Publications (34) View all
-
Article: Consensus statement "Current evidence on the management of metal-on-metal bearings" - April 16, 2012.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The following recommendations are based on expert opinions of an international multidisciplinary panel endorsed by the "European Federation of National Associations of Orthopaedics and Traumatology" (EFORT), the "European Hip Society" (EHS), the German "Arbeitsgemeinschaft Endoprothetik" (AE) and the "Deutsche Arthrosehilfe" (DAH).Hip international: the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy 02/2013; 23(1):2-5. · 0.34 Impact Factor -
Article: A rare case of bilateral large osteolysis following cemented and cementless total knee arthroplasties.
Acta Orthopaedica 12/2012; · 2.17 Impact Factor -
Article: Prosthesis alignment affects axial rotation motion after total knee replacement: a prospective in vivo study combining computed tomography and fluoroscopic evaluations.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Clinical consequences of alignment errors in total knee replacement (TKR) have led to the rigorous evaluation of surgical alignment techniques. Rotational alignment in the transverse plane has proven particularly problematic, with errors due to component malalignment relative to bone anatomic landmarks and an overall mismatch between the femoral and tibial components' relative positions. Ranges of nominal rotational alignment are not well defined, especially for the tibial component and for relative rotational mismatch, and some studies advocate the use of mobile-bearing TKR to accommodate the resulting small rotation errors. However, the relationships between prosthesis rotational alignment and mobile-bearing polyethylene insert motion are poorly understood. This prospective, in vivo study evaluates whether component malalignment and mismatch affect axial rotation motions during passive knee flexion after TKR. METHODS: Eighty patients were implanted with mobile-bearing TKR. Rotational alignment of the femoral and tibial components was measured from postoperative CT scans. All TKR were categorized into nominal or outlier groups based on defined norms for surgical rotational alignment relative to bone anatomic landmarks and relative rotational mismatch between the femoral and tibial components. Axial rotation motion of the femoral, tibial and polyethylene bearing components was measured from fluoroscopic images acquired during passive knee flexion. RESULTS: Axial rotation motion was generally accomplished in two phases, dominated by polyethylene bearing rotation on the tibial component in early to mid-flexion and then femoral component rotation on the polyethylene articular surface in later flexion. Opposite rotations of the femur-bearing and bearing-baseplate articulations were evident at flexion greater than 80[degree sign]. Knees with outlier alignment had lower magnitudes of axial rotation and distinct transitions from external to internal rotation during mid-flexion. Knees with femoral-tibial rotational mismatch had significantly lower total axial rotation compared to knees with nominal alignment. CONCLUSIONS: Maintaining relative rotational mismatch within +/-5[degree sign] during TKR provided for controlled knee axial rotation during flexion. TKR with rotational alignment outside of defined surgical norms, with either positive or negative mismatch, experienced measurable kinematic differences and presented different patterns of axial rotation motions during passive knee flexion compared to TKR with nominal mismatch. These findings support previous studies linking prosthesis rotational alignment with inferior clinical and functional outcomes.Trial RegistrationClinical Trials NCT01022099.BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 10/2012; 13(1):206. · 1.58 Impact Factor -
Article: Pulmonary Metastases due to a Giant-Cell Tumor of Bone.
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Abstract Not Available.The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism 07/2012; 97(10):3408-9. · 6.50 Impact Factor -
Article: [Update on metal-on-metal hip joints.]
[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Increasing data are available describing risk factors for the development of local and systemic adverse events following operations using metal-on-metal (MoM) hip implants. The prevalence and clinical relevance of metal-associated problems are, however, still under debate. They can be influenced by type and position of implant as well as patient-specific factors. Patients with small MoM heads (maximum diameter 32 mm) and subgroups of resurfacing arthroplasty can achieve good long-term survival. The use of large head MoM implants (diameters greater than 36 mm), however, is currently not advised due to the unsatisfactory results.Der Orthopäde 05/2013; · 0.51 Impact Factor
