Polished vs rough femoral components in grade A and grade C-2 cement mantles

被引:12
作者
Duffy, Gavan P.
Lozynsky, Andrew J.
Harris, William H.
机构
[1] Mayo Clin, Dept Orthoped, Jacksonville, FL 32224 USA
[2] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Orthopaed Biomech Lab, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[3] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Adult Reconstruct Unit, Boston, MA 02114 USA
关键词
total hip arthroplasty; cemented femoral component; surface finish; cement technique; TOTAL HIP-ARTHROPLASTY; FOLLOW-UP; PROSTHESIS; CHARNLEY; FAILURE; SURFACE; STEMS;
D O I
10.1016/j.arth.2005.07.018
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
100224 [整形外科学];
摘要
The ideal surface for cemented femoral components remains controversial. Six polished stems were compared with 6 rough stems both with good cement mantle and also with poor cement mantles in a stair-climbing model. With good cement mantles, both the polished and the rough stems were loose by 6 million cycles. However, none were loose by radiographic criteria. With the poor cement mantle, both stems became loose earlier and developed more micromotion, the polished stems having significantly higher and earlier motion than the rough. Radiographic evidence of debonding was not visible until the stems had motion of more than 2000 mu m. In the presence of a good cement mantle in this laboratory model there was no significant difference in the development of micromotion under fatigue stair-climbing conditions between a polished or grit-blasted femoral component. However, in the presence of a poor cement mantle, the polished components had earlier and higher micromotion. This study reinforces the importance of centralization and cement technique, particularly if using a polished surface finish.
引用
收藏
页码:1054 / 1063
页数:10
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]
IMPROVED CEMENTING TECHNIQUES AND FEMORAL COMPONENT LOOSENING IN YOUNG-PATIENTS WITH HIP-ARTHROPLASTY - A 12-YEAR RADIOGRAPHIC REVIEW [J].
BARRACK, RL ;
MULROY, RD ;
HARRIS, WH .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 1992, 74 (03) :385-389
[2]
Berger RA, 1996, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P134
[3]
BERRY DJ, 1999, MID AM ORTH ASS 17 A
[4]
MICROMOTION OF CEMENTED AND UNCEMENTED FEMORAL COMPONENTS [J].
BURKE, DW ;
OCONNOR, DO ;
ZALENSKI, EB ;
JASTY, M ;
HARRIS, WH .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-BRITISH VOLUME, 1991, 73 (01) :33-37
[5]
Primary exeter total hip arthroplasty in patients with small femurs - A minimal of 10 years follow-up [J].
Chiu, KH ;
Shen, WY ;
Cheung, KW ;
Tsui, HF .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2005, 20 (03) :275-281
[6]
Primary hybrid total hip replacement, performed with insertion of the acetabular component without cement and a precoat femoral component with cement - An average ten-year follow-up study [J].
Clohisy, JC ;
Harris, WH .
JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 1999, 81A (02) :247-255
[7]
Crowninshield RD, 1998, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P90
[8]
Dowd JE, 1998, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P123
[9]
The Charnley versus the Spectron hip prosthesis -: Radiographic evaluation of a randomized, prospective study of 2 different hip implants [J].
Garellick, G ;
Malchau, H ;
Regnér, H ;
Herberts, P .
JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 1999, 14 (04) :414-425
[10]
Goldberg BA, 1998, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P163