Custom-Made Segmental Femoral Replacement Prosthesis in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

1993 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 727-733 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arthur L. Malkani ◽  
Franklin H. Sim ◽  
Edmund Y.S. Chao
Author(s):  
Rashid M. Tikhilov ◽  
Alisagib A. Dzhavadov ◽  
Anton N. Kovalenko ◽  
Stanislav S. Bilyk ◽  
Alexey O. Denisov ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
pp. 112070002110043
Author(s):  
Antonios A Koutalos ◽  
Sokratis Varitimidis ◽  
Konstantinos N Malizos ◽  
Theofilos Karachalios

Purpose: The aim of the study was to systematically evaluate clinical outcomes of tapered fluted stems, either monoblock or modular, in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science and Cochrane databases were systematically searched by 2 researchers. Clinical studies reporting primarily on survival and re-revision rates, and secondarily on subsidence, dislocation, intraoperative fractures, periprosthetic fractures and infection were included. 2 investigators assessed the quality of the studies. Results: 46 studies were included in this review, reporting on 4601 stem revisions. The pooled re-revision rate was 5.1% and long-term survival ranged from 75% to 98.5%. No differences were observed between monoblock and modular stems regarding re-revision rate, dislocation rate, periprosthetic fracture rate or infection rates. Monoblock stems exhibited more subsidence and modular stems displayed more intraoperative fractures. Conclusions: Satisfactory results can be obtained with the use of tapered fluted end-bearing stems. Monoblock stems offer the same clinical results as modular stems.


2008 ◽  
Vol 90 (4) ◽  
pp. 881-884 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lindsey S. Hagstrom ◽  
Dennis J. Callahan ◽  
James W. Green

2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eduardo García-Rey ◽  
Ricardo Fernández-Fernández ◽  
David Durán ◽  
Rosario Madero

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document