Results of Monolithic and Modular Femoral Components Use at Total Hip Revision Arthroplasty



Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Results of 28 total hip revision arthroplasties using distal fixation stems were analyzed. In 18 operations revision stems Wagner SL (1 st group) and in 10 interventions modular revision stems Cerafit revision (2 nd group) were used. Mean follow up period made up 3 years. Course of operation and peculiarities of bone canal treatment prior to stem implantation were described in detail. In 1 st group excellent results were achieved in 2 (11.11%), good in 8 (44.44%) satisfactory in 4 (22.22%) and poor in 4 (22.22%) of patients. In 2 nd group in 2 (20%), 4 (40%), 3 (30%) and 1 (10%) patient, respectively. Poor treatment outcomes resulted from suppuration and distal migration offemoral component. Rate of intraoperative femur cracks and fractures for two study groups was not higher than at revision arthroplasty using other implants. Taking into account intraoperative advantages the use of modular femoral components in complicated cases is a good alternative to monolithic stems.

Full Text

Результаты применения монолитных и модульных бедренных компонентов при ревизионном эндопротезировании тазобедренного сустава
×

References

  1. B^m P., Bichsel O. Femoral revision with the Wagner SL revision stem: evaluation of one hundred and twenty- nine revisions followed for a mean of 4,8 years. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 2001; 83 (7): 1023-31.
  2. Engh C.A. Jr, Ellis T.J., Koralewicz L.M., McAuley J.P., Engh C.A. Sr. Extensively porous-coated femoral revision for severe femoral bone loss: minimum 10-year follow-up. J. Arthroplasty. 2002; 17 (8): 955-60.
  3. Paprosky W.G., Greidanus N.V., Antoniou J. Minimum 10-year results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1999; (369): 230-42.
  4. Weeden S.H., Paprosky W.G. Minimal 11-year follow- up of extensively porous-coated stems in femoral revision total hip arthroplasty. J. Arthroplasty. 2002; 17 (4 Suppl 1): 134-7.
  5. Cameron H.U. The 3-6 year results of a modular noncemented low-bending stiffness hip implant. A preliminary study. J. Arthroplasty. 1993; 8 (3): 239-43.
  6. Kwong L.M., Miller A.J., Lubinus P. A modular distal fixation option for proximal bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty: a 2- to 6-year follow-up study. J. Arthroplasty. 2003; 18 (3 Suppl 1): 94-7.
  7. Mulroy W.F., Harris W.H. Revision of the total hip arthroplasty with use of so-called second-generation cementing techniques for aseptic loosening of the femoral component. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 1996; 78 (3): 325-30.
  8. Wirtz D.C., Heller K.D., Holzwarth U., Siebert C., Pitto R.P., Zeiler G., Blencke B.A., Forst R. A modular femoral implant for uncemented stem revision in THR. Int. Orthop. 2000; 24: 134-8.
  9. Kцster G., Walde T.A., Willert H.G. Five- to 10-year results using a noncemented modular revision stem without bone grafting. J. Arthroplasty. 2008; 23 (7): 964-70.
  10. Garbus D.S., Masri B.A., Duncan C.P. Fractures of the femur follaving. In: Steinborg M.E., Garino S.P., eds. Revision Total hip Artroplasy. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott—Williams & Wilkins. 1999: 493-503.
  11. Загородний Н.В., Нуждин В.И., Бухтин К.М., Кагра- манов С.В. Результаты применения бедренных компонентов цементной фиксации при ревизионном эндопротезировании тазобедренного сустава. Вестник травматологии и ортопедии им. Н.Н. Приорова. 2012; 3: 32-8.
  12. Barrack R.L. Orthopaedic Crossfire-stem modularity is unnecessary in revision total hip arthroplasty: in the affirmative. J. Arthroplasty. 2003; 18 (3 Suppl 1): 98100.
  13. Garbuz D.S., Toms A., Masri B.A., Duncan C.P. Improved outcome in femoral revision arthroplasty with tapered fluted modular titanium stems. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2006; 453: 199-202.
  14. Busch C.A., Charles M.N., Haydon C.M., Bourne R.B., Rorabeck C.H., Macdonald S.J., McCalden R.W. Fractures of distally-fixed femoral stems after revision arthroplasty. J. Bone Jt Surg. Br. 2005; 87 (10): 1333-6.
  15. Della Valle A.G., Becksaxc B., Anderson J., Wright T., Nestor B., Pellicci P.M., Salvati E.A. Late fatigue fracture of a modern cemented [corrected] cobalt chrome stem for total hip arthroplasty: a report of 10 cases. J. Arthroplasty. 2005; 20: 1084-8.
  16. Kishida Y., Sugano N., Ohzono K., Sakai T., Nishii T., Yoshikawa H. Stem fracture of the cementless spongy metal Lьbeck hip prosthesis. J. Arthroplasty. 2002; 17 (8): 1021-7.
  17. Woolson S.T., Milbauer J.P., Bobyn J.D., Yue S., Maloney W.J. Fatigue fracture of a forged cobalt-chromium- molybdenum femoral component inserted with cement. A report of ten cases. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 1997; 79: 1842-8.
  18. Lakstein D., Kosashvili Y., Backstein D., Safir O., Lee P., Gross A.E. The long modified extended sliding trochanteric osteotomy. Int Orthop. 2011; 35 (1):13 — 7.
  19. Miner T.M., Momberger N.G., Chong D., Paprosky W.L. The extended trochanteric osteotomy in revision hip arthroplasty: a critical review of 166 cases at mean 3- year, 9-month follow-up. J. Arthroplasty. 2001; 16 (8 Suppl 1): S188-94.
  20. Pattyn C., Mulliez A., Verdonk R., Audenaert E. Revision hip arthroplasty using a cementless modular tapered stem. Int. Orttop. (SICOT). 2012; 36 (1): 35-41.
  21. Lakstein D., Eliaz N., Levi O., Backstein D., Kosashvili Y., Safir O., Gross А.Е. Fracture of cementless femoral stems at the mid-stem junction in modular revision hip arthroplasty systems. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 2011; 93 (1): 57-65.
  22. Atwood S.A., Patten E.W., Bozic K.J., Pruitt L.A., Ries M.D. Corrosion-induced fracture of a double-modular hip prosthesis: a case report. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 2010; 92 (6):1522-25.
  23. Wilson D.A., Dunbar M.J., Amirault J.D., Farhat Z. Early failure of a modular femoral neck total hip arthroplasty component: a case report. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 2010; 92 (6): 1514-7;
  24. Wright G., Sporer S., Urban R., Jacobs J. Fracture of a modular femoral neck after total hip arthroplasty: a case report. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 2010; 92 (6): 1518-21.
  25. Загородний Н.В. Эндопротезирование тазобедренного сустава. Основы и практика: Руководство. М.: ГЭО- ТАР-Медиа; 2011.
  26. Buttaro M.A., Mayor M.B., Van Citters D., Piccaluga F. Fatigue fracture of a proximally modular, distally tapered fluted implant with diaphyseal fixation. J. Arthroplasty. 2007; 22 (5): 780-3.
  27. Ovesen O, Emmeluth C, Hofbauer C., Overgaard S. Revision total hip arthroplasty using a modular tapered stem with distal fixation: good short-term results in 125 revisions. J. Arthroplasty. 2010; 25 (3): 348-54.
  28. Lakstein D., Backstein D., Safir O., Kosashvili Y., Gross Revision total hip arthroplasty with a porous-coated modular stem: 5 to 10 years follow-up. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 2010; 468 (5): 1310-5.
  29. Murphy S.B., Rodriguez J. Revision total hip arthroplasty with proximal bone loss. J. Arthroplasty. 2004; 19 (4 Suppl 1): 115-9.
  30. Andriacchi T.P., Galante J.O., Belytschko T.B., Hampton S. A stress analysis of the femoral stem in total hip prostheses. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 1976; 58 (5): 618-24.
  31. Mollan R.A., Watters P.H., Steele R., McClelland C.J. Failure of the femoral compo nent in the Howse total hip arthroplasty. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1984; 190: 142-7.
  32. Davidson D., Pike J., Garbuz D., Duncan C.P., Masri Intraoperative periprosthetic fractures during total hip arthroplasty. Evaluation and management. J. Bone Jt Surg. Am. 2008; 90 (9): 2000-12.
  33. Engh C.A., Culpepper W.J., Kassapidis E. Revision of loose cementless prostheses to larger porous-coated components. Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res. 1998; (347): 168-178.
  34. Krishnamurthy A.B., MacDonald S.J., Paprosky W.G. 5- to 13-year Follow up study on cementless femoral components in revision Ssrgery. J. Arthroplasty. 1997; 12 (8): 839-47.
  35. Moreland J.R., Bernstein M.L. Femoral revision hip arthroplasty with uncemented, porous-coated stems. Clin. Orthop. 1995; 319: 141-50.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2013 Eco-Vector


СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77-76249 от 19.07.2019.


This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies