Press fit fixation of cementless cups: how much stability do we need indeed?

Röth, Andreas; Winzer, T.; Sander, Klaus; Anders, J. O.; Venbrocks, R.

doi:10.1007/s00402-005-0001-9

Cited by 32 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This might suggest that initial bone-cup apposition at the periphery of the component may be sufficient to ensure durable osseointegration. This result is in agreement with those of previous reports of filling of the postoperative gap within a few years after surgery and no incidence of component loosening [11,25,30]. The prevalence of radiolucencies around the cup at 5 years for both groups was comparable to the rate reported by Ollivere et al [23] with the Birmingham prosthesis with the same followup time.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Acetabular Component Thickness Does Not Affect Mid-term Clinical Results in Hip Resurfacing

Al-Hamad

Duff

Takamura

et al. 2014

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The benefits of using thin acetabular components for hip resurfacing have been shown in terms of bone conservation, but there currently are little data available in the literature addressing the mid-term clinical results of these devices. Questions/purposes We aimed to determine whether thinner acetabular components altered mid-term postoperative clinical scores, complication rates, survivorship, radiographic appearance, and metal ion levels. Methods Two hundred eighty-one patients with unilateral disease received a 5-mm thick acetabular shell and 223 received a 3.5-mm shell. The femoral component implanted in both groups was identical. We compared clinical scores, complication rates, survivorship, radiographic results, and ion levels between these two groups. Results UCLA hip scores were similar (pain, p = 0.0976; walking, p = 0.9571; function, p = 0.9316; activity, p = 0.2085). Complications were higher in the 5-mm group (6.4% versus 1.8%, p = 0.0431). Both groups were similar regarding survivorship (p = 0.3181), cup radiolucency at 5 years (p = 0.107), and metal ion levels (cobalt p = 0.404, chromium p = 0.250). Conclusions With comparable mid-term clinical results,

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Acetabular Component Thickness Does Not Affect Mid-term Clinical Results in Hip Resurfacing

Al-Hamad

Duff

Takamura

et al. 2014

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some of these trials have failed to find a difference [20][21][22], two of which included patients with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) [21,22]. Two other trials have demonstrated differing results, but notably did not use UHMWPE [23,24].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Cluster Hole Versus Solid Cup in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Control Trial

Blakeney

Khan

2015

The Journal of Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…It has been demonstrated that gaps between press-fit cups and the Results from PS14 were excluded because of cracking of the acetabulum in one side during insertion Fig. 3 Final vs initial shell pinch (left) and final liner pinch vs initial shell pinch (right) surrounding bone can close over time [13,14] and that periprosthetic BMD continues to change for five years after cementless hip replacement [4]. The resulting long-term changes of load transfer could redistribute loading away from the rim.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deformation of metal-backed acetabular components and the impact of liner thickness in a cadaveric model

Markel

Day

Siskey

et al. 2010

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Shell deformation of resurfacing and all-metal modular cups following press-fit implantation has been reported, but not for conventional metal-backed cups with polyethylene liners. The deformation of acetabular components with historical and thin polyethylene inserts after press-fit insertion was evaluated using a cadaveric model. All shells and liners deformed upon implantation. Following joint loading, shell pinch decreased from 0.32 to 0.22 mm (p=0.019) and from 0.29 to 0.13 mm (p=0.003) for the thin and thick liner groups, respectively. Liner pinch also decreased from 0.17 to 0.04 mm (p=0.031) and from 0.06 to 0 mm (p=0.103) for the thin and thick liner groups, respectively. There were no significant differences between the thin and thick liners. Liner deformation was influenced by the initial shell deformation and donor bone quality. Shell and liner pinch decreased following joint loading, suggesting a settling in effect.

show abstract

Press fit fixation of cementless cups: how much stability do we need indeed?

Abstract: Less radiological changes around the cup if no screws were used and no disadvantages within this group led to the conclusion that an additional screw fixation in principle is not necessary in press-fit cups.

Cited by 32 publications

References 21 publications

Acetabular Component Thickness Does Not Affect Mid-term Clinical Results in Hip Resurfacing

Acetabular Component Thickness Does Not Affect Mid-term Clinical Results in Hip Resurfacing

Cluster Hole Versus Solid Cup in Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Randomized Control Trial

Deformation of metal-backed acetabular components and the impact of liner thickness in a cadaveric model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About