CFP prosthetic stem in mini-invasive total hip arthroplasty

Pipino, F

doi:10.1007/s10195-004-0065-2

Cited by 32 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We report only the data of 943 implants, demonstrating a high percentage of excellent clinical results and good radiograph outcome [8]. …”

Section: Clinical Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tissue-sparing surgery: 25 years’ experience with femoral neck preserving hip arthroplasty

Pipino

Keller

2006

J Orthopaed Traumatol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tissue-sparing surgery is a surgical strategy that aims to preserve, as much as possible, both bone and soft tissue, in order to minimize the invasiveness of the operation and the overall treatment aggression. This is achieved, in the field of hip replacement surgery, by conservation of the femoral neck through the use of "mini-prostheses" such as the Biodynamic and later the CFP. In this paper, we illustrate the biomechanical characteristics and structure of the CFP prosthesis and briefly describe our 25-year experience in conserving the femoral neck during hip replacement surgery. In particular, we report the results of 943 implants, demonstrating a high percentage of excellent results and good clinicoradiographic results (97%) with a survival rate of almost 100%.

show abstract

“…We report only the data of 943 implants, demonstrating a high percentage of excellent clinical results and good radiograph outcome [8]. …”

Section: Clinical Resultsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…The results are excellent also in comparison with those of other contemporary prosthetic designs [5][6][7][8]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

Tissue-sparing surgery: 25 years’ experience with femoral neck preserving hip arthroplasty

Pipino

Keller

2006

J Orthopaed Traumatol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…7 We identified nine case series with a mean follow-up of 5.1 (3.0-11) years and a total of 1001 included patients. [15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23] These studies demonstrated a mean revision per 100 observed component years rate of 0.21. All studies reported a revision per 100 observed component years of less than 1, which corresponds to a projected revision rate of less than 10% at 10 years follow-up.…”

Section: Previous Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Better early functional outcome after short stem total hip arthroplasty? A prospective blinded randomised controlled multicentre trial comparing the Collum Femoris Preserving stem with a Zweymuller straight cementless stem total hip replacement for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesPrimary aim was to compare the functional results at 3 months and 2 years between short and conventional cementless stem total hip arthroplasty (THA). Secondary aim was to determine the feasibility of a double-blind implant-related trial.DesignA prospective blinded randomised controlled multicentre trial in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip. All patients, research assistants, clinical assessors, investigators and data analysts were blinded to the type of prosthesis. Population: 150 patients between 18 and 70 years with osteoarthritis of the hip, 75 in the short stem and 75 in the conventional stem group. Mean age: 60 years (SD 7). Interventions: the Collum Femoris Preserving short stem versus the Zweymuller Alloclassic conventional stem.Main outcome measuresThe Dutch version of the Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). Secondary outcomes measures: Harris Hip Score, the Physical Component Scale of the SF12, the Timed Up and Go test, Pain and the EQ-5D. Feasibility outcomes: continued blinding, protocol adherence and follow-up success rate.ResultsNo significant difference between the two groups. Mean HOOS total score in the short stem group increased 32.7 points from 36.6 (95% CI 32.9 to 40.2) preoperatively to 69.3 (95% CI 66.4 to 72.1) at 3 months follow-up. Mean HOOS total score in the conventional straight stem group increased 36.3 points from 37.1 (95% CI 33.9 to 40.3) preoperatively to 73.4 (95% CI 70.3 to 76.4) at 3 months follow-up. 91.2% of patients remained blinded at 2 years follow-up. Both protocol adherence and follow-up success rate were 98%.ConclusionsFunctional result at 3 months and 2 years after short stem THA is not superior to conventional cementless THA. There were more perioperative and postoperative complications in the short stem group. Direct comparison of two hip implants in a double-blinded randomised controlled trial is feasible.Trial registration numberNTR1560.

show abstract

“…Some surgeons believe that it is important to preserve the bony architecture and mechanical stress distribution systems within the proximal femur to maintain physiological load transfer to the medial and lateral diaphysis and allow satisfactory bone remodelling [35]. They also argue that retaining the femoral neck would preserve the endosteal circulation derived from the femoral circumflex arteries, ensuring adequate blood supply and nutrition to the proximal femur [38].…”

Section: Biomechanical Advantagesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neck-Preserving Femoral Stems

Rajakulendran

Field

2012

HSS Jrnl

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Surgeons undertaking total hip arthroplasty (THA) routinely perform a distal femoral neck resection. It has been argued that retaining the femoral neck during THA can provide mechanical and biological advantages. Purposes: The objectives of this study were to review:(1) the current evidence on the advantages of femoral neck preservation during THA and (2) the clinical and radiological outcome of neck-preserving femoral stems. Methods: A search of the English-language literature on neck-preserving THA and on the individual neck-preserving implants was performed using PubMed, Ovid SP and Science Direct. Results: Studies have indicated that neck preservation offers superior tri-planar implant stability and allows more accurate restoration of the hip geometry and biomechanics. The trend towards tissue sparing surgery has contributed to the development of bone-conserving short-stem implants that offer variable levels of neck preservation. Despite an initial learning curve, these implants have generated promising early clinical results, with low revision rates and high outcome scores. However, radiological evaluation of some neck-preserving implants has detected a characteristic pattern of proximal femoral bone loss with distal cortical hypertrophy. The long-term implications of this finding are not yet known. Conclusions: Preserving the femoral neck during THA has biomechanical advantages. However, long-term outcome data are needed on neck-preserving femoral stems to evaluate on-going bone remodelling and assess implant performance and survival.

show abstract

CFP prosthetic stem in mini-invasive total hip arthroplasty

Cited by 32 publications

References 6 publications

Tissue-sparing surgery: 25 years’ experience with femoral neck preserving hip arthroplasty

Tissue-sparing surgery: 25 years’ experience with femoral neck preserving hip arthroplasty

Better early functional outcome after short stem total hip arthroplasty? A prospective blinded randomised controlled multicentre trial comparing the Collum Femoris Preserving stem with a Zweymuller straight cementless stem total hip replacement for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip

Neck-Preserving Femoral Stems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About