Literature DB >> 9234876

Long-term clinical consequences of stress-shielding after total hip arthroplasty without cement.

W D Bugbee1, W J Culpepper, C A Engh, C A Engh.   

Abstract

Remodeling of the femur, or so-called stress-shielding, was observed on the two-year postoperative radiographs of forty-eight (23 per cent) of 207 hips that were part of a consecutive, non-selected series of 223 hips that had had a primary arthroplasty with use of the anatomic medullary locking hip system. Three patients (three hips) died within ten years after the arthroplasty, leaving forty-four patients (forty-five hips) who had a minimum of ten years of clinical follow-up. At the time of the latest follow-up, thirty-eight patients (86 per cent) reported that they had either no or mild pain related to the hip, forty-two (95 per cent) had less pain than they had had preoperatively, and forty-one (93 per cent) were satisfied with the results of the arthroplasty. Two patients had a reoperation, but neither procedure involved the femoral component; specifically, one patient had a revision of a loose acetabular component and one had an exchange of a polyethylene liner. No femoral component was associated with clinical or radiographic evidence of loosening. Femoral osteolysis, confined to zones 1 and 7 of Gruen et al., was observed on the ten-year radiographs of four of the thirty-three hips for which such radiographs were available. Stress-shielding (defined as evidence of pronounced femoral bone-remodeling on the two-year radiographs) had not adversely affected the outcome for these four hips by the time of the latest follow-up. The findings regarding postoperative pain, function, and over-all satisfaction for the forty-four patients (forty-five hips) who were included in the present study were similar to those reported for our larger (parent) series of patients who had been managed with the anatomic medullary locking hip system and to those reported for a similar series of patients who were followed for 9.5 years after the insertion of a porous-coated anatomic prosthesis. In addition, the prevalence of acetabular and femoral osteolysis (four [12 per cent] of thirty-three hips) and that of revision of the femoral component (zero [0 per cent] of forty-five hips) were lower than those for our larger (parent) series (fifty-four [39 per cent] of 137 hips and three [1 per cent] of 201 hips, respectively) as well as those for the series of patients who had been managed with the porous-coated anatomic prosthesis (thirty-five [45 per cent] and four [5 per cent] of seventy-eight hips, respectively).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9234876     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199707000-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  33 in total

Review 1.  How do tissues respond and adapt to stresses around a prosthesis? A primer on finite element stress analysis for orthopaedic surgeons.

Authors:  Richard A Brand; Clark M Stanford; Colby C Swan
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2003

2.  [Periprosthetic bone loss after total hip endoprosthesis. Dependence on the type of prosthesis and preoperative bone configuration].

Authors:  A Roth; G Richartz; K Sander; A Sachse; R Fuhrmann; A Wagner; R-A Venbrocks
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 1.087

3.  Second-generation extensively porous-coated THA stems at minimum 10-year followup.

Authors:  David W Hennessy; John J Callaghan; Steve S Liu
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-04-14       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Proximally versus fully porous-coated femoral stems: a multicenter randomized trial.

Authors:  Steven J MacDonald; Seth Rosenzweig; Jeffrey S Guerin; Richard W McCalden; Eric R Bohm; Robert B Bourne; Cecil H Rorabeck; Robert L Barrack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Bone stock in revision femoral arthroplasty: a new evaluation.

Authors:  François Canovas; Julien Girard; Olivier Roche; Henri Migaud; François Bonnomet; Mathias Goldschild; Pierre Le Béguec
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-01-08       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Cementless femoral revision in patients with a previous cemented prosthesis.

Authors:  Min Zeng; Jie Xie; Mingqing Li; Shaoru Lin; Yihe Hu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-02-19       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Does Robotic Milling For Stem Implantation in Cementless THA Result in Improved Outcomes Scores or Survivorship Compared with Hand Rasping? Results of a Randomized Trial at 10 Years.

Authors:  Nobuo Nakamura; Nobuhiko Sugano; Takashi Sakai; Ichiro Nakahara
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Dual offset metaphyseal-filling stems in primary total hip arthroplasty in dysplastic hips after a minimum follow-up of ten years.

Authors:  Goksel Dikmen; Vahit Emre Ozden; Burak Beksac; Ismail Remzi Tozun
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-09-19       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Basic science considerations in primary total hip replacement arthroplasty.

Authors:  Saqeb B Mirza; Douglas G Dunlop; Sukhmeet S Panesar; Syed G Naqvi; Shafat Gangoo; Saif Salih
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2010-05-11

10.  Cementless total hip replacement: past, present, and future.

Authors:  Harumoto Yamada; Yasuo Yoshihara; Osamu Henmi; Mitsuhiro Morita; Yuichiro Shiromoto; Tomoki Kawano; Arihiko Kanaji; Kennichi Ando; Masato Nakagawa; Naoto Kosaki; Eiichi Fukaya
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2009-04-01       Impact factor: 1.601

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.