We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Fractures of the femoral neck treated with hemiarthroplasty. A comparative study.
Folia Medica 2009 October
INTRODUCTION: Hemiarthroplasty is the treatment of choice in the management of displaced intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur in old patients with low functional demands.
AIM: To assess the effectiveness of cementless Austin-Moore and the cemented Thompson prostheses used in the treatment of displaced intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied retrospectively 376 patients with fresh, displaced, nonpathological femur neck fractures. They were treated with either a cementless Austin-Moore prosthesis or a cemented Thompson prosthesis. Criteria for the choice of the prosthesis were the fracture site on the neck of the femur and the bone quality. The follow-up period was 3 to 8 years and the number of reviewed patients was 122.
RESULTS: The Thompson prosthesis group showed slightly better results. Acetabular erosion rate was significantly lower in the uncemented group while loosening rate here was significantly higher.
CONCLUSION: Advantages and disadvantages were identified in both groups although we believe that none of the approaches proved definitively superior to the other.
AIM: To assess the effectiveness of cementless Austin-Moore and the cemented Thompson prostheses used in the treatment of displaced intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: We studied retrospectively 376 patients with fresh, displaced, nonpathological femur neck fractures. They were treated with either a cementless Austin-Moore prosthesis or a cemented Thompson prosthesis. Criteria for the choice of the prosthesis were the fracture site on the neck of the femur and the bone quality. The follow-up period was 3 to 8 years and the number of reviewed patients was 122.
RESULTS: The Thompson prosthesis group showed slightly better results. Acetabular erosion rate was significantly lower in the uncemented group while loosening rate here was significantly higher.
CONCLUSION: Advantages and disadvantages were identified in both groups although we believe that none of the approaches proved definitively superior to the other.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app