Yan Shuang G, Woiczinski Matthias, Schmidutz Tobias F, Weber Patrick, Paulus Alexander C, Steinbrück Arnd, Jansson Volkmar, Schmidutz Florian
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Munich (LMU), Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany.
Anhui Medical University, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Anhui Sheng, China.
Int Orthop. 2017 Dec;41(12):2471-2477. doi: 10.1007/s00264-017-3497-z. Epub 2017 May 9.
Short stem total hip arthroplasty (SHA) has gained increasing popularity as it conserves bone stock and is supposed to allow revision with a conventional stem. However, no study has evaluated whether the revision of a SHA with a standard total hip arthroplasty (THA) stem provides sufficient primary stability to allow osseous integration.
A neck preserving SHA (Metha) and a standard THA (CLS) stem were implanted into six composite femurs respectively and dynamically loaded (300-1700 N, 1 Hz). Primary stability was evaluated by three dimensional-micromotions (3D micro motion) at five points of the interface. Then, a revision scenario was created by removing the SHA and using the same CLS stem as a revision implant (CLS-revision group), with subsequent evaluation of the 3D micro motion according to the primary CLS stem.
The 3D micro motion pattern significantly differed in the primary situation between the short and the standard stem. The highest 3D micro motion were registered proximally for the Metha and distally for the CLS stem. Revising the Metha with a CLS stem revealed a bony defect at the calcar. However, the 3D micro motion of the CLS-revision group were not significant higher compared to those of the primary CLS stem.
Our results show, that SHA (Metha) and standard THA (CLS) provide a good primary stability, however with different pattern of anchorage. The CLS stem reached a similar stability in this revision scenario as the CLS in the primary situation, wherefore it can be assumed that in uncomplicated revisions the Metha short stem can safely be revised with a CLS standard stem.
短柄全髋关节置换术(SHA)越来越受欢迎,因为它能保留骨量,并且据推测可使用传统柄进行翻修。然而,尚无研究评估使用标准全髋关节置换术(THA)柄对SHA进行翻修是否能提供足够的初始稳定性以实现骨整合。
分别将保留颈的SHA(Metha)柄和标准THA(CLS)柄植入六根复合股骨中,并进行动态加载(300 - 1700 N,1 Hz)。通过界面五个点处的三维微动(3D微动)评估初始稳定性。然后,通过移除SHA并使用相同的CLS柄作为翻修植入物创建一个翻修方案(CLS翻修组),随后根据初始CLS柄评估3D微动。
在初始情况下,短柄和标准柄的3D微动模式存在显著差异。Metha柄近端的3D微动最高,而CLS柄远端的3D微动最高。用CLS柄翻修Metha柄时,在股骨矩处出现骨缺损。然而,CLS翻修组的3D微动与初始CLS柄相比并无显著升高。
我们的结果表明,SHA(Metha)和标准THA(CLS)提供了良好的初始稳定性,但锚固模式不同。在这种翻修情况下,CLS柄达到了与初始情况相似的稳定性,因此可以假设,在无并发症的翻修中,Metha短柄可以安全地用CLS标准柄进行翻修。