RecentMedicalFindings.com
Summarizing relevant biomedical research!
revision of hip replacement femoral component     Bookmark and Share
Search webpages of this site (RecentMedicalFindings):
Didn't find what you wanted? Try it at BioMedLib™ !
Search directly on the biomedical articles using BioMedLib™ search engine:



1. Biomedical articles (top 50; 2009 to 2014)
1. |||||..... 50%  Howie DW, Callary SA, McGee MA, Russell NC, Solomon LB: Reduced femoral component subsidence with improved impaction grafting at revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2010 Dec;468(12):3314-21
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Reduced femoral component subsidence with improved impaction grafting at revision hip arthroplasty.
  • BACKGROUND: Despite stem subsidence being a major complication of femoral impaction bone grafting in cemented revision hip arthroplasty, few studies have distinguished subsidence at the prosthesis-cement interface from that at the cement-bone interface.
  • QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We used a sensitive technique to measure subsidence of a cemented polished collarless double-taper stem at each interface after femoral impaction grafting and compared subsidence, radiographic loosening, complications, and reoperations over three series of hips defined by technique developments.
  • CONCLUSIONS: Evolution in techniques of femoral impaction grafting in this study were associated with reduced subsidence of the stem at both the prosthesis-cement interface and cement-bone interface when compared to the original series.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Bone Transplantation. Femur / surgery. Hip Joint / surgery
  • [MeSH-minor] Adult. Aged. Aged, 80 and over. Bone Cements / therapeutic use. Female. Fractures, Bone / etiology. Fractures, Bone / prevention & control. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Joint Instability / etiology. Joint Instability / prevention & control. Male. Middle Aged. Prospective Studies. Prosthesis Design. Reoperation. South Australia. Time Factors. Transplantation, Homologous. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Bone Grafts.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Oct;(319):159-67 [7554625.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 1995 Jun;66(3):207-14 [7604698.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1997 Aug;12(5):535-40 [9268793.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1997 Oct;12(7):759-64 [9355004.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997 Dec;79(12):1834-41 [9409797.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999 Jan;81(1):118-24 [10068018.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999 Jan;81(1):130-4 [10068020.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999 Jan;81(1):135-42 [10068021.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999 Mar;81(2):266-72 [10204933.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Mar;(432):174-80 [15738819.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Mar;(432):181-7 [15738820.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Nov;87(11):2499-507 [16264127.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Jun;88(6):828-31 [16720782.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Jun;88(6):832-6 [16720783.001]
  • [Cites] Int Orthop. 2007 Jun;31(3):297-302 [16964487.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 Jul;89(7):879-86 [17673579.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007 Sep;462:130-6 [17804966.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Jan;90(1):16-22 [18160493.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2002 Oct;17(7):834-40 [12375240.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Apr;85-A(4):639-46 [12672839.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2003 Aug;85(6):809-17 [12931796.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Jun;90(6):1330-6 [18519328.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Aug;90(8):1000-4 [18669953.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Jan;91(1):37-43 [19092002.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Apr;91(4):441-6 [19336801.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000 Jan;82(1):103-7 [10697324.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 2000 Apr;71(2):135-42 [10852318.001]
  • [Cites] Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2000;120(7-8):445-7 [10968536.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2001 Jan;16(1):76-82 [11172274.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001 Jul;83(5):767-71 [11476320.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 2001 Dec;72(6):572-84 [11817871.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2002 Aug;84(6):825-31 [12211672.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2003 Oct;18(7):852-9 [14566739.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 Dec;(417):175-82 [14646715.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Sep;86-A(9):2050-60 [15342772.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 2004 Aug;75(4):408-14 [15370583.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 2004 Oct;75(5):533-43 [15513483.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982 Sep;64(7):1063-7 [7118973.001]
  • [Cites] J Orthop Res. 1985;3(4):447-55 [4067703.001]
  • [Cites] Orthop Clin North Am. 1988 Jul;19(3):477-89 [3269211.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990 Jan;72(1):151-2 [2298782.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993 Jan;75(1):14-21 [8421012.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 1995 Oct;66(5):418-24 [7484121.001]
  • (PMID = 20680531.001).
  • [ISSN] 1528-1132
  • [Journal-full-title] Clinical orthopaedics and related research
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Bone Cements
  • [Other-IDs] NLM/ PMC2974885
  •  go-up   go-down


2. |||||..... 50%  Kopec MA, Pemberton A, Milbrandt JC, Allan G: Component version in modular total hip revision. Iowa Orthop J; 2009;29:5-10
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Component version in modular total hip revision.
  • Morphologic changes of the proximal femur make revision total hip arthroplasty challenging.
  • Twenty-one total hip revisions using a modular femoral prosthesis were examined by obtaining three radiographs (A/P, surgical lateral, and true lateral of the femur) to assemble CAD models for determining the range of modular component positioning.
  • An average of femoral neck anteversion was observed.
  • One of 21 cases (5%) resulted in component orientation similar to a non-modular prosthesis.
  • Modular components provide options to accommodate proximal femoral remodeling not afforded by monobloc stems in total hip revision surgery.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Bone Malalignment / surgery. Femur / surgery
  • [MeSH-minor] Adult. Aged. Aged, 80 and over. Bone Remodeling. Femoral Fractures / surgery. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Middle Aged. Prosthesis Failure. Prosthesis-Related Infections / surgery. Reoperation / instrumentation. Reoperation / methods. Retrospective Studies

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999 Dec;81(12):1707-16 [10608382.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Mar;87(3):521-9 [15741617.001]
  • [Cites] Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2001 Apr;30(4):297-302 [11334451.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2001 Dec;16(8 Suppl 1):188-94 [11742474.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2002 Dec;17(8):997-1005 [12478509.001]
  • [Cites] Orthopedics. 2002 Dec;25(12):1385-7 [12502202.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Feb;85-A(2):273-7 [12571305.001]
  • [Cites] J Orthop Sci. 2003;8(3):381-6 [12768482.001]
  • [Cites] Skeletal Radiol. 2003 Sep;32(9):521-5 [12898059.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Jan;86-A(1):106-15 [14711952.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2004 Feb;19(2):162-6 [14973858.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Mar;(420):142-7 [15057090.001]
  • [Cites] Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2004 Jun;124(5):306-9 [15064958.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1971 Jan;53(1):101-14 [5540151.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Jun;(141):66-70 [477126.001]
  • [Cites] AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1979 Dec;133(6):1127-34 [116505.001]
  • [Cites] Orthop Clin North Am. 1988 Jul;19(3):567-73 [3380534.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Radiol. 1988 Sep-Oct;29(5):551-3 [3166875.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991 Aug;(269):220-7 [1864042.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992 Feb;(275):187-93 [1735211.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Jan;(298):27-36 [8118986.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Feb;(311):91-101 [7634596.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Oct;(319):85-93 [7554653.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Oct;(319):130-40 [7554622.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996 Sep;78(5):796-801 [8836074.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1997 Feb;12(2):194-201 [9139102.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2005 Jan;20(1):79-83 [15660064.001]
  • [Cites] Int Orthop. 2000;24(3):134-8 [10990382.001]
  • (PMID = 19742077.001).
  • [ISSN] 1555-1377
  • [Journal-full-title] The Iowa orthopaedic journal
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Iowa Orthop J
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Other-IDs] NLM/ PMC2723684
  •  go-up   go-down


3. |||||..... 50%  Bardou-Jacquet J, Souillac V, Mouton A, Chauveaux D: Primary aseptic revision of the femoral component of a cemented total hip arthroplasty using a cemented technique without bone graft. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res; 2009 Jun;95(4):243-8
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Primary aseptic revision of the femoral component of a cemented total hip arthroplasty using a cemented technique without bone graft.
  • HYPOTHESIS: Femoral component fixation with cement can be a valid option in total hip arthroplasty primary revision.
  • OBJECTIVES: The objective of this investigation was to study the long-term results of cemented femoral stems in total hip arthroplasty primary revisions in terms of the quality of the cementing technique and the residual bone stock.
  • PATIENTS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of a series of 80-cemented primary femoral stems revised for aseptic loosening using a new-cemented femoral stem without bone graft.
  • The Postel Merle D'Aubigné and the Harris Hip Scores were used for clinical assessment.
  • The radiographic study at the last follow-up sought signs of femoral implant loosening classified according to Harris.
  • The functional evaluation of the hip showed a significant overall gain (p<0.0001) after surgical revision.
  • The 10-year survival rate of the femoral implant was 90% (95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 79.2-94.9%).
  • CONCLUSION: This study shows that revised cemented femoral stems without bone graft added are a valid therapeutic option in primary cemented total hip arthroplasty revisions provided that a good-quality cement technique can be achieved.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Bone Cements / therapeutic use. Cementation / methods. Reoperation / methods

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] 2009 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
  • (PMID = 19523892.001).
  • [ISSN] 1877-0568
  • [Journal-full-title] Orthopaedics & traumatology, surgery & research : OTSR
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Orthop Traumatol Surg Res
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] France
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Bone Cements
  • [General-notes] NLM/ Original DateCompleted: 20090929
  •  go-up   go-down


Advertisement
4. |||||..... 50%  Marcos L, Buttaro M, Comba F, Piccaluga F: Femoral cement within cement technique in carefully selected aseptic revision arthroplasties. Int Orthop; 2009 Jun;33(3):633-7
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Femoral cement within cement technique in carefully selected aseptic revision arthroplasties.
  • The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological results in a group of patients who underwent aseptic revision hip arthroplasty using the cement within cement (CWC) technique.
  • Between 1999 and 2005, 37 aseptic revision hip operations were performed.
  • The reasons for revision were femoral stem fracture, cup failure, acetabular protrusion after hemi-arthroplasty and recurrent dislocation.
  • At an average follow-up of 46 months, none of the patients required further femoral revision.
  • No evidence of radiological stem failure was observed and no femoral component was considered to be at risk for loosening.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects. Bone Cements. Hip Joint / surgery. Postoperative Complications / etiology. Postoperative Complications / surgery

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - After Surgery.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 1981;52(2):201-5 [7246099.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1980 Nov;62-B(4):450-3 [7430222.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985 Sep;67(7):1074-85 [4030826.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1986 Sep;68(7):1064-6 [3745245.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987 Jul;(220):142-7 [3594984.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Radiol. 1987 Sep-Oct;28(5):607-13 [2960357.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1988;3(2):103-7 [3397739.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Nov;(236):214-20 [3180573.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993 Nov;75(6):869-71 [8245073.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1993 Oct;8(5):517-21 [8245997.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1994 Jan;76(1):77-87 [8288668.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Oct;(319):232-7 [7554635.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996 Sep;78(5):809-11 [8836076.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1954 Jun;36-A(3):451-75 [13163078.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Jun;88(6):730-3 [16720764.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Dec;453:132-6 [17312589.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Mar;89(3):526-33 [17332101.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2007 Sep;462:130-6 [17804966.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 2004 Aug;75(4):427-9 [15370586.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1973 Sep;(95):48-59 [4754218.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1977 Oct;(128):287-95 [598167.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1978 Feb;60(1):107-10 [627570.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Jun;(141):17-27 [477100.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982 Oct;(170):8-20 [7127968.001]
  • (PMID = 18278495.001).
  • [ISSN] 1432-5195
  • [Journal-full-title] International orthopaedics
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Int Orthop
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Germany
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Bone Cements
  • [Other-IDs] NLM/ PMC2903118
  •  go-up   go-down


5. ||........ 22%  Cooper IF, Siadaty MS: 'Qualitative Concepts' associated with 'Hip Replacement Revision': Top Publications. BioMedLib Review; QualitativeConcept;HipReplacementRevision:706870201. ISSN: 2331-5717. 2014/7/2
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article.

  • [Title] 'Qualitative Concepts' associated with 'Hip Replacement Revision': Top Publications.
  • [Transliterated title]
  • Background: There are articles published each month which present 'Qualitative Concept' for 'hip replacement revision'.
  • Finding such articles is important for researchers, clinicians, and patients.
  • However these articles are spread across thousands of journals, and there are many types of 'Qualitative Concept'.
  • This makes searching and locating the relevant publications a challenge.
  • We have used BioMedLib's semantic search technology to address the issue, and gathered all the pertinent publications in this review article.
  • Methods: We categorized the publications we found into two groups.
  • We used the strength of textual-association to separate the groups.
  • In group one there are publications with the strongest evidence of association. We focused finding the most relevant publications pertinent to our goal, rather than combining them into a conclusion section. Such textual synthesis will be the focus of our next project.
  • Results: Group one includes 25 publications, and group two 4521 publications.
  • Here are the top 10.
  • Cooper IF et al: 'Steroids' associated with 'Hip Replacement Revision': Top Publications.
  • Biring GS et al: Predictors of quality of life outcomes after revision total hip replacement.
  • Katz JN et al: Predictive value of Medicare claims data for identifying revision of index hip replacement was modest.
  • Katz JN et al: Twelve-year risk of revision after primary total hip replacement in the U.S. Medicare population.
  • Langlais F: Can we improve the results of revision arthroplasty for infected total hip replacement?.
  • Prabu A et al: Anaemia in a patient with rheumatoid arthritis recovering from revision of a hip replacement.
  • Rose DM et al: Focal femoral osteolysis after revision hip replacement with a cannulated, hydroxyapatite-coated long-stemmed femoral component: a new route for particulate wear debris.
  • Avrunin AS et al: [Biorhythmic characteristics of patients with total primary and revision hip replacement].
  • Korda M et al: Use of mesenchymal stem cells to enhance bone formation around revision hip replacements.
  • Whittaker JP et al: Is prolonged systemic antibiotic treatment essential in two-stage revision hip replacement for chronic Gram-positive infection?.

  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright 2014 Siadaty and Cooper; licensee BioMedLib LLC.
  • (UID = 706870201.001).
  • [ISSN] 2331-5717
  • [Journal-full-title] BioMedLib Review
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Review
  • [Publication-country] UNITED STATES
  •  go-up   go-down


6. |||||..... 50%  Prosser GH, Yates PJ, Wood DJ, Graves SE, de Steiger RN, Miller LN: Outcome of primary resurfacing hip replacement: evaluation of risk factors for early revision. Acta Orthop; 2010 Feb;81(1):66-71
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Outcome of primary resurfacing hip replacement: evaluation of risk factors for early revision.
  • The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) started collection of data on hip resurfacing at a time when modern resurfacing was started in Australia.
  • This study was undertaken to determine the results of this series and the risk factors associated with revision.
  • PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from the AOANJRR were used to analyze the survivorship of 12,093 primary resurfacing hip replacements reported to the Joint Replacement Registry between September 1999 and December 2008.
  • This was compared to the results of primary conventional total hip replacement reported during the same period.
  • The Kaplan-Meier method and proportional hazards models were used to determine risk factors such as age, sex, femoral component size, primary diagnosis, and implant design.
  • RESULTS: Female patients had a higher revision rate than males; however, after adjusting for head size, the revision rates were similar.
  • Prostheses with head sizes of less than 50 mm had a higher revision rate than those with head sizes of 50 mm or more.
  • At 8 years, the cumulative per cent revision of hip resurfacing was 5.3 (4.6-6.2), as compared to 4.0 (3.8-4.2) for total hip replacement.
  • However, in osteoarthritis patients aged less than 55 years with head sizes of 50 mm or more, the 7-year cumulative per cent revision for hip resurfacing was 3.0 (2.2-4.2).
  • Also, hips with dysplasia and some implant designs had an increased risk of revision.
  • INTERPRETATION: Risk factors for revision of resurfacing were older patients, smaller femoral head size, patients with developmental dysplasia, and certain implant designs.
  • These results highlight the importance of patient and prosthesis selection in optimizing the outcome of hip resurfacing.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects
  • [MeSH-minor] Adult. Aged. Australia. Female. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Osteoarthritis, Hip / surgery. Prosthesis Design. Prosthesis Failure. Registries. Reoperation. Risk Factors. Sex Factors. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Cites] BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2003 Feb 5;4:1 [12570876.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Aug;91(8):1019-24 [19651827.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Jan;(418):87-93 [15043098.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004 Mar;86(2):177-84 [15046429.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981 Dec;63(9):1426-34 [7320033.001]
  • [Cites] Orthop Clin North Am. 1985 Oct;16(4):757-69 [4058901.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989 Jul;(244):198-207 [2743660.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993 Feb;(287):153-9 [8448934.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993 Jul;75(4):616-23 [8331119.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1994 Oct;9(5):453-6 [7807101.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996 Apr;78(4):505-11 [8609129.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997 Nov;(344):257-62 [9372776.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 Feb;87(2):167-70 [15736736.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 Mar;87(3):324-9 [15773639.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005 Apr;87(4):463-4 [15795193.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005 Dec;441:200-4 [16331003.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 May;88(5):592-600 [16645103.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Jun;88(6):721-6 [16720762.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Nov;88 Suppl 3:90-7 [17079373.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Nov;88 Suppl 3:98-103 [17079374.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2007 Jan;22(1):100-8 [17197316.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2008 Sep;23(6 Suppl 1):44-9 [18722302.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Jan;86-A(1):28-39 [14711942.001]
  • (PMID = 20180719.001).
  • [ISSN] 1745-3682
  • [Journal-full-title] Acta orthopaedica
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Acta Orthop
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] England
  • [Other-IDs] NLM/ PMC2856206
  •  go-up   go-down


7. |||||..... 50%  Richards CJ, Duncan CP, Masri BA, Garbuz DS: Femoral revision hip arthroplasty: a comparison of two stem designs. Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2010 Feb;468(2):491-6
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Femoral revision hip arthroplasty: a comparison of two stem designs.
  • For various reasons the tapered, fluted, modular titanium (TFMT) stem has become our component of choice over cylindrical, nonmodular cobalt chrome (CNCC) components for THA revision.
  • We therefore asked whether the TFMT femoral components better achieved three important goals of revision arthroplasty than CNCC stems:.
  • (2) avoiding complications; and (3) preserving or restoring femoral bone stock.
  • We compared patients undergoing femoral component revision hip arthroplasty with either a CNCC (N = 105) component or a TFMT (N = 95) component to determine if the increased use of TFMT components is justified.
  • We retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty between January 2000 and March 2006.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Chromium Alloys. Femur / surgery. Hip Joint / surgery. Hip Prosthesis. Prosthesis Failure. Titanium

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • HSDB. structure - TITANIUM.
  • COS Scholar Universe. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 Dec;(417):203-9 [14646718.001]
  • [Cites] Qual Health Care. 1996 Jun;5(2):81-8 [10158596.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2007 Oct;22(7):993-9 [17920471.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2007 Jun;22(4 Suppl 1):106-10 [17570290.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Dec;453:199-202 [17312593.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2006 Apr;21(3):372-80 [16627145.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1997 Dec;12(8):839-47 [9458248.001]
  • [Cites] J Rheumatol. 1997 Apr;24(4):799-802 [9101522.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2003 Aug;18(5):638-42 [12934218.001]
  • [Cites] Arthritis Rheum. 2003 Feb;48(2):560-8 [12571867.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2002 Jun;17(4 Suppl 1):138-41 [12068425.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2002 Jun;17(4 Suppl 1):134-7 [12068424.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 Oct;82-A(10):1414-20 [11057469.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996 Mar;78(2):185-90 [8666621.001]
  • [Cites] Med Care. 1996 Mar;34(3):220-33 [8628042.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001 Jul;83-A(7):1023-31 [11451971.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2000 Oct;15(7):840-8 [11061443.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Oct;(319):141-50 [7554623.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990 Aug;(257):107-28 [2199114.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Mar;(420):148-59 [15057091.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Mar;(420):135-41 [15057089.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Mar;86-A(3):480-5 [14996872.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2008 Feb;23(2):220-5 [18280416.001]
  • (PMID = 19847578.001).
  • [ISSN] 1528-1132
  • [Journal-full-title] Clinical orthopaedics and related research
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Comparative Study; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Chromium Alloys; D1JT611TNE / Titanium
  • [Other-IDs] NLM/ PMC2806991
  •  go-up   go-down


8. |||||..... 50%  Min BW, Song KS, Cho CH, Bae KC, Lee KJ: Femoral osteolysis around the unrevised stem during isolated acetabular revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2009 Jun;467(6):1501-6
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Femoral osteolysis around the unrevised stem during isolated acetabular revision.
  • Many surgeons treat progressive femoral osteolysis in association with a well-fixed stem with bone grafting but in uncontained proximal defects the graft could get into the joint, raising a question regarding whether the osteolysis can be treated by simple débridement without bone grafting.
  • We investigated whether the curetted proximal osteolysis around an unrevised femoral component progressed in size and whether this lesion would have a deleterious effect on fixation of the femoral component in patients with isolated acetabular revision.
  • We prospectively followed 21 patients (24 hips) who underwent acetabular revision and curetting of femoral osteolysis.
  • All hips were judged stable and to have well-fixed acetabular cups and femoral stems.
  • Provided a femoral component is bone ingrown with osseointegration sufficient to provide long-term stability, the osteolytic defect is in the proximal aspect of the femur, and the defect is uncontained, simple curettage may preserve femoral implant stability and may prevent progression of osteolysis to another Gruen zone for at least 3 to 7 years.
  • [MeSH-major] Acetabulum / surgery. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Femur Head / surgery. Osteolysis / etiology. Osteolysis / surgery
  • [MeSH-minor] Adult. Aged. Debridement. Disease Progression. Female. Follow-Up Studies. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Osseointegration. Reoperation. Retrospective Studies. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1983 Jun;(176):52-66 [6851342.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 1997 Jun;68(3):231-4 [9246982.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1989 Sep;4(3):245-51 [2795031.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990 Apr;72(4):518-28 [2324138.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997 Nov;79(11):1628-34 [9384421.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998 Jul;(352):75-80 [9678035.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2005 Jun;20(4 Suppl 2):75-8 [15991137.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Aug;87(8):1816-21 [16085624.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2007 Oct;22(7):987-92 [17920470.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2007 Dec;22(8):1137-42 [18078882.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000 Dec;(381):58-67 [11127671.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2001 Feb;16(2):149-60 [11222887.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Dec;85-A(12):2288-93 [14668496.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969 Jun;51(4):737-55 [5783851.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976 Nov-Dec;(121):20-32 [991504.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987 Jan;69(1):45-55 [3818732.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990 Aug;(257):107-28 [2199114.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990 Sep;(258):95-107 [2203577.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992 Mar;74(3):404-10 [1548268.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992 Jul;74(6):849-63 [1634575.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1992 Sep;7(3):285-90 [1402944.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Nov;(308):111-26 [7955673.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995 Mar;77(3):432-9 [7890792.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1995 Jun;10(3):307-12 [7673909.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1996 Sep;11(6):668-72 [8884441.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1996 Sep;11(6):718-25 [8884448.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Jun;(141):17-27 [477100.001]
  • (PMID = 18791773.001).
  • [ISSN] 1528-1132
  • [Journal-full-title] Clinical orthopaedics and related research
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Other-IDs] NLM/ PMC2674156
  •  go-up   go-down


9. ||........ 22%  Cooper IF, Siadaty MS: 'Spatial Concepts' associated with 'Hip Replacement Revision': Top Publications. BioMedLib Review; SpatialConcept;HipReplacementRevision:706871925. ISSN: 2331-5717. 2014/10/2
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article.

  • [Title] 'Spatial Concepts' associated with 'Hip Replacement Revision': Top Publications.
  • [Transliterated title]
  • Background: There are articles published each month which present 'Spatial Concept' for 'hip replacement revision'.
  • Finding such articles is important for researchers, clinicians, and patients.
  • However these articles are spread across thousands of journals, and there are many types of 'Spatial Concept'.
  • This makes searching and locating the relevant publications a challenge.
  • We have used BioMedLib's semantic search technology to address the issue, and gathered all the pertinent publications in this review article.
  • Methods: We categorized the publications we found into two groups.
  • We used the strength of textual-association to separate the groups.
  • In group one there are publications with the strongest evidence of association. We focused finding the most relevant publications pertinent to our goal, rather than combining them into a conclusion section. Such textual synthesis will be the focus of our next project.
  • Results: Group one includes 18 publications, and group two 5092 publications.
  • Here are the top 10.
  • Marti RK et al: Superolateral bone grafting for acetabular deficiency in primary total hip replacement and revision.
  • Wroblewski BM et al: The angle-bore acetabular component and dislocation after revision of a failed total hip replacement.
  • Huntley JS et al: Surface replacement of the hip: a late revision.
  • Rose DM et al: Focal femoral osteolysis after revision hip replacement with a cannulated, hydroxyapatite-coated long-stemmed femoral component: a new route for particulate wear debris.
  • Fink B et al: Mid term results with the curved modular tapered, fluted titanium Revitan stem in revision hip replacement.
  • Babis GC et al: Proximal femoral allograft-prosthesis composites in revision hip replacement: a 12-year follow-up study.
  • Malkani AL et al: Custom-made segmental femoral replacement prosthesis in revision total hip arthroplasty.
  • Jaiswal PK et al: Use of an 'internal proximal femoral replacement' with distal fixation in revision arthroplasty of the hip.
  • Johnsson R et al: Revision of total hip replacement with solid cortico-spongious bone graft for medial acetabular disruption.
  • Suominen S et al: Revision total hip replacement using the bias proximal porous-coated femoral component.

  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright 2014 Siadaty and Cooper; licensee BioMedLib LLC.
  • (UID = 706871925.001).
  • [ISSN] 2331-5717
  • [Journal-full-title] BioMedLib Review
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Review
  • [Publication-country] UNITED STATES
  •  go-up   go-down


10. |||||..... 52%  Ito H, Tanino H, Yamanaka Y, Nakamura T, Minami A, Matsuno T: Cemented calcar replacement femoral component in revision hybrid total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty; 2011 Feb;26(2):236-43
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Cemented calcar replacement femoral component in revision hybrid total hip arthroplasty.
  • We evaluated intermediate-term to long-term survival of cemented calcar replacement femoral components in hybrid revision total hip arthroplasty.
  • Six (12%) femoral components had been revised: 2 for aseptic loosening, 2 for periprosthetic fracture, and 2 for deep infection.
  • One additional femoral component was definitely loose.
  • The number of previous revision operations (P = .004), preoperatively poorer femoral bone stock (P = .005), and postoperative poor cement mantle grading (P = .003) were significant factors for failure.
  • This technique remains a reasonable option for the first-time revision, especially for older and less active patients.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Hip Prosthesis

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • (PMID = 20381995.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Bone Cements
  •  go-up   go-down


11. |||||..... 52%  Gravius S, Mumme T, Weber O, Berdel P, Wirtz DC: [Surgical principles and clinical experiences with the DUROM hip resurfacing system using a lateral approach]. Oper Orthop Traumatol; 2009 Dec;21(6):586-601
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] [Surgical principles and clinical experiences with the DUROM hip resurfacing system using a lateral approach].
  • [Transliterated title] Operationstechnik und klinische Ergebnisse des DUROM-Hip-Resurfacing-Systems mit dem lateralen Zugang.
  • OBJECTIVE: Objective Bone-preserving hip resurfacing in young and active patients using a soft-tissue-sparing, modified transgluteal, lateral approach.
  • INDICATIONS: Primary hip osteoarthritis in physically active, working patients aged < 65 years (males) and < 60 years (females).
  • Necrosis of the femoral head.
  • Varus deformity of the femoral neck with a reduced horizontal femoral offset.
  • Femoral head cysts (> 1 cm in diameter). Infection. Osteoporosis.
  • Previous femoral neck fracture.
  • Previous intertrochanteric femoral osteotomies.
  • Modified transgluteal, lateral approach to the hip joint.
  • Luxation of the femoral head.
  • First, reaming of the femoral head to improve visualization of the acetabular cup.
  • Central positioning of the guide wire in the femoral neck in a slight valgus position of approximately +5 degrees to the anatomic collodiaphyseal (CCD) angle using the mechanical targeting device.
  • Preparation of the femoral head over the guide rod using cylinder cutters one or two sizes larger than the smallest possible femoral component.
  • Cement-free implantation of the acetabular component according to the predetermined definitive size of the femoral component.
  • Final preparation of the femoral head using profile, surface and forming cutter.
  • Following cemented implantation of the femoral component, repositioning of the hip joint and conclusion of the surgical procedure.
  • Limitation of hip flexion to 90 degrees during the first 6 postoperative weeks, and no adduction and forced external rotation allowed in order to avoid luxation.
  • RESULTS: Analysis involved the pre- and postoperative functions of 72 patients with a total of 82 prostheses and a mean durability time of 29.2 +/- 11 months based on the Harris Hip Score (HHS), the modified UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) activity index, and the Merle d'Aubigné Score.
  • Postoperatively, prosthetic angle and femoral offset as well as periprosthetic signs of loosening/lytic areas were assessed by means of radiology and compared with the preoperative CCD angle and femoral offset.
  • In 98.8%, a solid osteointegration of the cup and femoral components was observed.
  • The postoperative femoral offset was reduced by an average of 2.3 mm compared to the preoperative offset.
  • During clinical follow-up n = 2 prostheses (2.5%) required revision (one femoral neck fracture; one periarticular ossification [Brooker III]).
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Femur Head / surgery. Hip Prosthesis. Joint Instability / surgery. Osteoarthritis, Hip / surgery

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 20087719.001).
  • [ISSN] 1439-0981
  • [Journal-full-title] Operative Orthopädie und Traumatologie
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Oper Orthop Traumatol
  • [Language] ger
  • [Publication-type] Clinical Trial; English Abstract; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Germany
  •  go-up   go-down


12. |||||..... 51%  Yang J, Kang PD, Shen B, Zhou ZK, Pei FX: [Impaction morselized allografting combined with cementless long stem for femoral defects in femoral component revision]. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi; 2010 Jul 15;48(14):1055-9
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] [Impaction morselized allografting combined with cementless long stem for femoral defects in femoral component revision].
  • OBJECTIVE: To retrospectively analyze the clinical and radiological results of the impaction morselized allografting combined with cementless long stem for femoral component revision in patients with significant bone loss.
  • METHODS: From July 2003 to June 2009, 27 patients (27 hips) underwent revision hip arthroplasty in femurs with bone defect using impaction allografting and cementless components.
  • Harris score improved from 43 points pre-revision to 83 points at the final follow-up.
  • No femoral stem loosening and failure occurred.
  • One case had an acute infection after revision and treated successfully by debridement and drainage, antibiotics.
  • No stem need further revision.
  • CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrates that femoral support and vigorous impaction grafting combined with cementless long stem results in an good intermediated-term clinical effects.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Bone Transplantation / methods. Femur / surgery. Prosthesis Design

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Bone Grafts.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 21055107.001).
  • [ISSN] 0529-5815
  • [Journal-full-title] Zhonghua wai ke za zhi [Chinese journal of surgery]
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi
  • [Language] chi
  • [Publication-type] English Abstract; Evaluation Studies; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] China
  •  go-up   go-down


13. |||||..... 51%  Garrett SJ, Bolland BJ, Yates PJ, Gardner EM, Latham JM: Femoral revision in hip resurfacing compared with large-bearing metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty; 2011 Dec;26(8):1214-8
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Femoral revision in hip resurfacing compared with large-bearing metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty.
  • It has been suggested that revision of the femoral component of hip resurfacing after femoral failure would be straightforward and have an outcome comparable to primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).
  • We have compared the outcome of femoral side-only revision resurfacings to the results of primary modular large-bearing metal-on-metal THA.
  • Fourteen consecutive patients underwent revision surgery of the failed femoral component, to a cemented tapered stem (CPT, Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana) with a large modular metal head (Smith and Nephew Orthopaedics Ltd, Memphis, Tennessee, or Adept, Finsbury Orthopaedics, Surrey, England).
  • The acetabular component was found to be well fixed, well orientated, and was left in situ.
  • At a mean follow-up of 49 months (range, 30-60 months), clinical outcome measured using the Oxford and Harris Hip Scores showed no significant difference (P = .11, P = .45, respectively).
  • We conclude that revision of the failed femoral resurfacing component gives excellent results.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Hip Prosthesis. Metals. Osteoarthritis, Hip / surgery
  • [MeSH-minor] Aged. Blood Loss, Surgical. Female. Follow-Up Studies. Hip Joint / radiography. Hip Joint / surgery. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Outcome Assessment (Health Care). Reoperation. Time Factors. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • (PMID = 21414749.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Comparative Study; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Metals
  •  go-up   go-down


14. |||||..... 51%  Sangüesa-Nebot MJ, Soriano FC, Gabarda RF, Mordt CV: Revision hip arthroplasty with a short femoral component in fractured hydroxyapatite fully coated femoral stem. J Arthroplasty; 2010 Oct;25(7):1168.e13-6
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Revision hip arthroplasty with a short femoral component in fractured hydroxyapatite fully coated femoral stem.
  • We describe a case of a fractured femoral component in a hydroxyapatite-coated cementless total hip arthroplasty that was revised using a prosthesis with circumferential proximal metaphyseal support and a lateral flare, with a short femoral stem.
  • This type of prosthesis allows for revision, thus, avoiding the removal of the distal part of the previous prosthesis well bonded to the bone.
  • This makes the revision arthroplasty easier and the patient's recovery quicker.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Durapatite. Femur / surgery. Hip Prosthesis. Periprosthetic Fractures / surgery
  • [MeSH-minor] Aged. Hip Joint / radiography. Hip Joint / surgery. Humans. Male. Osteoarthritis, Hip / surgery. Reoperation / instrumentation. Reoperation / methods. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • HSDB. structure - HYDROXYAPATITE.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • [CommentIn] J Arthroplasty. 2011 Apr;26(3):509; author reply 509-10 [21277157.001]
  • (PMID = 19729273.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Case Reports; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 91D9GV0Z28 / Durapatite
  •  go-up   go-down


15. |||||..... 51%  Masterson S, Lidder S, Scott G: Impaction femoral allografting at revision hip arthroplasty: uncemented versus cemented technique using a Freeman femoral component. J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2012 Jan;94(1):51-5
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Impaction femoral allografting at revision hip arthroplasty: uncemented versus cemented technique using a Freeman femoral component.
  • We report the long-term results of revision total hip replacement using femoral impaction allografting with both uncemented and cemented Freeman femoral components.
  • A standard design of component was used in both groups, with additional proximal hydroxyapatite coating in the uncemented group.
  • A total of 33 hips in 30 patients received an uncemented component and 31 hips in 30 patients a cemented component.
  • Revision procedures (for all causes) were required in four patients (four hips) in the uncemented group and in five patients (five hips) in the cemented group.
  • Harris hip scores improved significantly in both groups and were maintained independently of the extent of any migration of the femoral component within the graft or graft-cement mantle.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Bone Transplantation / methods. Femur / surgery

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Bone Grafts.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • HSDB. structure - HYDROXYAPATITE.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 22219247.001).
  • [ISSN] 0301-620X
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Bone Joint Surg Br
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Comparative Study; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] England
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 91D9GV0Z28 / Durapatite
  •  go-up   go-down


16. |||||..... 50%  So K, Kuroda Y, Matsuda S, Akiyama H: Revision total hip replacement with a cemented long femoral component: minimum 9-year follow-up results. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2013 Jun;133(6):869-74
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Revision total hip replacement with a cemented long femoral component: minimum 9-year follow-up results.
  • BACKGROUND: Surgical revision after failed total hip replacement is a technically challenging procedure.
  • The aim of this study was to analyze the long-term results of revision total hip replacement using a cemented long femoral component and identify factors that influence the results.
  • METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 34 hips in 33 patients who had undergone revision total hip replacement using a cemented long femoral component between 1994 and 2001.
  • Hip function was evaluated according to the scoring system of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association.
  • Perioperative complications included intraoperative femoral cortex perforation (six hips, 18 %), dislocation (five hips, 15 %), deep venous thrombosis (one hip, 3 %) and postoperative periprosthetic fracture (one hip, 3 %).
  • The mean preoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association hip score was 50.3 ± 14.9 vs 78.2 ± 11.5 at the latest follow-up.
  • The Kaplan-Meier survival rate at 15 years, calculated using radiological failure or re-revision of the femoral component for any reason as the end point, was 87 or 100 %, respectively.
  • Revision total hip replacement using a cemented long femoral component yielded satisfactory long-term results in this series.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Cementation. Hip Prosthesis. Prosthesis Design. Prosthesis Failure
  • [MeSH-minor] Aged. Female. Follow-Up Studies. Hip Joint / radiography. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Reoperation

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 23584837.001).
  • [ISSN] 1434-3916
  • [Journal-full-title] Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Arch Orthop Trauma Surg
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Germany
  •  go-up   go-down


17. |||||..... 50%  Sibiński M, Dorman T, Drobniewski M, Synder M: [Use of bulky, femoral head allografts in revision hip arthroplasty for acetabular component aseptic loosening]. Chir Narzadow Ruchu Ortop Pol; 2010 Nov-Dec;75(6):353-6
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] [Use of bulky, femoral head allografts in revision hip arthroplasty for acetabular component aseptic loosening].
  • The aim of the study was to analyze results in patients treated with frozen, bulky femoral head allografts without reinforcement ring for significant bone lost after acetabular component aseptic loosening.
  • For revision 10 cemented and 9 uncemented cups were used.
  • Mean coverage of acetabular component by graft on antero-posterior radiographs was 52% (from 30% to 100%).
  • Seven of our patients required another revision for aseptic loosening of the cup.
  • Bulky, femoral head allografts are passive scaffold and may lose the mechanical strength.
  • [MeSH-major] Acetabulum / surgery. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Bone Transplantation / methods. Cementation. Postoperative Complications / surgery. Prosthesis Failure
  • [MeSH-minor] Adult. Aged. Female. Follow-Up Studies. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Retrospective Studies. Treatment Outcome


18. |||||..... 50%  Lichtinger TK, Pingsmann A, Erol N, Schulze-Pellengahr C, Teske W: [Cement-in-cement hip revision with a long-stemmed femoral component]. Orthopade; 2009 Dec;38(12):1241-4
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] [Cement-in-cement hip revision with a long-stemmed femoral component].
  • Revision hip surgery often requires individualized techniques and implants.
  • We report on a case of failed femoral revision in an extensively cemented femur with a concomitant proximal and dorsal femoral bone defect.
  • We advocate the clinically effective revision procedure of antegrade drilling of the stable cement mantle and use of a cemented long-stemmed femoral component.
  • This cement-in-cement revision technique is discussed along with the pertinent literature.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Bone Cements / therapeutic use. Cementation / methods. Hip Prosthesis / adverse effects. Joint Instability / etiology. Joint Instability / surgery

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 19639298.001).
  • [ISSN] 1433-0431
  • [Journal-full-title] Der Orthopäde
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Orthopade
  • [Language] ger
  • [Publication-type] Case Reports; English Abstract; Journal Article; Review
  • [Publication-country] Germany
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Bone Cements
  • [Number-of-references] 10
  •  go-up   go-down


19. |||||..... 50%  Gilbert RE, Cheung G, Carrothers AD, Meyer C, Richardson JB: Functional results of isolated femoral revision of hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am; 2010 Jul 7;92(7):1600-4
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Functional results of isolated femoral revision of hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
  • BACKGROUND: Conversion of a failed femoral resurfacing component is reportedly a straightforward procedure; however, little has been published regarding the functional results following revision.
  • Our primary aim was to compare the functional results for a group of patients who had had isolated femoral component revision after a failed hip resurfacing with those for a group of patients with a surviving hip resurfacing.
  • METHODS: Between 1997 and 2002, data were prospectively collected on 5000 Birmingham Hip Resurfacing procedures.
  • One hundred and seventy-seven hips were revised, and, of those, seventy-six had an isolated femoral component revision.
  • We reviewed the modes of failure and the post-revision clinical outcomes for this subgroup (the revised implant group) and compared the results with those for the patients who had a surviving hip resurfacing implant (the surviving implant group).
  • RESULTS: The median Harris and Merle d'Aubigné hip scores were significantly better in the surviving implant group than in the revised implant group (median Harris score, 96 compared with 82 [p < 0.001]; median Merle d'Aubigné score, 17 compared with 14 [p < 0.001]).
  • When we analyzed outcomes following revision, we found that the mode of failure affected outcome.
  • Patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes were worse following revision because of femoral component loosening in comparison with revision because of femoral neck fracture or revision because of femoral head collapse or osteonecrosis.
  • In these three subgroups, the median Harris hip scores were 66, 87, and 92, respectively, and the median Merle d'Aubigné scores were 10, 14, and 15, respectively.
  • Six of fifteen patients in the femoral loosening group believed that they were worse or much worse after the revision than they had been before the primary procedure, compared with four of twenty-five patients in the femoral neck fracture group and two of twenty-two patients in the femoral head collapse or osteonecrosis group.
  • Four patients (four hips) experienced complications as a consequence of revision surgery (three deep infections and one case of loosening of an uncemented femoral stem).
  • CONCLUSIONS: The functional results for patients who had revision of the femoral component of a current-generation metal-on-metal resurfacing arthroplasty were worse than those for patients with a surviving hip resurfacing.
  • Patients who had revision because of femoral component loosening had worse outcomes than those who had revision because of femoral neck fracture or femoral head collapse or osteonecrosis.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip
  • [MeSH-minor] Adolescent. Adult. Aged. Aged, 80 and over. Equipment Failure Analysis. Female. Femoral Neck Fractures / surgery. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Osteonecrosis / surgery. Patient Satisfaction. Postoperative Complications. Prospective Studies. Reoperation. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 20595565.001).
  • [ISSN] 1535-1386
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Bone Joint Surg Am
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Comparative Study; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


20. |||||..... 50%  Brogan K, Charity J, Sheeraz A, Whitehouse SL, Timperley AJ, Howell JR, Hubble MJ: Revision total hip replacement using the cement-in-cement technique for the acetabular component: technique and results for 60 hips. J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2012 Nov;94(11):1482-6
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Revision total hip replacement using the cement-in-cement technique for the acetabular component: technique and results for 60 hips.
  • The technique of femoral cement-in-cement revision is well established, but there are no previous series reporting its use on the acetabular side at the time of revision total hip replacement.
  • All had a radiologically and clinically well-fixed acetabular cement mantle at the time of revision.
  • The two most common indications for acetabular revision were recurrent dislocation (46, 77%) and to complement femoral revision (12, 20%).
  • Of the 60 hips, there were two cases of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component (3.3%) requiring re-revision.
  • No other hip was clinically or radiologically loose (96.7%) at the latest follow-up.
  • One hip was re-revised for infection, four for recurrent dislocation and one for disarticulation of a constrained component.
  • At five years the Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 100% for aseptic loosening and 92.2% (95% CI 84.8 to 99.6), with revision for any cause as the endpoint.
  • These results support the use of cement-in-cement revision on the acetabular side in appropriate cases.
  • [MeSH-major] Acetabulum / surgery. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Bone Cements / therapeutic use. Hip Joint / surgery

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 23109626.001).
  • [ISSN] 0301-620X
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Bone Joint Surg Br
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] England
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Bone Cements
  •  go-up   go-down


21. |||||..... 50%  Foran JR, Brown NM, Della Valle CJ, Levine BR, Sporer SM, Paprosky WG: Prevalence, risk factors, and management of proximal femoral remodeling in revision hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty; 2013 May;28(5):877-81
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Prevalence, risk factors, and management of proximal femoral remodeling in revision hip arthroplasty.
  • The prevalence of, risk factors, and management of proximal femoral remodeling in revision total hip arthroplasty is unknown.
  • Therefore, we reviewed the files of 200 consecutive femoral revision arthroplasties to study this phenomenon.
  • Remodeling was considered present if a properly sized diaphyseal-engaging acrylic template had appropriate distal canal fill but lied within 2mm of the proximal lateral endosteal cortex (definition 1) or completely outside the femoral canal (definition 2) on anteroposterior femoral radiographs.
  • The strongest risk factors were loose femoral components and more severe femoral bone loss.
  • Orthopedic surgeons performing revision arthroplasty should be prepared to encounter remodeling as its presence can complicate femoral component revision.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Bone Remodeling. Femur

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • (PMID = 23489721.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


22. |||||..... 50%  Chung LH, Wu PK, Chen CF, Chen WM, Chen TH, Liu CL: Extensively porous-coated stems for femoral revision: reliable choice for stem revision in Paprosky femoral type III defects. Orthopedics; 2012 Jul 1;35(7):e1017-21
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Extensively porous-coated stems for femoral revision: reliable choice for stem revision in Paprosky femoral type III defects.
  • Between January 1999 and August 2008, ninety-six femoral revisions were performed with extensively porous-coated stems in Paprosky type III femoral defects (89 type IIIA and 7 type IIIB defects).
  • Average postoperative Harris Hip Score was 92.3±8 (range, 77-100), and all scores improved postoperatively.
  • The most frequent diagnosis for revision of the femoral component was loosening of the cementless stem (53 patients; 55.2%), followed by status after a Girdlestone procedure (21 patients; 21.8%), after total hip arthroplasty with acetabular wear (10 patients; 10.4%), loosening of the cemented stem (7 patients; 7.3%), and periprosthetic fracture (5 patients; 5.2%).
  • The authors performed 65 total hip arthroplasty revisions, 23 femoral component revisions, and 8 revisions of femoral components with cemented liners in patients with well-fixed acetabular shells.
  • Extensively porous-coated stems in femoral revision for Paprosky type III femoral defects provided good mid-term durability.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / statistics & numerical data. Hip Prosthesis / statistics & numerical data. Prosthesis-Related Infections / epidemiology

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright 2012, SLACK Incorporated.
  • (PMID = 22784893.001).
  • [ISSN] 1938-2367
  • [Journal-full-title] Orthopedics
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Orthopedics
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Clinical Trial; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Coated Materials, Biocompatible
  •  go-up   go-down


23. |||||..... 50%  Cho HJ, Han SB, Park JH, Park SW: An analysis of stably fixed femoral components retained during revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty; 2011 Dec;26(8):1239-44
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] An analysis of stably fixed femoral components retained during revision total hip arthroplasty.
  • This study was conducted to analyze the clinical and radiographic results of isolated acetabular revisions during which intact femoral stems were retained.
  • The average time from primary operation to revision surgery was 9.2 years, and the average follow-up time after revision was 5 years.
  • The average Harris hip scores improved from 56.4 to 89.8 points after revision surgery, and in all cases, the acetabular components and femoral stems were assessed as stable at the final follow-up.
  • The average length of service of the femoral components was 14.2 years.
  • In conclusion, we recommend that isolated acetabular revision be considered in cases with an acetabular component failure and a stable femoral component.
  • [MeSH-major] Acetabulum / surgery. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Equipment Failure Analysis. Femur. Hip Prosthesis. Prosthesis Design
  • [MeSH-minor] Adult. Aged. Female. Femur Head Necrosis / surgery. Follow-Up Studies. Hip Joint / radiography. Hip Joint / surgery. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Osteoarthritis, Hip / surgery. Osteolysis / surgery. Prosthesis Failure. Reoperation. Retrospective Studies. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • (PMID = 21435820.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


24. |||||..... 50%  Park MS, Lee JH, Park JH, Ham DH, Rhee YK: A distal fluted, proximal modular femoral prosthesis in revision hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty; 2010 Sep;25(6):932-8
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] A distal fluted, proximal modular femoral prosthesis in revision hip arthroplasty.
  • Most reports on the use of modular femoral stems during revision surgery have involved short follow-up periods.
  • Average Harris hip score was improved from 47 to 87.6.
  • Re-revision was performed in 5 patients, and 3 of these were for subsidence (of these 3, subsidence was associated with dissociation of the coupling part in 1 and with osteotomy nonunion in other 2 [proximal component only]).
  • Modular distally fixed femoral stems were found to offer intraoperative flexibility, but to suffer from subsidence and intraoperative greater trochanter and metaphyseal femoral fractures.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Hip Prosthesis. Prosthesis Design

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc.
  • (PMID = 19762205.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


25. |||||..... 50%  Butt AJ, Shaikh AH, Cameron HU: Coupling failure between stem and femoral component in a constrained revision total knee arthroplasty. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak; 2013 Feb;23(2):162-3
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Coupling failure between stem and femoral component in a constrained revision total knee arthroplasty.
  • Knee revision using constrained implants is associated with greater stresses on the implant and interface surfaces.
  • The present report describes a case of failure of the screw coupling between the stem and the femoral component.
  • The cause of the failure is surmised with outline of the treatment in this case with extensive femoral bone loss.
  • Revision implant stability was augmented with the use of a cemented femoral stem, screw fixation and the metaphyseal sleeve of an S-ROM modular hip system (DePuy international Ltd).
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee / adverse effects. Femoral Fractures / surgery. Periprosthetic Fractures / surgery. Prosthesis Failure

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Knee Replacement.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Leg Injuries and Disorders.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 23374527.001).
  • [ISSN] 1681-7168
  • [Journal-full-title] Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan : JCPSP
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Coll Physicians Surg Pak
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Case Reports; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Pakistan
  •  go-up   go-down


26. |||||..... 50%  Muirhead-Allwood S, Sandiford NA, Skinner JA, Hua J, Muirhead W, Kabir C, Walker PS: Uncemented computer-assisted design-computer-assisted manufacture femoral components in revision total hip replacement: a minimum follow-up of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2010 Oct;92(10):1370-5
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Uncemented computer-assisted design-computer-assisted manufacture femoral components in revision total hip replacement: a minimum follow-up of ten years.
  • We prospectively evaluated the long-term outcome of 158 consecutive patients who underwent revision total hip replacement using uncemented computer-assisted design-computer-assisted manufacture femoral components.
  • The mean Oxford, Harris and Western Ontario and McMaster hip scores improved from 41.1, 44.2 and 52.4 pre-operatively to 18.2, 89.3 and 12.3, respectively (p < 0.0001, for each).
  • The overall survival of the femoral component was 97% (95% confidence interval 94.5 to 99.7).
  • These results are comparable to those of previously published reports for revision total hip replacement using either cemented or uncemented components.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Computer-Aided Design. Hip Prosthesis. Prosthesis Design / methods
  • [MeSH-minor] Adult. Age Distribution. Aged. Aged, 80 and over. Cementation. Female. Follow-Up Studies. Hip Joint / radiography. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Prosthesis Failure. Survival Analysis. Treatment Outcome

  • Genetic Alliance. consumer health - TEN.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 20884973.001).
  • [ISSN] 0301-620X
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Bone Joint Surg Br
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Evaluation Studies; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] England
  •  go-up   go-down


27. |||||..... 50%  Faroug R, Shah Y, McCarthy MJ, Halawa M: Two stage one component revision in infected total hip replacements - two case reports and literature review. Hip Int; 2009 Jul-Sep;19(3):292-8
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Two stage one component revision in infected total hip replacements - two case reports and literature review.
  • We present two cases of infected primary total hip replacements (THR) where only one of the two components exhibited loosening.
  • Both were revised using a two stage, one component revision technique, replacing the loose component only.
  • In the first case the acetabular component was revised leaving the original femoral stem in situ.
  • In the second case, the femoral component was revised, leaving the original acetabular cup undisturbed.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Hip Prosthesis. Surgical Wound Infection
  • [MeSH-minor] Accidental Falls. Aged. Female. Femoral Neck Fractures. Hip Joint / radiography. Humans. Male. Methylmethacrylate. Reoperation

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • HSDB. structure - METHYL METHACRYLATE.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 19876888.001).
  • [ISSN] 1724-6067
  • [Journal-full-title] Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Hip Int
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Case Reports; Journal Article; Review
  • [Publication-country] Italy
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 196OC77688 / Methylmethacrylate
  • [Number-of-references] 26
  •  go-up   go-down


28. |||||..... 49%  Bos PK, van Biezen FC, Weinans H: Femoral component neck fracture after failed hip resurfacing arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty; 2011 Dec;26(8):1570.e1-4
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Femoral component neck fracture after failed hip resurfacing arthroplasty.
  • Failure on the femoral side after third-generation metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty is suggested to be easily treated with conversion to conventional total hip arthroplasty.
  • Clinical results of conversion for failed hip resurfacing arthroplasty with the use of primary femoral implants confirmed this for a short-term follow-up.
  • We present a case of the occurrence of a stemmed femoral implant neck fracture in a patient who was earlier treated for a failed hip resurfacing.
  • We advise to consider acetabular revision in case of (suspected) acetabular metal damage and to use a stem component with a relative large neck diameter.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Femoral Neck Fractures / radiography. Hip Prosthesis / adverse effects. Osteoarthritis, Hip / surgery
  • [MeSH-minor] Hip Joint / radiography. Hip Joint / surgery. Humans. Male. Metals. Middle Aged. Prosthesis Design. Prosthesis Failure. Reoperation. Treatment Failure

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Injuries and Disorders.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • (PMID = 21397452.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Case Reports; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Metals
  •  go-up   go-down


29. |||||..... 49%  Srinivasan A, Jung E, Levine BR: Modularity of the femoral component in total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg; 2012 Apr;20(4):214-22
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Modularity of the femoral component in total hip arthroplasty.
  • Modular femoral components have been developed to aid in recreating native femoral version, limb length, and offset in total hip arthroplasty.
  • With modular implants, the femoral prosthesis can be built in situ, which is helpful in minimizing incision length and surgical dissection.
  • However, additional modular junctions are associated with increased concern for component failure through taper fretting, fatigue fracture, and local corrosion, which may contribute to elevated serum metal ion levels.
  • The recent trend toward using larger diameter femoral heads may impart higher loads and stress than were seen previously.
  • Although modular components offer a plethora of intraoperative options in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty, the long-term effects of these additional junctions remains unknown.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Hip Prosthesis. Prosthesis Design

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • HSDB. structure - TITANIUM.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 22474091.001).
  • [ISSN] 1067-151X
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Am Acad Orthop Surg
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article; Review
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Alloys; 0 / Chromium Alloys; 12597-68-1 / Stainless Steel; D1JT611TNE / Titanium
  •  go-up   go-down


30. |||||..... 49%  Matharu GS, McBryde CW, Revell MP, Pynsent PB: Femoral neck fracture after Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: prevalence, time to fracture, and outcome after revision. J Arthroplasty; 2013 Jan;28(1):147-53
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Femoral neck fracture after Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty: prevalence, time to fracture, and outcome after revision.
  • A consecutive cohort of 3076 Birmingham Hip Resurfacings from a single institution was analyzed.
  • The prevalence of femoral neck fracture, the time to fracture, and the outcome after revision were investigated.
  • Mean operation time for revision was 59 minutes, and 71% underwent isolated femoral component revision.
  • At a mean follow-up of 5.5 years since revision, 3 patients required re-revision (2 aseptic loosening, 1 for sepsis) giving a survival of 95.7% (confidence interval, 86.9%-100%) at 5 years for the revision.
  • Median Oxford Hip Score was 12.5% (interquartile range, 3.2%-32.3%).
  • Most fractures occur early after hip resurfacing and were straightforward to revise.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects. Femoral Neck Fractures / surgery. Hip Prosthesis / adverse effects. Periprosthetic Fractures / surgery

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Injuries and Disorders.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • (PMID = 22819379.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


31. |||||..... 49%  Chen CF, Chen WM, Yang CT, Huang CK, Chen TH: Hybrid assembly of metal head and femoral stem from different manufacturers during isolated acetabular revision. Artif Organs; 2010 Aug;34(8):E242-5
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Hybrid assembly of metal head and femoral stem from different manufacturers during isolated acetabular revision.
  • During revision of a failed acetabular component with well-fixed antiquated femoral stem, the same variant of metal head is usually not available in the inventory production.
  • We gathered the stems retrieved from revision surgeries and tried to reassemble with the commercially available femoral heads.
  • This study reports the results of suitable hybrid assembly of metal heads with the most common antiquated femoral stems from different manufacturers.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Hip Prosthesis

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 20626740.001).
  • [ISSN] 1525-1594
  • [Journal-full-title] Artificial organs
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Artif Organs
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Comparative Study; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


32. |||||..... 49%  Jack CM, Molloy DO, Walter WL, Zicat BA, Walter WK: The use of ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in isolated revision of the acetabular component. Bone Joint J; 2013 Mar;95-B(3):333-8
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] The use of ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in isolated revision of the acetabular component.
  • The practice of removing a well-fixed cementless femoral component is associated with high morbidity.
  • Ceramic bearing couples are low wearing and their use minimises the risk of subsequent further revision due to the production of wear debris.
  • A total of 165 revision hip replacements were performed, in which a polyethylene-lined acetabular component was revised to a new acetabular component with a ceramic liner, while retaining the well-fixed femoral component.
  • A titanium sleeve was placed over the used femoral trunnion, to which a ceramic head was added.
  • The mean Harris hip score improved significantly from 71.3 (9.0 to 100.0) pre-operatively to 91.0 (41.0 to 100.0) at a mean follow up of 4.8 years (2.1 to 12.5) (p < 0.001).
  • No patients reported squeaking of the hip.
  • At 8.3 years post-operatively the survival with any cause of failure as the endpoint was 96.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 85.7 to 99.3) for the acetabular component and 94.0% (95% CI 82.1 to 98.4) for the femoral component.
  • The technique of revising the acetabular component in the presence of a well-fixed femoral component with a ceramic head placed on a titanium sleeve over the used trunnion is a useful adjunct in revision hip practice.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Ceramics. Hemiarthroplasty / instrumentation. Hip Prosthesis. Prosthesis Failure
  • [MeSH-minor] Acetabulum. Adult. Aged. Aged, 80 and over. Arthritis / surgery. Female. Follow-Up Studies. Hip Dislocation / surgery. Humans. Kaplan-Meier Estimate. Male. Middle Aged. Reoperation / instrumentation. Retrospective Studies. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 23450016.001).
  • [ISSN] 2049-4408
  • [Journal-full-title] The bone & joint journal
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Bone Joint J
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Evaluation Studies; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] England
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Ceramics
  •  go-up   go-down


33. |||||..... 49%  Giori NJ: Unexpected finding of a fractured metal prosthetic femoral head in a nonmodular implant during revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty; 2010 Jun;25(4):659.e13-5
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Unexpected finding of a fractured metal prosthetic femoral head in a nonmodular implant during revision total hip arthroplasty.
  • Though there are many reports of fractured femoral components after total hip arthroplasty; there are no reports of a fractured metal femoral head.
  • This is a report of a fractured metal femoral head in a nonmodular total hip replacement discovered unexpectedly during revision total hip arthroplasty for acetabular failure.
  • This surprise finding, which was not appreciated on preoperative x-rays, required unplanned extraction of a well-ingrown, fully porous coated cylindrical femoral stem.
  • Though rare, fracture of the metal femoral head in a DePuy (Warsaw, Ind.) monoblock Anatomic Medullary Locking (AML) component is possible, and one cannot expect the fracture to be apparent on preoperative radiographs as the 2 pieces may not necessarily dissociate.
  • As usual, the surgeon performing revision arthroplasty should be prepared to revise all components.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects. Hip Prosthesis / adverse effects. Prosthesis Failure

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • COS Scholar Universe. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Published by Elsevier Inc.
  • (PMID = 20022458.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Case Reports; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Biocompatible Materials; 0 / Metals
  •  go-up   go-down


34. |||||..... 49%  Sangiorgio SN, Ebramzadeh E, Borkowski SL, Oakes DA, Reid JJ, Bengs BC: Effect of proximal femoral bone support on the fixation of a press-fit noncemented total hip replacement femoral component. J Appl Biomater Funct Mater; 2013;11(1):e26-34
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Effect of proximal femoral bone support on the fixation of a press-fit noncemented total hip replacement femoral component.
  • PURPOSE: Proximal femoral bone loss is a common challenge in revision hip arthroplasty.
  • In this study, in-vitro fixation of a non-cemented, rectangular, dual-tapered, press-fit femoral component designed to achieve metadiaphyseal fixation was analyzed using an accelerated proximal femoral bone loss model to assess the potential use in revision cases.
  • METHODS: The press-fit AlloclassicTM femoral stem was implanted in ten cadaveric femurs and tested under cyclic biomechanical loading in an intact state, and then again after sequential proximal femoral bone resections, simulating increasing amounts of bone deficiency.
  • CONCLUSION: The results indicate that when strong initial fixation is achieved, long-term success is possible given substantial proximal femoral bone loss.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Femur. Hip Prosthesis

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 23413131.001).
  • [ISSN] 2280-8000
  • [Journal-full-title] Journal of applied biomaterials & functional materials
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Appl Biomater Funct Mater
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • [Publication-country] Italy
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Bone Cements
  •  go-up   go-down


35. |||||..... 49%  Jameson SS, Baker PN, Mason J, Gregg PJ, Brewster N, Deehan DJ, Reed MR: The design of the acetabular component and size of the femoral head influence the risk of revision following 34 721 single-brand cemented hip replacements: a retrospective cohort study of medium-term data from a National Joint Registry. J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2012 Dec;94(12):1611-7
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] The design of the acetabular component and size of the femoral head influence the risk of revision following 34 721 single-brand cemented hip replacements: a retrospective cohort study of medium-term data from a National Joint Registry.
  • Despite excellent results, the use of cemented total hip replacement (THR) is declining.
  • This retrospective cohort study records survival time to revision following primary cemented THR using the most common combination of components that accounted for almost a quarter of all cemented THRs, exploring risk factors independently associated with failure.
  • Cox's proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates, with a significance threshold of p < 0.01.
  • The overall seven-year rate of revision for any reason was 1.70% (99% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 2.12).
  • In the final adjusted model the risk of revision was significantly higher in THRs with the Contemporary hooded component (hazard ratio (HR) 1.88, p < 0.001) than with the flanged version, and in smaller head sizes (< 28 mm) compared with 28 mm diameter heads (HR 1.50, p = 0.005).
  • The seven-year revision rate was 1.16% (99% CI 0.69 to 1.63) with a 28 mm diameter head and flanged component.
  • The overall risk of revision was independent of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, surgeon volume, surgical approach, brand of cement/presence of antibiotic, femoral head material (stainless steel/alumina) and stem taper size/offset.
  • However, the risk of revision for dislocation was significantly higher with a 'plus' offset head (HR 2.05, p = 0.003) and a hooded acetabular component (HR 2.34, p < 0.001).
  • In summary, we found that there were significant differences in failure between different designs of acetabular component and sizes of femoral head after adjustment for a range of covariates.
  • [MeSH-major] Acetabulum / surgery. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Bone Cements / therapeutic use. Femur Head / surgery. Osteoarthritis, Hip / surgery
  • [MeSH-minor] Adult. Aged. Aged, 80 and over. England. Female. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Prosthesis Design. Prosthesis Failure. Registries. Reoperation. Retrospective Studies. Risk Factors. Treatment Outcome. Wales

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 23188900.001).
  • [ISSN] 0301-620X
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Bone Joint Surg Br
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • [Publication-country] England
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Bone Cements
  •  go-up   go-down


36. |||||..... 49%  Wu HB, Yan SG, Wu LD, He RX, Wang XH, Dai XS: Combined use of extensively porous coated femoral components with onlay cortical strut allografts in revision of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures. Chin Med J (Engl); 2009 Nov 5;122(21):2612-5
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Combined use of extensively porous coated femoral components with onlay cortical strut allografts in revision of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures.
  • BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty are getting more prevalent.
  • The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical results of combined use of uncemented extensively porous coated femoral components with onlay cortical strut allografts in revision of Vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures.
  • METHODS: Thirteen hips after total hip arthroplasty in 13 patients who suffered a Vancouver B2 or B3 periprosthetic fracture were treated with an uncemented extensively porous coated femoral component combined with onlay cortical strut allografts.
  • Each patient was assigned a Harris hip score, and a visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain and satisfaction.
  • Radiographs were examined for component stability, fracture site and allograft-host union and allograft reconstruction.
  • RESULTS: At an average of 5.3-year follow-up, no patient required repeat revision.
  • The average Harris hip score was (71.8 +/- 6.3) points, the pain VAS score was (16.6 +/- 4.3) points, and the patient satisfaction VAS score was (81.5 +/- 5.7) points.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Bone Transplantation / methods. Femoral Fractures / surgery. Hip Prosthesis / adverse effects


37. |||||..... 49%  Sexton SA, Walter WL, Jackson MP, De Steiger R, Stanford T: Ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surface and risk of revision due to dislocation after primary total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2009 Nov;91(11):1448-53
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surface and risk of revision due to dislocation after primary total hip replacement.
  • Dislocation is a common reason for revision following total hip replacement.
  • This study investigated the relationship between the bearing surface and the risk of revision due to dislocation.
  • It was based on 110 239 primary total hip replacements with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis collected by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry between September 1999 and December 2007.
  • Ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces had a lower risk of requiring revision due to dislocation than did metal-on-polyethylene and ceramic-on-polyethylene surfaces, with a follow-up of up to seven years.
  • The size of the head of the femoral component and age are known to be independent predictors of dislocation.
  • There is a significantly higher rate of revision for dislocation in ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces than in metal-on-polyethylene implants when smaller sizes (< or = 28 mm) of the head were used in younger patients (< 65 years) (hazard ratio = 1.53, p = 0.041) and also with larger (> 28 mm) and in older patients (> or = 65 years) (hazard ratio = 1.73, p = 0.016).
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects. Hip Dislocation / etiology. Hip Prosthesis
  • [MeSH-minor] Age Factors. Aged. Ceramics. Female. Femur Head / pathology. Follow-Up Studies. Humans. Middle Aged. Osteoarthritis, Hip / surgery. Prosthesis Design. Prosthesis Failure. Reoperation. Surface Properties

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Injuries and Disorders.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 19880888.001).
  • [ISSN] 0301-620X
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Bone Joint Surg Br
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] England
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Ceramics
  •  go-up   go-down


38. |||||..... 49%  Artiaco S, Boggio F, Titolo P, Zoccola K, Bianchi P, Bellomo F: Clinical experience in femoral revision with the modular Profemur R stem. Hip Int; 2011 Jan-Mar;21(1):39-42
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Clinical experience in femoral revision with the modular Profemur R stem.
  • The application of modular femoral stems is constantly increasing in revision hip surgery.
  • From March 2001 to March 2006, we employed the Profemur R modular stem in 35 cases of femoral component revision (31 first revisions and 4 re-revisions).
  • The reasons for revision surgery included aseptic loosening in 17 cases, periprosthetic femoral fracture in 8 cases, stem fracture in 3 cases, septic loosening in 2 cases and recurrent dislocation in 1 case.
  • One fracture healed in association with temporary wound discharge, and the other resulted in non-union with a femoral varus deformity.
  • This required revision with internal fixation (LCP plate) at 3 months, with a successful result.
  • In one case of stem subsidence femoral revision with a larger Profemur R implant was required.
  • In our retrospective study the Profemur R modular stem has been an effective prosthetic system for femoral reconstruction in case of loosening with Paprosky grade III bone loss and following periprosthetic femoral fractures.
  • [MeSH-major] Femoral Fractures / surgery. Fracture Fixation, Internal / methods. Hip Prosthesis. Periprosthetic Fractures / surgery. Reoperation / methods
  • [MeSH-minor] Aged. Aged, 80 and over. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects. Female. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Prosthesis Design. Prosthesis Failure. Retrospective Studies. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Leg Injuries and Disorders.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 21279965.001).
  • [ISSN] 1724-6067
  • [Journal-full-title] Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Hip Int
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Italy
  •  go-up   go-down


39. |||||..... 49%  Mahadevan D, Challand C, Keenan J: Revision total hip replacement: predictors of blood loss, transfusion requirements, and length of hospitalisation. J Orthop Traumatol; 2010 Sep;11(3):159-65
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Revision total hip replacement: predictors of blood loss, transfusion requirements, and length of hospitalisation.
  • BACKGROUND: Revision total hip replacement (THR) is associated with increased blood loss and extended hospitalization.
  • MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed 146 patients who underwent revision THR to identify predictors of blood loss, transfusion requirements, and length of hospitalization.
  • Femoral and dual-component revision and revision of cemented hip components were also associated with greater blood loss.
  • Transfusion requirements were greater in patients who had lower preoperative hemoglobin concentration and in patients undergoing dual-component revision.
  • Length of hospitalization was significantly increased in patients who received transfusion but less in patients who underwent isolated acetabular-component hip revision.
  • CONCLUSIONS: This study shows significantly greater blood loss in men, older patients, revision surgery of cemented implants, and dual-component revisions.
  • More complex revision surgery and preoperative anemia are clearly associated with increased transfusion requirements and length of hospitalization.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects. Blood Loss, Surgical / statistics & numerical data. Blood Transfusion / utilization. Length of Stay / statistics & numerical data
  • [MeSH-minor] Age Distribution. Aged. Cohort Studies. Confidence Intervals. Female. Follow-Up Studies. Great Britain. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Incidence. Intraoperative Complications / diagnosis. Intraoperative Complications / epidemiology. Male. Middle Aged. Multivariate Analysis. Predictive Value of Tests. Prosthesis Failure. Regression Analysis. Reoperation / methods. Retrospective Studies. Risk Assessment. Sex Distribution. Time Factors. Treatment Outcome

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Blood Transfusion and Donation.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Cites] Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2000 Jul;17(7):411-7 [10964142.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004 Sep;86(7):970-3 [15446520.001]
  • [Cites] Int Orthop. 2001;25(4):226-7 [11561496.001]
  • [Cites] J Surg Res. 2002 Feb;102(2):237-44 [11796024.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 Feb;84-A(2):216-20 [11861727.001]
  • [Cites] Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2002 Jul;84(4):269-72 [12215032.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 Aug;(413):175-82 [12897608.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Nov;85-A(11):2147-51 [14630844.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989 Jan;71(1):8-14 [2913006.001]
  • [Cites] Arthritis Care Res. 1995 Sep;8(3):167-73 [7654801.001]
  • [Cites] Transfusion. 1996 Feb;36(2):144-9 [8614965.001]
  • [Cites] Transfusion. 1997 Oct;37(10):1070-4 [9354828.001]
  • [Cites] Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2004 Dec;124(10):699-701 [15517315.001]
  • [Cites] Anesth Analg. 2005 May;100(5):1416-21, table of contents [15845698.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006 Sep;88(9):1141-2 [16943461.001]
  • [Cites] Transfus Med. 2001 Apr;11(2):87-95 [11299025.001]
  • (PMID = 20835744.001).
  • [ISSN] 1590-9999
  • [Journal-full-title] Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Orthop Traumatol
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Italy
  • [Other-IDs] NLM/ PMC2948129
  •  go-up   go-down


40. |||||..... 49%  Al-Taki MM, Masri BA, Duncan CP, Garbuz DS: Quality of life following proximal femoral replacement using a modular system in revision THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2011 Feb;469(2):470-5
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Quality of life following proximal femoral replacement using a modular system in revision THA.
  • BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral replacement using a segmental modular system is one option for revision THA in the presence of severe bone loss or periprosthetic fracture.
  • QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We evaluated the quality of life in patients undergoing proximal femoral replacement using a segmental modular system for severe bone loss.
  • PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 63 patients undergoing complex revision THA using a modular replacement system for nonneoplastic conditions between April 1996 and June 2006.
  • Study patients were matched by age-decade to a control group of patients undergoing conventional revision THA.
  • RESULTS: At last followup, the modular system group showed improvement in WOMAC function, WOMAC pain, Oxford score, and the SF-12 mental component.
  • CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severely compromised bone stock, a segmental modular replacement system can improve the quality of life.
  • Special attention should be given to the stability of the hip intraoperatively and a constrained acetabular liner should be used when the risk of postoperative dislocation is high.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Femur / surgery. Hip Joint / surgery. Hip Prosthesis. Osteolysis / surgery. Quality of Life

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • COS Scholar Universe. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Mar;(420):169-75 [15057093.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003 Dec;(417):224-31 [14646721.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1976 Nov-Dec;(121):20-32 [991504.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Jun;(141):17-27 [477100.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981 Oct;63(8):1228-39 [7287793.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985 Jan-Feb;(192):159-67 [3855392.001]
  • [Cites] J Rheumatol. 1988 Dec;15(12):1833-40 [3068365.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993 Jan;75(1):14-21 [8421012.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Jan;(298):67-74 [8118997.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1994 Feb;9(1):33-44 [8163974.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995 May;77(3):351-6 [7744913.001]
  • [Cites] Instr Course Lect. 1995;44:293-304 [7797866.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Jan;(322):207-23 [8542698.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 1996 Feb;67(1):37-42 [8615100.001]
  • [Cites] Med Care. 1996 Mar;34(3):220-33 [8628042.001]
  • [Cites] Orthop Clin North Am. 1998 Apr;29(2):313-7 [9553576.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1998 Dec;13(8):890-5 [9880181.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Dec;(429):94-101 [15577472.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Aug;87(8):1777-81 [16085618.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 May;89(5):1036-43 [17473141.001]
  • [Cites] J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2007 Aug;15(2):163-6 [17709853.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 Aug;89(8):1010-4 [17785736.001]
  • [Cites] Instr Course Lect. 2000;49:83-96 [10829164.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999 Dec;(369):230-42 [10611878.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000 Aug;82(6):830-6 [10990306.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 Oct;84-A(10):1788-92 [12377909.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Nov;85-A(11):2156-62 [14630846.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1972 Feb;54(1):61-76 [5011747.001]
  • (PMID = 20824405.001).
  • [ISSN] 1528-1132
  • [Journal-full-title] Clinical orthopaedics and related research
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Comparative Study; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Other-IDs] NLM/ PMC3018217
  •  go-up   go-down


41. |||||..... 49%  Uchiyama K, Takahira N, Fukushima K, Yamamoto T, Moriya M, Itoman M: Radiological evaluation of allograft reconstruction in acetabulum with Ganz reinforcement ring in revision total hip replacement. J Orthop Sci; 2010 Nov;15(6):764-71
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Radiological evaluation of allograft reconstruction in acetabulum with Ganz reinforcement ring in revision total hip replacement.
  • BACKGROUND: In revision total hip replacement (THR), cages and rings are commonly used for the reconstruction of bone defects that are due to mechanical loosening of the acetabular cup and migration of the femoral head prosthesis.
  • The purpose of this study was to evaluate the radiological results of the use of Ganz reinforcement rings with bone allografts in acetabular revision THR.
  • METHODS: We reviewed 30 hips of 28 patients who underwent allograft reconstruction of the acetabulum with a Ganz reinforcement ring in revision THR.
  • Loosening of the acetabular component was defined as a change in the cranial or central direction of the cup or a change in the cup inclination angle at the time of last follow-up.
  • The end point was revision surgery done because of defined loosening of the acetabular component at the time of the last follow-up.
  • RESULTS: All five acetabular components (16.7%) defined as showing aseptic loosening were type D defects (cranio-central defects), but no patient needed revision surgery during the follow-up period.
  • Nine revision surgeries with strut screws for type D acetabular bone defects were performed.
  • The calculated Kaplan-Meier survival rate at 5 years was 96.0%, and the rate at 10 years was 80.2%, using defined loosening of the acetabular component as the end point.
  • CONCLUSIONS: Allograft reconstruction of the acetabulum with a Ganz reinforcement ring is a useful technique for revision THR.
  • [MeSH-major] Acetabulum / surgery. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Bone Transplantation. Hip Prosthesis. Internal Fixators. Prosthesis Failure

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Bone Grafts.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 21116894.001).
  • [ISSN] 1436-2023
  • [Journal-full-title] Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Orthop Sci
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Japan
  •  go-up   go-down


42. |||||..... 49%  Fukui K, Kaneuji A, Sugimori T, Ichiseki T, Kitamura K, Matsumoto T: Should the well-fixed, uncemented femoral components be revised during isolated acetabular revision? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg; 2011 Apr;131(4):481-5
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Should the well-fixed, uncemented femoral components be revised during isolated acetabular revision?
  • INTRODUCTION: The results of isolated acetabular revision performed in 35 patients (36 hips) were monitored from 3 to 10 years.
  • All femoral components were well fixed and not removed or revised during index surgery.
  • METHOD: All revision acetabular implants were cementless, using a porous-coated hemispheric cup with or without bone graft.
  • There were no cases of femoral component radiographic or clinical failure.
  • The mean pre- and postoperative Harris Hip Scores were 49 and 80, respectively.
  • The findings suggest that isolated acetabular revision using a cementless porous-coated hemispheric cup can be performed without removing or revising a stable, well-fixed, uncemented femoral component if there is no concern about dislocation.
  • CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that isolated acetabular revision is feasible and that grafting to the osteolytic femoral defects is a worthwhile procedure to restore bone stock.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods
  • [MeSH-minor] Acetabulum / radiography. Acetabulum / surgery. Adult. Aged. Bone Transplantation. Female. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Prosthesis Failure. Reoperation

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 20665041.001).
  • [ISSN] 1434-3916
  • [Journal-full-title] Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Arch Orthop Trauma Surg
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Germany
  •  go-up   go-down


43. |||||..... 49%  Jaiswal A, Gilbert RE, Sunil Kumar KH, Carrothers AD, Kuiper JH, Richardson JB: Function and survival after revision of hip resurfacing. Hip Int; 2011 Sep-Oct;21(5):610-5
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Function and survival after revision of hip resurfacing.
  • The purpose of this study was to compare functional outcome and survival of isolated acetabular, isolated femoral and both component revision after failure of primary Birmingham Hip Resurfacing.
  • The Oswestry Outcome Centre prospectively collected data on 5000 hip resurfacing between 1997 and 2002.
  • Of these, 182 hips were revised: 8% had revision of the acetabular component only, 42% had revision of the femoral component only to conventional stemmed prosthesis, and 50% had revision of both components to conventional total hip arthroplasty (THA).
  • We used a postal questionnaire to assess function by Harris and Merle d'Aubigné and Postel hip scores and determined survival using re-revision as an endpoint.
  • In patients with isolated acetabular revision, the median Harris hip score (HHS) was 74 at a mean of 4.5 years follow up.
  • Isolated femoral revision had a median HHS of 82 at a mean of 3.8 years.
  • Survival was significantly lower for isolated acetabular revision (75%) than isolated femoral (93%) or both component revision (96%).
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects. Hip Joint / surgery. Prosthesis Failure
  • [MeSH-minor] Acetabulum / surgery. Adolescent. Adult. Equipment Failure Analysis. Female. Femur / surgery. Health Status. Hip Prosthesis. Humans. Joint Diseases / surgery. Male. Middle Aged. Prospective Studies. Questionnaires. Range of Motion, Articular. Recovery of Function. Reoperation. Time Factors. Young Adult

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 21960447.001).
  • [ISSN] 1724-6067
  • [Journal-full-title] Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Hip Int
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Comparative Study; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Italy
  •  go-up   go-down


44. |||||..... 49%  Garcia-Cimbrelo E, Garcia-Rey E, Cruz-Pardos A, Madero R: Stress-shielding of the proximal femur using an extensively porous-coated femoral component without allograft in revision surgery: a 5- to 17-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Br; 2010 Oct;92(10):1363-9
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Stress-shielding of the proximal femur using an extensively porous-coated femoral component without allograft in revision surgery: a 5- to 17-year follow-up study.
  • Revision surgery of the hip was performed on 114 hips using an extensively porous-coated femoral component.
  • No cortical struts were used and the cortical index and the femoral cortical width were measured at different levels.
  • The use of the extensively porous-coated femoral component can provide a solution for difficult cases in revision surgery.
  • Although without clinical relevance at the end of follow-up, the thickness of the medial femoral cortex often increased while that of the lateral cortex decreased.
  • In cases in which a shorter component was used and in those undertaken using an extended trochanteric osteotomy, there was a greater increase in thickness of the femoral cortex over time.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Coated Materials, Biocompatible. Hip Prosthesis
  • [MeSH-minor] Adult. Aged. Aged, 80 and over. Bone Remodeling. Cementation. Female. Follow-Up Studies. Hip Joint / radiography. Humans. Male. Middle Aged. Porosity. Prosthesis Design. Prosthesis Failure. Reoperation / adverse effects. Reoperation / instrumentation. Reoperation / methods

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 20884972.001).
  • [ISSN] 0301-620X
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Bone Joint Surg Br
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Evaluation Studies; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] England
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Coated Materials, Biocompatible
  •  go-up   go-down


45. |||||..... 49%  Patel D, Parvizi J, Sharkey PF: Alternative bearing surface options for revision total hip arthroplasty. Instr Course Lect; 2011;60:257-67
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Alternative bearing surface options for revision total hip arthroplasty.
  • Despite the overall success of total hip arthroplasty (THA), there has been an increase in the rate of revision hip surgeries performed each year in the United States.
  • These revision surgeries result in several billion dollars in health care costs.
  • Bearing surface wear can result in the need for revision surgery through a variety of mechanisms.
  • Many implant failures necessitating the need for revision surgeries occur secondary to dislocations, which are often related to prothesis wear and eventual loosening of the components.
  • The goal is to improve the durability of revision implants and/or reduce the incidence of revision THAs.
  • Revision arthroplasty involves using alternative surfaces, such as replacing the metal femoral head with a ceramic component or changing the entire prosthesis to a metal-on-metal or ceramic-on-ceramic articulation.
  • The choice of a bearing surface for a revision THA should consider factors such as the patient's age and activity level, the cost of the implant, and both the surgeons' and patients' preferences.
  • Although laboratory studies and small clinical trials have generated optimistic results for these alternative implants in vitro and in vivo, much still needs to be learned about the long-term performance of these materials in patients after total hip revision surgery.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Hip Prosthesis. Prosthesis Design

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • HSDB. structure - POLYETHYLENE.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 21553778.001).
  • [ISSN] 0065-6895
  • [Journal-full-title] Instructional course lectures
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Instr Course Lect
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Chemical-registry-number] 0 / Ceramics; 0 / Metals; 9002-88-4 / Polyethylene
  •  go-up   go-down


46. |||||..... 49%  He C, Feng JM, Yang QM, Wang Y, Liu ZH: Results of selective hip arthroplasty revision in isolated acetabular failure. J Surg Res; 2010 Dec;164(2):228-33
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Results of selective hip arthroplasty revision in isolated acetabular failure.
  • BACKGROUND: Controversy exists over whether to remove well-fixed components at the time of revision of a failed total hip arthroplasty (THA).
  • The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of selective acetabular revision after acetabular failure in which only the failed component was replaced.
  • MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-six isolated acetabular component revisions were performed and prospectively followed for a mean of 4.7 y (range, 2-9.3 y).
  • All femoral components and some metal-backed acetabular shells were well fixed at the time of revision and left in place.
  • Surgery involved cementation of an acetabular liner into a well-fixed acetabular shell in 16 cases, and acetabular revision in 20 cases.
  • Morselized cancellous allograft was used to fill acetabular defects in 27 hips, and proximal femoral defects in 17 hips.
  • RESULTS: The mean Harris hip score improved from 57.8 preoperatively to 89.1 at the final follow-up visit.
  • The unrevised femoral components and acetabular shells remained well fixed, and final follow-up radiographs revealed no cases of osteolytic lesion progression around the femoral and acetabular components.
  • CONCLUSIONS: Revision of only the failed acetabular component is recommended in cases of isolated acetabular failure, providing excellent results over the medium term, and allowing preservation of bone stock with lower surgical morbidity.
  • [MeSH-major] Acetabulum / surgery. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • (PMID = 19922944.001).
  • [ISSN] 1095-8673
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of surgical research
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J. Surg. Res.
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


47. |||||..... 49%  Ellman MB, Levine BR: Fracture of the modular femoral neck component in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty; 2013 Jan;28(1):196.e1-5
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Fracture of the modular femoral neck component in total hip arthroplasty.
  • The use of modularity, specifically dual modular femoral stems, in total hip arthroplasty has increased in popularity over the past 2 decades.
  • One potential complication of increasing modularity is component fracture.
  • We present a case of modular femoral neck prosthesis fracture necessitating revision surgery to treat this complication.
  • Careful preoperative planning during revision of these failures is essential to avoid morbidity and unnecessary subsequent revision surgeries, as demonstrated in this case.
  • The combined effects of crevice and fretting corrosion, large-diameter femoral head, long modular neck, metal-on-metal articulation, patient size, and activity level may have all played integral roles in creating an environment susceptible to this classic pattern of fatigue fracture.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Femur Head Necrosis / surgery. Hip Prosthesis. Prosthesis Failure

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • (PMID = 21798696.001).
  • [ISSN] 1532-8406
  • [Journal-full-title] The Journal of arthroplasty
  • [ISO-abbreviation] J Arthroplasty
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Case Reports; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


48. |||||..... 49%  Leonidou A, Pagkalos J, Luscombe J: Cement-in-cement acetabular revision with a constrained tripolar component. Orthopedics; 2012 Feb;35(2):e255-8
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] Cement-in-cement acetabular revision with a constrained tripolar component.
  • Dislocation of a total hip replacement (THR) is common following total hip arthroplasty (THA).
  • When nonoperative management fails to maintain reduction, revision surgery is considered.
  • Complete removal of the old cement mantle during revision THA can be challenging and is associated with significant complications.
  • Cement-in-cement revision is an established technique.
  • However, the available clinical and experimental studies focus on femoral stem revision.
  • The purpose of this study was to present a case of cement-in-cement acetabular revision with a constrained component for recurrent dislocations and to investigate the current best evidence for this technique.
  • This article describes the case of a 74-year-old woman who underwent revision of a Charnley THR for recurrent low-energy dislocations.
  • A tripolar constrained acetabular component was cemented over the primary cement mantle following removal of the original liner by reaming, roughening the surface, and thoroughly irrigating and drying the primary cement.
  • Clinical and radiological results were good, with the Oxford Hip Score improving from 11 preoperatively to 24 at 6 months postoperatively.
  • The good short-term results of this case and the current clinical and biomechanical data encourage the use of the cement-in-cement technique for acetabular revision.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / adverse effects. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / methods. Cementation / methods. Hip Dislocation / etiology. Hip Dislocation / surgery. Prosthesis Failure

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Injuries and Disorders.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Copyright] Copyright 2012, SLACK Incorporated.
  • (PMID = 22310415.001).
  • [ISSN] 1938-2367
  • [Journal-full-title] Orthopedics
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Orthopedics
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Case Reports; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  •  go-up   go-down


49. |||||..... 49%  Köster G, Walde TA: [Revision arthroplasty of the hip: modularity of neck and metaphyseal components]. Orthopade; 2009 Mar;38(3):238-47
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Get downloadable fulltext PDFs of articles closely matching to this article, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] [Revision arthroplasty of the hip: modularity of neck and metaphyseal components].
  • BACKGROUND: Modular parts in femoral components used for hip arthroplasty are reported to be predilection sites for mechanical failure.
  • PATIENTS AND METHOD: We report the outcome of 97 revision hip arthroplasties using a non-cemented femoral component with a modular metaphyseal part and an interchangeable neck (Profemur).
  • The femoral defects treated included Paprosky types I-III.
  • CONCLUSION: Because of the achieved results the use of the modular stem investigated in this study can be classified as safe and effective for revision hip arthroplasty.
  • The interchangeable neck proved to be a useful completion of the revision system.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / instrumentation. Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip / statistics & numerical data. Femoral Fractures / surgery. Hip Prosthesis / statistics & numerical data. Prosthesis-Related Infections / epidemiology

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Leg Injuries and Disorders.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • (PMID = 19221710.001).
  • [ISSN] 1433-0431
  • [Journal-full-title] Der Orthopäde
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Orthopade
  • [Language] ger
  • [Publication-type] Clinical Trial; English Abstract; Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] Germany
  •  go-up   go-down


50. |||||..... 49%  Korovessis P, Repantis T: High medium-term survival of Zweymüller SLR-plus stem used in femoral revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2009 Aug;467(8):2032-40
PDF icon [Fulltext service] Download fulltext PDF of this article and others, as many as you want.

  • [Source] The source of this record is MEDLINE®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.
  • [Title] High medium-term survival of Zweymüller SLR-plus stem used in femoral revision.
  • Revision after failed THA resulting from loosening of the femoral component can be challenging even for experienced surgeons.
  • We asked whether the Zweymüller SLR-Plus((R)), along with allograft reconstruction of the deficient femoral bone stock, would provide survivorship, osseointegration, and stability similar to or better than previously reported implants for femoral revision.
  • We retrospectively reviewed 69 selected patients (70 hips) who underwent revision of the femoral component using the SLR-Plus((R)) stem during a 10-year period.
  • The indications for revision included aseptic and septic failure of biologic fixation, incorrect implantation, and periprosthetic fracture.
  • Fifty-eight of the 69 patients (59 hips) were available at a mean 8.3 +/- 2.7 years (range, 4-14 years) after revision surgery.
  • No femoral periprosthetic osteolysis occurred around the stem and 91% of stems appeared stable radiographically (osseointegration, fibrous).
  • Based on the survival data, we believe the SLR-Plus((R)) stems are reliable for patients undergoing hip revision surgery with central bone loss.
  • [MeSH-major] Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip. Hip Prosthesis

  • MedlinePlus Health Information. consumer health - Hip Replacement.
  • ExactAntigen/Labome. author profiles.
  • ResearchGate. author profiles.
  • [Email] Email this result item
    Email the results to the following email address:   [X] Close
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996 Apr;(325):156-62 [8998868.001]
  • [Cites] Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2008;6:55 [18667085.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997 Mar;79(2):322-6 [9119866.001]
  • [Cites] Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1997;116(4):187-97 [9128770.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1997 Dec;12(8):839-47 [9458248.001]
  • [Cites] Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1998;117(8):448-52 [9801779.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Radiol. 1960 Jul;11:166-74 [14408427.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005 Jul;87(7):1487-97 [15995115.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2006 Feb;21(2):172-8 [16520203.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2006 Apr;21(3):362-71 [16627144.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 May;88(5):1079-84 [16651583.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Jun;88(6):1183-91 [16757749.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Nov;88 Suppl 3:126-30 [17079378.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop. 2006 Dec;77(6):871-6 [17260194.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999 Dec;(369):230-42 [10611878.001]
  • [Cites] Int Orthop. 2000;24(1):9-14 [10774854.001]
  • [Cites] J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2000 Nov-Dec;8(6):354-63 [11104399.001]
  • [Cites] Orthopade. 2001 May;30(5):304-9 [11417238.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001 Jul;83-A(7):1023-31 [11451971.001]
  • [Cites] Int Orthop. 2002;26(1):36-9 [11954847.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2002 Jun;17(4 Suppl 1):142-6 [12068426.001]
  • [Cites] Int Orthop. 2003;27 Suppl 1:S24-8 [14565681.001]
  • [Cites] Orthopade. 2004 Jan;33(1):63-7 [14747912.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004 Mar;86-A(3):480-5 [14996872.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Mar;(420):2-9 [15057072.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Mar;(420):55-62 [15057079.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Mar;(420):135-41 [15057089.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004 Mar;(420):148-59 [15057091.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 2004 Aug;19(5):573-81 [15284977.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969 Jun;51(4):737-55 [5783851.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1973 Dec;55(8):1629-32 [4217797.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Jun;(141):17-27 [477100.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Oct;(235):75-90 [3046806.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Nov;(236):214-20 [3180573.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1988;3(3):241-8 [3183678.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991 Jul;73(4):564-8 [2071636.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 1992 Apr;63(2):120-7 [1590044.001]
  • [Cites] Orthop Clin North Am. 1993 Oct;24(4):627-33 [8414428.001]
  • [Cites] Orthop Clin North Am. 1993 Oct;24(4):635-44 [8414429.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993 Nov;(296):133-9 [8222415.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Feb;(299):190-202 [8119017.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995 Mar;77(3):432-9 [7890792.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995 Oct;(319):168-77 [7554627.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1995 Nov;10 Suppl:S22-8 [8776052.001]
  • [Cites] J Arthroplasty. 1996 Jun;11(4):411-8 [8792248.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1985 Apr;67(4):513-6 [3980494.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987 Jan;69(1):45-55 [3818732.001]
  • [Cites] Orthopade. 1987 Aug;16(4):295-300 [3658412.001]
  • [Cites] J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1987 Oct;69(8):1144-9 [3667643.001]
  • [Cites] Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Oct;(235):12-24 [3416519.001]
  • [Cites] Injury. 2007 Jun;38(6):651-4 [17477925.001]
  • [Cites] Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2008 Apr;128(4):355-62 [17457595.001]
  • [Cites] Acta Orthop Scand. 1996 Dec;67(6):541-4 [9065063.001]
  • (PMID = 19255816.001).
  • [ISSN] 1528-1132
  • [Journal-full-title] Clinical orthopaedics and related research
  • [ISO-abbreviation] Clin. Orthop. Relat. Res.
  • [Language] eng
  • [Publication-type] Journal Article
  • [Publication-country] United States
  • [Other-IDs] NLM/ PMC2706349
  •  go-up   go-down


top


2. Definitions


3. Related RMF webpages
1. revision of hip replacement femoral component
2. revision of hip replacement femoral component only
3. revision of knee replacement femoral component
4. revision of hip replacement acetabular component
5. revision of knee replacement patellar component
6. revision of knee replacement tibial component
7. revision of total hip replacement procedure
8. revision of hip replacement with exchange of acetabular liner
9. total hip revision
10. pelvis hip revision
11. revision of hip arthroplasty procedure
12. of revision arthroplasty partial of hip
13. revision of knee replacement total all components
14. hip replacement total
15. arthroplasty replacement hip
16. revision of with of acetabulum bone arthroplasty hip graft to total
17. of of bone total hip to femur graft revision arthroplasty with
18. femoral femoral artery vascular bypass
19. of thoracic aorta valve replacement aortic with replacement ascending
20. femoral femoral bypass
21. secretory component
22. blood component transfusion
23. blood component removal
24. principal component analysis
25. component transfusion blood
26. serum amyloid p component
27. dislocation of hip screening congenital dislocation of hip
28. femoral nerve
29. femoral fractures
30. femoral neuropathy
31. femoral phlebitis
32. femoral neoplasms
33. femoral thrombosis
34. femoral artery
35. femoral vein
36. hernia femoral
37. aneurysm femoral
38. femoral neck fractures
39. interruption vein femoral of
40. femoral hernia nos
41. bypass iliac femoral
42. femoral bypass vein
43. femoral thrombectomy vein of
44. aorto femoral endarterectomy
45. femoral of exploration vein
46. of artery femoral interruption
47. aorta iliac femoral bypass
48. aneurysm of femoral artery disorder
49. axillary femoral arterial bypass
50. femoral artery thrombosis disorder

top


terms of use | advertising programs | contact us
© 2014 RecentMedicalFindings


Connect with the


RMF


audience;




Post your ad here!