4.5 Article

Influencing factors for the increased stem version compared to the native femur in cementless total hip arthroplasty

期刊

INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS
卷 38, 期 7, 页码 1341-1346

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00264-014-2289-y

关键词

Stem version; Femoral neck version; Total hip arthroplasty; Implant placement

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [24592268]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24592268] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stem version is not always equivalent to femoral neck version (native version) in cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA). We therefore examined the discrepancy of version between the native femoral neck and stem using pre- and postoperative computed tomography (CT), the level of the femur where the canal version most closely fit the stem version, and the factors influencing version discrepancy between the native femoral neck and stem. A total of 122 hips in 122 patients who underwent primary THA using a metaphyseal-fit stem through the postero-lateral approach were included. Pre- and postoperative CT images were utilized to measure native and stem version, and the version of the femoral canal at four levels relative to the lesser trochanter. The mean native and stem versions were 28.1 +/- 11.0A degrees and 38.0 A +/- 11.2A degrees, respectively, revealing increased stem version with a mean difference of 9.8A degrees (p < 0.0001). A total of 84 hips (68.9 %) revealed an increase in version greater than 5A degrees. Femoral canal version at the level of the lesser trochanter most closely approximated that of stem version. Among the factors analysed, both univariate and multivariate analysis showed that greater degrees of native version and anterior stem tilt significantly reduced the version discrepancy between the native femoral neck and stem version. Since a cementless stem has little version adjustability in the femoral canal, these findings are useful for surgeons in preoperative planning and to achieve proper component placement in THA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据