Ten-year RSA-measured migration of the Exeter femoral stem
Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Windmill Road, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LD, UK. Bone and Joint Journal
(Impact Factor: 1.96).
05/2013; 95-B(5):605-8. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B5.31330
The Exeter femoral stem is a double-tapered highly polished collarless cemented implant with good long-term clinical results. In order to determine why the stem functions well we have undertaken a long-term radiostereometric analysis (RSA) study. A total of 20 patients undergoing primary Exeter total hip replacement for osteoarthritis using the Hardinge approach were recruited and followed with RSA for ten years. The stems progressively subsided and internally rotated with posterior head migration. The mean subsidence was 0.7 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.5 to 0.9) at two years and 1.3 mm (95% CI 1.0 to 1.6) at ten years. The mean posterior migration of the head was 0.7 mm (95% CI 0.5 to 0.9) at two years and 1.2 mm (95% CI 1.0 to 1.4) at ten years. There was no significant cement restrictor migration. The Exeter stem continues to subside slowly into the cement mantle in the long term. This appears to compress the cement and the cement bone interface, contributing to secure fixation in the long term. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:605-8.
Available from: bjj.boneandjoint.org.uk
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In the United Kingdom, more cemented than cementless stems are implanted, whereas in North America, few cemented stems are implanted. This is primarily because cemented stems have not performed well in North America, whereas they have in the United Kingdom, as different designs have been used. The majority of cemented stems used in the United Kingdom are polished, collarless, and tapered. These are forgiving, as they subside within the cement mantle and compress the cement and stabilize the interface. They perform well in both young and active patients and elderly patients. They also do well in osteoporotic bone, with deformity, or with suboptimal cementing techniques. As the position of the stem can be varied, it is simple to achieve appropriate leg length, offset, and version. Cement can be used to deliver antibiotics locally. If revision is necessary, it is relatively straightforward. Cement has numerous advantages that outweigh the main disadvantage of an extended operating time.
Orthopedics 09/2011; 34(9):e462-3. DOI:10.3928/01477447-20110714-25 · 0.96 Impact Factor
Bone and Joint Journal 02/2014; 96-B(2):145-6. DOI:10.1302/0301-620X.96B2.33788 · 1.96 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: We determined the short-term clinical outcome and migration within the bone of the humeral cementless component of the Instrumented Bone Preserving (IBP) total elbow replacement in a series of 16 patients. There were four men and 12 women with a mean age at operation of 63 years (40 to 81). Migration was calculated using radiostereometric analysis. There were no intra-operative complications and no revisions. At two-year follow-up, all patients showed a significant reduction in pain and functional improvement of the elbow (both p < 0.001). Although ten components (63%) showed movement or micromovement during the first six weeks, 14 (88%) were stable at one year post-operatively. Translation was primarily found in the proximal direction (median 0.3 mm (interquartile range (IQR) -0.09 to 0.8); the major rotational movement was an anterior tilt (median 0.7° (IQR 0.4° to 1.6°)). One malaligned component continued to migrate during the second year, and one component could not be followed beyond three months because migration had caused the markers to break off the prosthesis. This study shows promising early results for the cementless humeral component of the IBP total elbow replacement. All patients had a good clinical outcome, and most components stabilised within six months of the operation. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:229-36.
Bone and Joint Journal 02/2014; 96-B(2):229-36. DOI:10.1302/0301-620X.96B2.29050 · 1.96 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.