We have located links that may give you full text access.
ENGLISH ABSTRACT
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
[Etiology, diagnosis and therapy of aseptic hip prosthesis loosening--a status assessment].
PURPOSE: Aseptic loosening of prostheses implants is the most common complication of hip replacement surgery and represents an increasing problem because of still rising numbers of primary arthroplasties. This study reviews the current scientific status of causes, diagnosis and therapeutical concepts on this theme in literature.
METHOD: We analyzed 6,386 cases on aseptic hip revision arthroplasties published in the international literature and separated the results for cup and femoral components. On this basis we deduced some recommendations for the operative procedure in aseptic hip revision surgery.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up time of all studies was 6.8 years in the case of cemented and 4.0 years in the case of uncemented hip revision arthroplasty. As an average rate of rerevision, 15.1% was calculated for cemented cup revisions, 4.3% for uncemented cup revisions. Rates of aseptic loosening were 23.1% for cemented procedure, 8.8% for uncemented cup implants. Femoral revision implants showed an average aseptic loosening rate of 21.2% for cemented procedures and an average rate of rerevisions of 12.7%; uncemented procedures showed aseptic loosening in 4.4% of the cases and rerevision in 5.5%. For old, relatively immobile patients with reduced physical constitution, cemented reimplantation has still to be regarded as the method of choice. In young patients uncemented revision arthroplasty is to prefer both on the acetabular and the femoral side to achieve superior results with good long-term prognosis. Regarding the bony defects induced by loosening, bone grafting is recommended for cemented and uncemented reimplantation technique.
CONCLUSION: In the case of aseptic hip revision arthroplasty, the therapeutical procedure has to be adapted especially to the age and general constitution of the patient as well as to the bony defects induced by prosthetic loosening. For the future, controlled studies should respect the initial condition of primary as well as revision arthroplasty in reporting the results.
METHOD: We analyzed 6,386 cases on aseptic hip revision arthroplasties published in the international literature and separated the results for cup and femoral components. On this basis we deduced some recommendations for the operative procedure in aseptic hip revision surgery.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up time of all studies was 6.8 years in the case of cemented and 4.0 years in the case of uncemented hip revision arthroplasty. As an average rate of rerevision, 15.1% was calculated for cemented cup revisions, 4.3% for uncemented cup revisions. Rates of aseptic loosening were 23.1% for cemented procedure, 8.8% for uncemented cup implants. Femoral revision implants showed an average aseptic loosening rate of 21.2% for cemented procedures and an average rate of rerevisions of 12.7%; uncemented procedures showed aseptic loosening in 4.4% of the cases and rerevision in 5.5%. For old, relatively immobile patients with reduced physical constitution, cemented reimplantation has still to be regarded as the method of choice. In young patients uncemented revision arthroplasty is to prefer both on the acetabular and the femoral side to achieve superior results with good long-term prognosis. Regarding the bony defects induced by loosening, bone grafting is recommended for cemented and uncemented reimplantation technique.
CONCLUSION: In the case of aseptic hip revision arthroplasty, the therapeutical procedure has to be adapted especially to the age and general constitution of the patient as well as to the bony defects induced by prosthetic loosening. For the future, controlled studies should respect the initial condition of primary as well as revision arthroplasty in reporting the results.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
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