Revision Hip Arthroplasty Using An Extensively Porous Coated Stem: Medium Term Results

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 129-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prakash Jayakumar ◽  
Ahmad K. Malik ◽  
Saif U. Islam ◽  
Fares S. Haddad
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amit Singh ◽  
Sunirmal Mukherjee ◽  
Kuntal Patel ◽  
Deepak Herlekar ◽  
Srikant Gandavaram ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The extraction of a femoral stem during the revision hip arthroplasty can be a daunting task and can lead to catastrophic complications for the patient. A sound technique employed intraoperatively helps in speedy recovery of the patient and reduces the risk of future surgical interventions. In this study, we present a medium-term outcome of our novel Lancaster Cortical Window technique which can be used for removal of cemented or uncemented femoral stems. Methodology The study was conducted at a specialist centre in the North-West of the UK from January 2014 to May 2019. This is a retrospective case series where patients were treated surgically using Lancaster Cortical Window technique for removal of femoral implant during a revision hip arthroplasty. Patient’s electronic notes and the radiographs were used to evaluate the functional and radiological outcome. Results In this study, 18 patients were managed surgically using Novel Lancaster Window technique. The mean age of the all the patients was 81.5 years and the male to female ratio was 10:8. Fifteen patients underwent revision surgery for aseptic loosening of the femoral and acetabular component. Rest of the three patients had revision surgery for a broken femoral stem, intraoperative femoral canal perforation while implanting a total hip replacement femoral stem and infection. Twelve femurs were replanted with uncemented long femoral stems and six with long cemented stems. The cortical window osteotomy united in all the patients in 4.2 months (mean). The mean follow up of these patients is 20.9 months, and none of them had any implant subsidence or loosening at the time of their last follow up. Conclusion We believe Lancaster cortical window technique can be safely used for removal of cemented stems during revision hip arthroplasty without the need for expensive equipment’s.


2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amit Singh ◽  
Sunirmal Mukherjee ◽  
Kuntal Patel ◽  
Deepak Herlekar ◽  
Srikant Gandavaram ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The extraction of a femoral stem during the revision hip arthroplasty can be a daunting task and can lead to catastrophic complications for the patient. A sound technique employed intraoperatively helps in the speedy recovery of the patient and reduces the risk of future surgical interventions. In this study, we present a medium-term outcome of our novel Lancaster cortical window technique which can be used for the removal of cemented or uncemented femoral stems. Methods The study was conducted at a specialist centre in the north-west of the UK from January 2014 to May 2019. This is a retrospective case series where patients were treated surgically using the Lancaster cortical window technique for removal of the femoral implant during a revision hip arthroplasty. Patient’s electronic notes and radiographs were used to evaluate the functional and radiological outcome. Results In this study, 18 patients were managed surgically using the novel Lancaster window technique. The mean age of all the patients was 81.5 years, and the male to female ratio was 10:8. Fifteen patients underwent revision surgery for aseptic loosening of the femoral and acetabular components. The rest of the three patients had revision surgery for a broken femoral stem, intraoperative femoral canal perforation while implanting a total hip replacement femoral stem and infection. Twelve femurs were replanted with uncemented long femoral stems and six with long cemented stems. The cortical window osteotomy united in all the patients in 4.2 months (mean). The mean follow-up of these patients is 20.9 months, and none of them had any implant subsidence or loosening at the time of their last follow-up. Conclusion We believe Lancaster cortical window technique can be safely used for the removal of cemented stems during revision hip arthroplasty without the need for expensive equipment.


2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 272-277 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Young ◽  
V.R.P. Vallamshetla ◽  
T. Lawrence

The object of this study was to determine the short to medium term outcome of cementing a highly polished tapered implant into the old cement mantle once damaged cement is removed at the time of revision hip surgery. A consecutive series of 36 patients underwent c-stem cement-in-cement revision hip arthroplasty between June 2000 and April 2006. The primary outcome measure was the validated shortened Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) score, secondary outcomes were the Orthowave company patient satisfaction survey, radiological analysis, and general complications. The follow-up period was between 12 and 84 months (average 48.86 months). The mean post op WOMAC score at latest follow-up was 10.89 (0 to 29). Two patients died with their hip in situ. Two patients had radiological signs of prosthesis loosening on follow-up. Complications included: one sacral plexus palsy which had a partial recovery and one intra-operative periprosthetic fracture. One patient underwent cup revision for recurrent dislocation. Cement within cement revision hip arthroplasty using a highly polished tapered stem in the short to medium term provides satisfactory functional outcomes and is associated with a low complication rate and good survivorship.


2002 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 108-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heikki M[auml ]enp[auml ][auml ] ◽  
Kari Laiho ◽  
Markku Kauppi ◽  
Kalevi Kaarela ◽  
Hannu Kautiainen ◽  
...  

2009 ◽  
Vol 468 (2) ◽  
pp. 491-496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corey J. Richards ◽  
Clive P. Duncan ◽  
Bassam A. Masri ◽  
Donald S. Garbuz

2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (6) ◽  
pp. 932-938 ◽  
Author(s):  
Myung-Sik Park ◽  
Ju-Hong Lee ◽  
Jong-Hyuk Park ◽  
Dong-Hun Ham ◽  
Yang-Keun Rhee

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
pp. 88-101
Author(s):  
Alex Upfill-Brown ◽  
Peter P. Hsiue ◽  
Troy Sekimura ◽  
Jay N. Patel ◽  
Micah Adamson ◽  
...  

2000 ◽  
Vol 120 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 386-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. B. Flugsrud ◽  
Stein Øvre ◽  
Bjarne Grøgaard ◽  
Lars Nordsletten

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document