Advanced search
Publication Cover
Acta Orthopaedica Volume 87, 2016 - Issue 2
Journal homepage
1,148
Views
4
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

Medium-term follow-up of 92 femoral component revisions using a third-generation cementing technique

Martijn A J Te StroetDepartment of Orthopaedics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
,
Wim H C RijnenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
,
Jean W M GardeniersDepartment of Orthopaedics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
,
Albert Van KampenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
&
B Willem SchreursDepartment of Orthopaedics, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.Correspondence[email protected]
Pages 106-112 | Received 30 Oct 2014, Accepted 18 Aug 2015, Published online: 16 Nov 2015

  • Adolphson P Y, Salemyr M O, Sköldenberg O G, Bodén H S. Large femoral bone loss after hip revision using the uncemented proximally porous-coated Bi-Metric prosthesis: 22 hips followed for a mean of 6 years. Acta Orthop 2009; 80(1): 14–9.
  • Alberton G M, High W A, Morrey B F. Dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of risk factors and treatment options. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002; 84(10): 1788–92.
  • Amanatullah D F, Meehan J P, Cullen A B, Kim S H, Jamali A A. Intermediate-term radiographic and patient outcomes in revision hip arthroplasty with a modular calcar design and porous plasma coating. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26(8): 1451–4.
  • Amstutz H C, Ma S M, Jinnah R H, Mai L. Revision of aseptic loose total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop 1982; (170): 21–33.
  • Brokelman R B, Haverkamp D, van Loon C, Hol A, van Kampen A, Veth R. The validation of the visual analogue scale for patient satisfaction after total hip arthroplasty. Eur Orthop Traumatol 2012; 3(2): 101–105.
  • Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996; 78(2): 185–190.
  • Eisler T, Svensson O, Iyer V, Wejkner B, Schmalholz A, Larsson H, Elmstedt E. Revision total hip arthroplasty using third-generation cementing technique. J Arthroplasty 2000; 15(8): 974–81.
  • Engelbrecht E, Heinert K. Klassifikation und Behandlungsrichtlinien von Knochen substanzverlusten bei Revision operationen am Hüftgelenk mittlefristige Ergebnisse. In: Endo-Klinik ed. Primär- und Revisions: alloarthroplastik Hüft-und Kniegelenk. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1987:189–201.
  • Fowler J L, Gie G A, Lee A J, Ling R S. Experience with the Exeter total hip replacement since 1970. Orthop Clin North Am 1988; 19(3): 477–89. Erratum in: Orthop Clin North Am. 1989; 20(4): preceding 519.
  • Garbuz D S, Masri B A, Duncan C P, Greidanus N V, Bohm E R, Petrak M J, Della Valle C J, Gross A E. The Frank Stinchfield Award: Dislocation in revision THA: do large heads (36 and 40 mm) result in reduced dislocation rates in a randomized clinical trial? Clin Orthop 2012; 470(2):351–6.
  • Garcia-Cimbrelo E, Garcia-Rey E, Cruz-Pardos A. The extent of the bone defect affects the outcome of femoral reconstruction in revision surgery with impacted bone grafting: a five- to 17-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93(11): 1457–64.
  • Garvin K L, Konigsberg B S, Ommen N D, Lyden E R. What is the long-term survival of impaction allografting of the femur? Clin Orthop 2013; 471(12): 3901–11.
  • Gramkow J, Jensen T H, Varmarken J E, Retpen J B. Long-term results after cemented revision of the femoral component in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2001; 16(6): 777–83.
  • Haydon C M, Mehin R, Burnett S, Rorabeck C H, Bourne R B, McCalden R W, MacDonald S J. Revision total hip arthroplasty with use of a cemented femoral component. Results at a mean of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86(6): 1179–85.
  • Howie D W, Wimhurst J A, McGee M A, Carbone T A, Badaruddin B S. Revision total hip replacement using cemented collarless double-taper femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007; 89(7): 879–86.
  • Jameson S S, Lees D, James P, Serrano-Pedraza I, Partington P F, Muller S D, Meek R M, Reed M R. Lower rates of dislocation with increased femoral head size after primary total hip replacement: a five-year analysis of NHS patients in England. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93(7): 876–80.
  • Kavanagh B F, Ilstrup D M, Fitzgerald R H Jr. Revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985; 67(4): 517–26.
  • Kostensalo I, Junnila M, Virolainen P, Remes V, Matilainen M, Vahlberg T, Pulkkinen P, Eskelinen A, Mäkelä K T. Effect of femoral head size on risk of revision for dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: a population-based analysis of 42,379 primary procedures from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2013; 84(4): 342–7.
  • Lamberton T D, Kenny P J, Whitehouse S L, Timperley A J, Gie G A. Femoral impaction grafting in revision total hip arthroplasty: a follow-up of 540 hips. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26(8): 1154–60.
  • Muirhead-Allwood S K, Sandiford N, Skinner JA, Hua J, Kabir C, Walker PS. Uncemented custom computer-assisted design and manufacture of hydroxyapatite-coated femoral components: survival at 10 to 17 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010; 92(8): 1079–84.
  • Ornstein E, Linder L, Ranstam J, Lewold S, Eisler T, Torper M. Femoral impaction bone grafting with the Exeter stem - the Swedish experience: survivorship analysis of 1305 revisions performed between 1989 and 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009; 91(4): 441–6.
  • Pellicci P M, Wilson P D Jr, Sledge C B, Salvati E A, Ranawat C S, Poss R, Callaghan J J. Long-term results of revision total hip replacement. A follow-up report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985; 67(4): 513–6.
  • Raut V V, Siney P D, Wroblewski B M. Outcome of revision for mechanical stem failure using the cemented Charnley’s stem. A study of 399 cases. J Arthroplasty 1996; 11(4): 405–10.
  • Regis D, Sandri A, Bonetti I, Braggion M, Bartolozzi P. Femoral revision with the Wagner tapered stem: a ten- to 15-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011; 93(12): 1320–6.
  • Rodriguez J A, Rathod P A. Large diameter heads: is bigger always better? J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012; 94 (11 Suppl A): 52–4.
  • Schreurs B W, Arts J J, Verdonschot N, Buma P, Slooff T J, Gardeniers J W. et al. Femoral component revision with use of impaction bone-grafting and a cemented polished stem. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 Supp l1 Pt 2: 259–74.
  • 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; 133(6): 869–74.
  • Te Stroet M A, Gardeniers J W, Verdonschot N, Rijnen W H, Slooff T J, Schreurs B W. Femoral component revision with use of impaction bone-grafting and a cemented polished stem: a concise follow-up, at fifteen to twenty years, of a previous report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94(23): e1731–4.
  • Thomsen P B, Jensen N J, Kampmann J, Bæk Hansen T. Revision hip arthroplasty with an extensively porous-coated stem - excellent long-term results also in severe femoral bone stock loss. Hip Int 2013; 23(4): 352–8.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.