Experience with proximal ingrowth implantation in hip revision surgery.
A 2 to 8 year review of 104 cases of Type III hip revisions with a proximally modular proximal ingrowth non-cemented stem has been carried out. Four re-revisions were required, 1 early for a femur which was too broken up to support an implant, 1 for late sepsis re-activation, 1 for knee pain, and 1 at 4 years for aseptic loosening. Of the remainder, 81.8% had a good or excellent result with most problems being experienced in the acetabular side. 68.8% show no radiolucency and only 3 cases, including the revised one, show complete stem radiolucency. It is concluded that in the medium term, proximal ingrowth implants can be used in revision hip surgery.
Cameron
H
H
Department of Surgery, University of Toronto and Orthopaedic & Arthritic Hospital, Canada.
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001170:Arthritis, Infectious / Q000601:surgery; D019644:Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; D002484:Cementation; D005260:Female; D005264:Femoral Fractures / Q000601:surgery; D005269:Femur / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery; D006622:Hip Prosthesis / Q000009:adverse effects; D006801:Humans; D007717:Knee; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D016348:Osseointegration; D010003:Osteoarthritis / Q000601:surgery; D010146:Pain / Q000601:surgery; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D016459:Prosthesis-Related Infections / Q000601:surgery; D011859:Radiography; D012086:Reoperation; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D018805:Sepsis / Q000601:surgery