Good short-term outcome of primary total hip arthroplasty with cementless bioactive glass ceramic bottom-coated implants

Department of Orthopaedics, Kyoto University.
Acta Orthopaedica (Impact Factor: 2.45). 10/2012; 83(6). DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2012.736173
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Background and purpose
Cementless total hip arthroplasty is currently favored by many orthopedic surgeons. The design of the porous surface is critically important for long-term fixation. We examined the clinical and radiographic outcome of the cementless titanium hip implant with a bottom coating of apatite-wollastonite containing bioactive glass ceramic.

We retrospectively reviewed 109 hips (92 patients) that had undergone primary cementless total hip arthroplasty with bioactive glass ceramic bottom-coated implants. The mean follow-up period was 7 (3–9) years. Hip joint function was evaluated with the Merle d’Aubigné and Postel hip score, and radiographic changes were determined from anteroposterior radiographs.

The mean hip score improved from 9.7 preoperatively to 17 at the final follow-up. The overall survival rate was 100% at 9 years, when radiographic loosening or revision for any reason was used as the endpoint. 3 stems in 2 patients subsided more than 3 mm vertically within 1 year after implantation. Radiographs of the interface of the stem and femur were all classified as bone ingrowth fixation.

The short-term results of this study show good outcome for cementless implants with a bottom coating of apatite-wollastonite containing bioactive glass ceramic.

Download full-text


Available from: Takashi Nakamura, May 13, 2014
  • Source
    • "Another glass-ceramic with potential for application in implant dentistry is apatite/wollas‐ tonite (A/W), which was developed by Kokubo et al., in 1982 [79]. This material presents a great capacity for bone bonding and moderate mechanical strength [80], with excellent results in orthopedic applications [81] [82] [83]. The resorption rate of this glass-ceramic can be increased when associated with β-TCP [84]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This chapter approaches the most current bone substitute materials used in implant dentistry, as in research as in clinical application, for alveolar ridge augmentation, maxillary sinus lift and guided bone regeneration, such as: alloplastic materials (bioceramics, bioactive glasses, glass-ceramics, polymers and composites) and bioactive molecules (peptides and growth factors). In addition, concepts of tissue engineering used for the development of the new materials and techniques for implant dentistry were approached. Moreover, this chapter approached some cytotoxic, genotoxic and mutagenic assays used to evaluate the safety of biomaterials. Some studies that evaluated cytotoxicity, genotoxicity and/or mutagenicity of biomaterials were presented.Thus, the use of bone substitutes continues to increase along with the availability of new technologies. Many alternatives for the replacement of autografts, allografts and xenografts are emerging. Rigorous preclinical and clinical studies are necessary to confirm the costeffectiveness of these approaches over traditional bone grafts methods with benefits of technological advancement exceeding risks to the patient and costs of implantation.
    Current Concepts in Dental Implantology, Edited by Ilser Turkyilmaz, 02/2015: chapter Bone Substitute Materials in Implant Dentistry: pages 25-57; InTech., ISBN: 978-953-51-1741-4
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Periprosthetic bone remodeling is commonly seen after total hip arthroplasty, but the remodeling pattern differs among patients even in those implanted with the same stem. Remodeling occurs mainly because of the difference in load transmitted from the stem to the femur. In this study, we evaluated the load-transfer pattern in eight female patients implanted with an anatomical stem on an individual basis by patient-specific finite element analysis that is based on pre- and postoperative computed tomography images. Load transfer was evaluated using interface stress between the stem and bone. One of eight patients demonstrated proximal dominant load transfer, while the other patients demonstrated a distal dominant pattern. The results of our biomechanical simulations reveal the differences in load-transfer pattern after surgery among patients with the same anatomical stem.
    Medical Engineering & Physics 06/2014; 36(6). DOI:10.1016/j.medengphy.2014.02.018 · 1.84 Impact Factor