首页> 外文OA文献 >A comparative study of 'plasmacup' and 'porous-coated' acetabular components: survival after 10 to 12 years of follow-up
【2h】

A comparative study of 'plasmacup' and 'porous-coated' acetabular components: survival after 10 to 12 years of follow-up

机译:“血浆肿物”和“多孔涂层”髋臼组件的比较研究:随访10至12年后的存活率

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

OBJECTIVES: Our primary aim was to compare the long-term survivorship rates and the rates of successful osseointegration between two different types of uncemented acetabular components. INTRODUCTION: Two types of alloys have primarily been used for the manufacture of the uncemented acetabular components: titanium-based and cobalt-based alloys. A titanium-based alloy appears to be more effective with regard to interface stress transfer to the host bone because of its lower elastic modulus relative to a cobalt-based alloy. This supposed mechanical advantage of a titanium-based alloy component motivated this comparative study. METHODS: Two uncemented acetabular components, a porous-coated acetabulum and a Plasmacup®, were compared with a focus on long-term prosthesis survivorship and the development of acetabular osseointegration. Five radiographic signs of osseointegration were evaluated at the last follow-up appointment: (1) absence of radiolucent lines, (2) presence of a superolateral buttress, (3) medial stress-shielding, (4) radial trabeculae, and (5) an inferomedial buttress. We considered the presence of any three of these radiographic signs, in the absence of acetabular dislocation or symptoms, to be indicative of successful acetabular osseointegration. RESULTS: Among 70 patients implanted with the porous-coated acetabulum, 80% achieved osseointegration over a mean follow-up time of 11.9 years versus 75.3% of the 73 patients who received a Plasmacup insert over a mean of 10.7 years. Prosthesis survivorship rates were not different between the two groups. Revision surgery due to mild or severe acetabular osteolysis, polyethylene wear, and aseptic loosening occurred in eight patients (11.4%) with a PCA versus nine (12.3%) with a Plasmacup. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that, during the first ten years after surgery, there is no significant difference between these two types of uncemented cups with regard to either prosthesis survivorship or successful osseointegration.
机译:目的:我们的主要目的是比较两种不同类型的非骨水泥髋臼组件之间的长期存活率和骨整合成功率。引言:两种类型的合金主要用于制造非骨水泥髋臼组件:钛基和钴基合金。钛基合金由于相对于钴基合金较低的弹性模量,似乎在界面应力传递到主体骨方面更有效。钛基合金部件的这种假定的机械优势推动了该比较研究。方法:比较了两种未粘合的髋臼组件,即多孔涂层的髋臼和Plasmacup®,重点是假体的长期存活和髋臼骨整合的发展。在上次随访中评估了五个骨整合的放射学征象:(1)不存在射线可透线,(2)上外侧支撑物的存在,(3)内侧应力屏蔽,(4)radial骨小梁,和(5)地狱的支柱。我们认为,在没有髋臼脱位或症状的情况下,如果存在上述三种放射线征象,则表明成功进行了髋臼骨整合。结果:在70名植入了多孔涂层髋臼的患者中,80%的患者在平均11.9年的随访时间内实现了骨整合,而73名在平均10.7年的时间接受Plasmacup植入物的患者中,骨整合达到了75.3%。两组的假体存活率无差异。因轻度或严重髋臼骨溶解,聚乙烯磨损和无菌性松动而进行的翻修手术发生在8例PCA患者(占11.4%)中,而Plasmacup患者9例(占12.3%)。结论:我们得出的结论是,在手术后的最初十年中,这两种类型的无骨水泥杯在假体存活或成功骨整合方面均无显着差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号