A mould arthroplasty revision: a 43-year follow-up

Margheritini, Fabrizio; Moreschini, O.; Romanini, L

doi:10.1007/pl00021228

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2). Presently, there are only a few reports on implant survival beyond 30 years [6][7][8]. Therefore, in this study, we analysed the linear and volumetric wear of the acrylic ball head after 38 years with hemiarthroplasty in place.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Very low wear rate measured in a hip endoprosthesis removed after 38 years

Maccauro

Sgrambiglia

Micelli

et al. 2006

J Orthopaed Traumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Marino Zuco hip prosthesis implanted in 1963 in a 13-year-old girl with congenital hip dislocation was revised in 2001 for aseptic loosening. At the time of revision surgery, no granulomatous tissue reaction due to massive wear was observed. Considering the notable 38-year survival of this implant, we measured linear and volumetric wear of the acrylic ball head using a digital method to reconstruct the original spherical surface. Linear wear was 0.817 mm (21.5 µm/year) and volumetric wear was 28.937 mm 3 /year. These low wear rates are attribuited to the patient's limited range of motion during the implant's life time. Low prosthetic use may have contributed to the long implant survival time.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Very low wear rate measured in a hip endoprosthesis removed after 38 years

Maccauro

Sgrambiglia

Micelli

et al. 2006

J Orthopaed Traumatol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The pioneers of arthroplasty surgery tested a variety of materials, including glass and acrylic, but there are few reports on the remarkable survival of some of these early implants. [1][2][3][4] We present what we believe is the longest follow-up of the Smith-Petersen Vitallium mould arthroplasty.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%