2014
DOI: 10.1186/1752-1947-8-434
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Two-year follow-up of revision total hip arthroplasty using a ceramic revision head with a retained well-fixed femoral component: a case series

Abstract: IntroductionIt is known that a well-fixed stem can be left in situ when only the acetabular component and femoral head have to be changed. However, in a revision case, the use of a ceramic head on an existing taper is not recommended. Slight damages of the taper may increase the risk of a ceramic fracture. Until now in a revision case a primary ceramic-on-ceramic or ceramic-on-polyethylene pairing was changed to a metal-on-polyethylene pairing or the well-fixed stem was removed as well. During the past several… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 27 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Spacers to be used and implants to be used in the second phase of revision are quite expensive, and they will increase surgical expenses. 6 7 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Spacers to be used and implants to be used in the second phase of revision are quite expensive, and they will increase surgical expenses. 6 7 …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%