4.3 Article

Perspectives on metaphyseal conservative stems

Journal

JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY
Volume 9, Issue 1, Pages 49-54

Publisher

SPRINGEROPEN
DOI: 10.1007/s10195-008-0105-4

Keywords

Arthroplasty; Conservative; Hip; Metaphyseal; DEXA

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Total hip replacement is showing, during the last decades, a progressive evolution toward principles of reduced bone and soft tissue aggression. These principles have become the basis of a new philosophy, tissue sparing surgery. Regarding hip implants, new conservative components have been proposed and developed as an alternative to conventional stems. Technical and biomechanical characteristics of metaphyseal bone-stock-preserving stems are analyzed on the basis of the available literature and our personal experience. Mayo, Nanos and Metha stems represent, under certain aspects, a design evolution starting from shared concepts: reduced femoral violation, non-anatomic geometry, proximal calcar loading and lateral alignment. However, consistent differences are level of neck preservation, cross-sectional geometry and surface finishing. The Mayo component is the most time-tested component and, in our hands, it showed an excellent survivorship at the mid-term follow-up, with an extremely reduced incidence of aseptic loosening (partially reduced by the association with last generation acetabular couplings). For 160 implants followed for a mean of 4.7 years, survivorship was 97.5% with 4 failed implants: one fracture with unstable stem, 1 septic loosening and 2 aseptic mobilizations. DEXA analysis, performed on 15 cases, showed a good calcar loading and stimulation, but there was significant lateral load transfer to R3-R4 zones, giv-ing to the distal part of the stem a function not simply limited to alignment. Metaphyseal conservative stems demonstrated a wide applicability with an essential surgical technique. Moreover, they offer the options of a conservative revision with a conventional primary component in case of failure and a conservative revision for failed resurfacing implants.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available