scholarly journals Uncemented Total Hip Replacement Stem Loosening after Long Term Compressive Stress Application: A Simulated FEA Study of Cortical Bone Remodeling

2004 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 1079-1085 ◽  
Author(s):  
Duk-Young JUNG ◽  
Sadami TSUTSUMI ◽  
Ryusuke NAKAI ◽  
Ken IKEUCHI ◽  
Ron SEKEL
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shuai Mao ◽  
Baomin Chen ◽  
Ying Zhu ◽  
Liang Qian ◽  
Jinluan Lin ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Cemented or uncemented total hip replacement (CTR or UTR) for femoral neck fractures (AO/OTA type 31B/C) is a relatively common procedure in elderly individuals. The recent literature is limited regarding long-term outcomes following CTR versus UTR in the Asian population. Methods Using our institutional database, we performed long-term outcome analysis on 268 patients with femoral neck fractures (AO/OTA type 31B/C) who had undergone a primary UTR or CTR (CTR: n = 132, mean age, 67.43 ± 6.51 years; UTR: n = 136, mean age, 67.65 ± 6.13 years) during 2007–2014, and these patients were followed until 2019. Follow-up occurred 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and yearly thereafter. The primary endpoint was the Harris hip score (HHS); the secondary endpoint was the incidence of orthopaedic complications. Results The mean follow-up time was 62.5 months (range, 50.1–76.1 months). At the final follow-up, the HHS was 79.39 ± 16.92 vs 74.18 ± 17.55 (CTR vs UTR, respectively, p = 0.011). Between-group significant differences were observed regarding the incidence of prosthesis revision, prosthesis loosening, and periprosthetic fracture (7.6% [95% CI, 6.4–8.2] for CTR vs 16.9% [95% CI, 14.7–17.3] for UTR, p = 0.020; 9.8% [95% CI, 8.3–10.7] for CTR vs 19.9% [95% CI, 18.2–20.9] for UTR, p = 0.022; 5.3% [95% CI, 4.4–6.7] for CTR vs 13.2% [95% CI, 12.1–13.8] for UTR, p = 0.026, respectively). Conclusion CTR showed superiority to UTR by improving the HHS and decreasing the incidence of orthopaedic complications. Our findings need to be confirmed in a prospective, randomized controlled study to verify whether they can be applicable to a broader population.


1986 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 229-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul F. Lachiewicz ◽  
Byron D. Rosenstein

1994 ◽  
Vol 76-B (1) ◽  
pp. 60-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
AS Shanbhag ◽  
JJ Jacobs ◽  
TT Glant ◽  
JL Gilbert ◽  
J Black ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Renée Huggard ◽  
Grace Wicks ◽  
Gordon Corfield

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to assess the short-term clinical outcome in dogs following a hip hemi-arthroplasty for the treatment of primary pathological disorders of the hip and as a salvage procedure following failure of the cup component of a total hip replacement. Materials and Methods Medical records of dogs that had a unilateral hip hemi-arthroplasty performed between 2015 and 2020 were reviewed. Data collected included follow-up orthopaedic examinations performed at 0, 2, 8 and 52 weeks postoperatively, pelvic radiography at 0, 8 and 52 weeks postoperatively and an owner questionnaire (Helsinki chronic pain index [HCPI]). Results Eleven unilateral hip hemi-arthroplasty procedures were identified. The median age at time of surgery was 3.6 years (8 months–10 years) and the median follow-up time was 13 months (range: 2 months–3 years). The HCPI for all dogs at follow-up was median 8 ± 7.30 (range: 5–25). Total HCPI was < 12 for 7/10 dogs and ≥ 12 for 3 dogs. Pelvic radiographs at 1 year confirmed osteointergration of the femoral stem implant and no evidence of implant subsidence or progression of osteoarthritis. However, there was some evidence of mild lucency of the acetabular bed around the prosthetic femoral head and mild peri-acetabular sclerosis in four cases. Conclusion Hip hemi-arthroplasty provides a clinically acceptable treatment for disabling disease of the coxofemoral joint with 10/11 patients achieving acceptable short-term clinical function. Long-term assessment of the hip hemi-arthroplasty and comparison with total hip replacement is indicated.


1985 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 757-769 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles N. Cornell ◽  
Eduardo A. Salvati ◽  
Paul M. Pellicci

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document