Cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty

Lieberman,; Bh, Moeckel; Bg, Evans; Ea, Salvati; Ranawat, C S

doi:10.1302/0301-620x.75b6.8245073

Cited by 114 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Isolated acetabular revision represents about 10% of revision hip arthroplasty [3] and only few reports [4,12,13] have been published. In some instances, retention of the stem may be beneficial as it may result in reduced morbidity, complications, blood loss, operative time, and cost.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For these stems, a titanium sleeve [16] has been proposed for use with an alumina head on the old Morse taper. Another solution to change the femoral head could be to use the cement-within-cement technique [13] in isolated cup revision presenting with a stable stem. This technique allows for a better visualization of the acetabulum and prevents Morse taper damage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Alumina Heads Minimize Wear and Femoral Osteolysis Progression After Isolated Simple Acetabular Revision

Hernigou

Dupuy

Pidet

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients with THA requiring cup revision for acetabular osteolysis may have a stable stem component without loosening. However, it is unclear whether isolated cup revision halts femoral osteolysis progression. Question/purposes We asked (1) whether and to what degree osteolysis progresses after isolated acetabular revision with a change of the femoral head and (2) whether an alumina or metal bearing better reduces osteolysis progression and wear with a polyethylene (PE) cup. Methods We retrospectively evaluated 150 patients who underwent 165 acetabular revisions but no treatment for proximal femoral osteolysis in hips with stable femoral components. Mean age at revision was 63 years (range, 48-74 years). All hips received a new PE cup; 83 hips received new alumina heads and 82 new metal heads. Radiographs (mean followup, 15 years; range, 10-25 years) were assessed to measure osteolysis, loosening, and PE wear. Revisions of the femoral stem were recorded.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alumina Heads Minimize Wear and Femoral Osteolysis Progression After Isolated Simple Acetabular Revision

Hernigou

Dupuy

Pidet

et al. 2012

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2a, b), acetabular failures in which the surgery is easier if the femoral component is taken out, conversion from a cemented hemiarthroplasty to a THA and recurrent dislocation (Fig. 3a, b) [17,18,20,22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From a biomechanical viewpoint, this technique was validated by studies reported by Greenwald et al [12]. Although the method is about to turn 20 years old, the results of the cement within cement (CWC) technique have been described in the literature by few authors [17,18,20,22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Femoral cement within cement technique in carefully selected aseptic revision arthroplasties

Marcos

Buttaro

Piccaluga

2008

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological results in a group of patients who underwent aseptic revision hip arthroplasty using the cement within cement (CWC) technique. Between 1999 and 2005, 37 aseptic revision hip operations were performed. There were 30 women and five men, with an average age of 68 years. The reasons for revision were femoral stem fracture, cup failure, acetabular protrusion after hemiarthroplasty and recurrent dislocation. At an average follow-up of 46 months, none of the patients required further femoral revision. The average post-operative Merle D'Aubigne score was 16.6 points (p<0.05). No evidence of radiological stem failure was observed and no femoral component was considered to be at risk for loosening. In this series of patients, the CWC technique provided consistent with high functional outcomes. This valid and effective alternative should be considered in carefully selected aseptic cases.

show abstract

“…This technique is used to revise a failed femoral component, or to aid in the exposure of an isolated acetabular revision when a monoblock femoral component is removed and recemented into the intact cement mantle [3]. We report the use of the arthroscope for the assessment of the integrity of the cement mantle, to assess the removal of the previously inserted distal cement centralizer, and to assist in the preparation of the cement mantle for recementation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Technique for arthroscopic assisted revision hip arthroplasty

Campbell

2001

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We describe a new technique in which the arthroscope is used to assist the preparation of the cement mantle for cemented revision hip arthroplasty. We present two case reports demonstrating the method and its rationale.Résumé Nous décrivons une nouvelle technique où l'arthroscope est utilisé pour aider la préparation du manchon cimenté dans les reprises d'arthroplastie de la hanche. Nous présentons deux observations qui décri-vent la méthode et son raisonnement.

show abstract

Cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty

Cited by 114 publications

References 6 publications

Alumina Heads Minimize Wear and Femoral Osteolysis Progression After Isolated Simple Acetabular Revision

Alumina Heads Minimize Wear and Femoral Osteolysis Progression After Isolated Simple Acetabular Revision

Femoral cement within cement technique in carefully selected aseptic revision arthroplasties

Technique for arthroscopic assisted revision hip arthroplasty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About