2005
DOI: 10.1080/00016470510030292
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Total hip arthroplasty for primary osteoarthrosis in younger patients in the Finnish arthroplasty register

Abstract: Modern uncemented stems seem to have better resistance to aseptic loosening than cemented stems in younger patients. Thus, for younger patients, uncemented proximally circumferentially porous- and HA-coated stems are the implants of choice. Press-fit porous- and HA-coated uncemented cups may have better endurance against aseptic loosening than cemented cups in younger patients. However, when all revisions (including exchange of liner) are taken into account, the survival of modern uncemented cups is no better … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

8
108
2
2

Year Published

2007
2007
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 135 publications
(120 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
(46 reference statements)
8
108
2
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Interestingly, the hazard ratio in the incidence of radiographic signs of loosening, adjusted for age and gender, was nearly twofold better for threaded titanium cups (0.16) than for press-fit titanium acetabular components (0.29), with cemented conventional PE acetabular components being defined as the reference level (1.00). This observation was also confirmed in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register, in which the risk of revision for aseptic loosening in patients younger than 55 years of age operated on for primary osteoarthritis was three times higher for all-PE cemented acetabular components than for press-fit porouscoated uncemented acetabular components [20]. A similar conclusion was drawn from the meta-analysis of the international literature conducted by Migaud et al [40].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…Interestingly, the hazard ratio in the incidence of radiographic signs of loosening, adjusted for age and gender, was nearly twofold better for threaded titanium cups (0.16) than for press-fit titanium acetabular components (0.29), with cemented conventional PE acetabular components being defined as the reference level (1.00). This observation was also confirmed in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register, in which the risk of revision for aseptic loosening in patients younger than 55 years of age operated on for primary osteoarthritis was three times higher for all-PE cemented acetabular components than for press-fit porouscoated uncemented acetabular components [20]. A similar conclusion was drawn from the meta-analysis of the international literature conducted by Migaud et al [40].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 71%
“…On the femoral side, the durability of cementless components may be at least as good as for cemented implants, particularly in young patients [23], but depend on the design, the material, or the type of coating used [6,9,10]. Several major issues must be addressed when using cementless stems: initial implant stability, durable long-term bone-implant fixation, strain transmission to the proximal femur, and restoration of hip mechanics (ie, the design of the extramedullary portion of the implant including variations of femoral anteversion, femoral offset, and neck-shaft angle).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Whereas this procedure has proven effective in the aging population, only a low percentage of young, active patients opt for THA. This is attributed to shortened projected lifetime of a hip implant for an active patient and the subsequent need for revision surgery, which is associated with significant complications, comorbidities, overall decreased effectiveness, and less patient satisfaction (4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9). The ability to repair or regenerate cartilage using tissue-engineering strategies could have a tremendous impact on the treatment of OA for the growing population of active patients with hip OA.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%