Improved outcome in femoral revision arthroplasty with tapered fluted modular titanium stems

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

Volumn 453, Issue , 2006, Pages 199-202

  Garbuz, Donald S ^a,b   Toms, Andrew ^a   Masri, Bassam A ^a   Duncan, Clive P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^b NONE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CHROMIUM; COBALT; TITANIUM;

AGE; AGED; ARTHROPLASTY SATISFACTION SCALE; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMUR; FOLLOW UP; GENDER; HUMAN; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OXFORD HIP SCORE; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RELIABILITY; REOPERATION; RIGIDITY; SCORING SYSTEM; SF-12; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS; WOMAC OSTEOARTHRITIS INDEX; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HIP PROSTHESIS; PROSTHESIS;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; FEMUR; HIP PROSTHESIS; HUMANS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; QUALITY OF LIFE; REOPERATION; TITANIUM;

EID: 33845394645     PISSN: 0009921X     EISSN: 15281132     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.blo.0000238875.86519.cf     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Barrack RL. Modularity of prosthetic implants. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1994;2:16-25.
2. Barrack RL. Orthopaedic crossfire - Stem modularity is unnecessary in revision total hip arthroplasty: in the affirmative. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18(Suppl 1):98-100.
3. Bellamy N, Kirwan J, Boers M, Brooks P, Strand V, Tugwell P, Altman R, Brandt K, Dougados M, Lequesne M. Recommendations for a core set of outcome measures for future phase III clinical trials in knee, hip, and hand osteoarthritis: consensus development at OMERACT III. J Rheumatol. 1997;24:799-802.
4. Bohm P, Bischel O. The use of tapered stems for femoral revision surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;420:148-159.
5. Cameron HU. The long-term success of modular proximal fixation stems in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17(Suppl 1):138-141.
6. Christie MJ, DeBoer DK, Tingstad EM, Capps M, Brinson MF, Trick LW. Clinical experience with a modular noncemented femoral component in revision total hip arthroplasty: 4- to 7-year results. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:840-848.
7. Davis AM, Agnidis Z, Badley E, Kiss A, Waddell JP, Gross AE. Predictors of functional outcome two years following revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:685-691.
8. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A, Murray D. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:185-190.
9. Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Murray D, Carr A. Comparison of measures to assess outcomes in total hip replacement surgery. Qual Health Care. 1996;5:81-88.
10. Engh JACA, Hopper RH Jr, Engh CA Sr. Distal ingrowth components. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;420:135-141.
11. Jones RE. Modular revision stems in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;420:142-147.
12. Kwong LM, Miller AJ, Lubinus P. A modular distal fixation option for proximal bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty: a 2- to 6-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18(Suppl 1):94-97.
13. Losina E, Plerhoples T, Fossel AH, Mahomed NN, Barrett J, Creel AH, Wright EA, Katz JN. Offering patients the opportunity to choose their hospital for total knee replacement: impact on satisfaction with the surgery. Arthritis Rheum. 2005;53:646-652.
14. Moreland JR, Bernstein ML. Femoral revision hip arthroplasty with uncemented, porous-coated stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;319:141-150.
15. Pham T, van der Heijde D, Altman RD, Anderson JJ, Bellamy N, Hochberg M, Simon L, Strand V, Woodworth T, Dougados M. OMERACT-OARSI initiative: Osteoarthritis Research Society International set of responder criteria for osteoarthritis clinical trials revisited. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2004;12:389-399.
16. Sporer SM, Paprosky WG. Revision total hip arthroplasty: the limits of fully coated stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;417:203-209.
17. Ware J Jr, Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996;34:220-233.
18. Weeden SH, Paprosky WG. Minimal 11-year follow-up of extensively porous-coated stems in femoral revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17(Suppl 1):134-137.
19. Wirtz DC, Heller KD, Holzwarth U, Siebert C, Pitto RP, Zeiler G, Blencke BA, Forst R. A modular femoral implant for uncemented stem revision in THR. Int Orthop. 2000;24:134-138.