Treatment of large femoral bone defects--15-year experiences with the cementless Bicontact revision stem with distal interlocking
- PMID: 17939097
- DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-965658
Treatment of large femoral bone defects--15-year experiences with the cementless Bicontact revision stem with distal interlocking
Abstract
Aim: With the steady growth in the number of hip arthroplasty revision operations, the concept and long-term results of the Bicontact revision stem with distal interlocking for the treatment of extensive femoral bone defects were investigated in this prospective study.
Method: The first 156 stem revision operations performed between January 1992 and December 2002 were evaluated. The indication for operation was aseptic loosening in 133, stem fracture in 14, recurrent dislocation in 2 and reimplantation following Girdlestone removal of a septic prosthesis in 7. The cup component was revised at the same time in 74 cases.
Results: Higher-grade femoral bone defects were found intraoperatively in 66 %. The average age of the patients was 71.4 (34 - 88) years at operation and 76.9 (44 - 94) years at the last follow-up. The average period until follow-up, re-revision or loss to follow-up was 5.54 (0.1 - 14.9) years. The clinical and radiological follow-up rate (with reference to the total number of patients) was 35 % (55 von 156), and 51 % (55 of 107) with reference to patients still living. The median Harris Hip Score was 63.7 points. In the observation period, 12 stems were exchanged for a cemented standard stem, 5 stems were removed because of infection and 2 stems were revised because of periprosthetic fracture. The calculated survival rate for the stems after 14.9 years was 85.9 %.
Conclusion: The 15-year results confirm the biomechanical concept of the Bicontact revision stem with optional distal interlocking for the treatment of extensive bone defects in stem revision surgery.
Similar articles
-
Treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures with the Bicontact revision stem.Z Orthop Unfall. 2007 Sep-Oct;145 Suppl 1:S29-33. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-965657. Z Orthop Unfall. 2007. PMID: 17939095
-
Prospective long-term follow-up of the cementless bicontact hip stem with plasmapore coating.Z Orthop Unfall. 2007 Sep-Oct;145 Suppl 1:S3-8. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-965652. Z Orthop Unfall. 2007. PMID: 17939096
-
[Treatment of femoral bony defects with a modular hip prosthesis and distal interlocking].Zentralbl Chir. 2007 Dec;132(6):547-53. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-981362. Zentralbl Chir. 2007. PMID: 18098084 German.
-
Removal of well-fixed fixed femoral stems.Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016 Feb;102(1 Suppl):S177-87. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2015.06.029. Epub 2016 Jan 18. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016. PMID: 26797009 Review.
-
The transfemoral approach for controlled removal of well-fixed femoral stems in hip revision surgery.J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020 Jan-Feb;11(1):33-37. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2019.11.001. Epub 2019 Nov 9. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020. PMID: 32001981 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Similar outcomes between two-stage revisions for infection and aseptic hip revisions.Int Orthop. 2016 Mar;40(3):459-64. doi: 10.1007/s00264-015-2850-3. Epub 2015 Jul 2. Int Orthop. 2016. PMID: 26130288
-
Functional and Emotional Results Differ After Aseptic vs Septic Revision Hip Arthroplasty.HSS J. 2011 Oct;7(3):235-8. doi: 10.1007/s11420-011-9211-6. Epub 2011 Jun 11. HSS J. 2011. PMID: 23024619 Free PMC article.
-
[Hip implant revision. Avoiding mistakes and managing risk].Orthopade. 2009 Aug;38(8):718-28. doi: 10.1007/s00132-009-1427-5. Orthopade. 2009. PMID: 19672577 Review. German.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical