Abstracts Posters SICOT-SOF meeting Gothenburg 2010 _2_
Abstracts Posters SICOT-SOF meeting Gothenburg 2010 _2_ Abstracts Posters SICOT-SOF meeting Gothenburg 2010 _2_
Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Abstract number: 26233 THE CLINICAL RESULTS OF MODIFIED TRANSTROCHANTERIC CURVED VARUS OSTEOTOMY FOR OSTEONECROSIS OF THE FEMORAL HEAD Tamaoki SATOSHI, Atsumi TAKASHI, Nakanishi RYOUSUKE Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Fujigaoka Hospital Showa University School of Medicine, Yokohama (JAPAN) Objective: Since 2004, in addition to original curved varus osteotomy (CVO) for Idiopathic osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ION), we have intentionally performed anterior or posterior rotation without incising the articular capsule to obtain a more extensive, viable area in the loaded portion. In this study, we investigated the extent of the viable area loaded portion after original and modified CVO. Methods: The subjects were 34 patients (18 males, 16 females, 38 joints) who underwent curved varus osteotomy. From these patients, 12 patients (14 joints) underwent a modified CVO. The mean rate of the viable area for the loaded portion on anteroposterior radiographs before surgery was 33%. Investigations were performed on the percent viable area in the preoperative/postoperative weighted portion. In addition, in patients for whom transtrochanteric curved varus osteotomy was combined with anterior/posterior rotation, we measured the extent of viable area in the loaded portion when the extent of curved varus osteotomy without rotation was performed based on a schematic drawing that we prepared. Results: In this study, the combination of CVO and anterior/posterior rotation significantly increased the percent viable area from 65% to 84%. Conclusion: The modified curved varus could be a vilable approach for patients with a viable area in the anterior or posterior region. The extent of post operative viable area on the loaded portion proved to be better than the original procedure. 106
Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Abstract number: 26252 USE OF MAYO CONSERVATIVE HIP PROSTHESIS (ZIMMER) IN OSTEOARTHRITIS OF DIFFERENT ETIOLOGY Adam NIEWIADOMSKI, Tadeusz NIEDZWIEDZKI, Jaroslaw NITON, Lukasz NIEDZWIEDZKI Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery Department, Jagiellonian University Collegium Medicum, Krakow (POLAND) Authors presented the results of the treatment of osteoarthritis of the hip with MAYO conservative hip prosthesis. Cementless MAYO endoprosthesis had been used 75 times beetwen 1999-2009. The age of patients was 17-60 years (average 38,2). There were 44 women and 25 men. Main causes of osteoarthritis were secondary changes to DDH, posttraumatic deformities and avascular necrosis of the femoral head. MAYO stems were connected with cementless acetabular cup (Press-fit Trilogy-65,3%) and threaded acetabular cup (Alloclassic-4,0%). Use of metal-onmetal articulation connected with MAYO stem (30,6%) has been used since 2007. Results were analyzed according to clinical Hip Harris Score and radiological assessment. After 10 years follow-up good and very good results were found in treatment of osteoarthritis especially in young people. MAYO stem causes minor damage of intertrochanteric region during procedure and has minimal effect on medullar cavity. It preserves bone stock and enables to replace femoral component with a cementless stem in case of revision surgery. Using metal-on-metal articulation preserves hip joint from luxation and its connection with short-stem prosthesis increases a range of mobility in a joint. 107
- Page 55 and 56: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 57 and 58: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 59 and 60: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 61 and 62: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 63 and 64: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 65 and 66: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 67 and 68: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 69 and 70: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 71 and 72: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 73 and 74: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 75 and 76: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 77 and 78: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 79 and 80: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 81 and 82: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 83 and 84: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 85 and 86: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 87 and 88: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 89 and 90: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 91 and 92: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 93 and 94: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 95 and 96: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 97 and 98: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 99 and 100: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 101 and 102: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 103 and 104: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 105: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 109 and 110: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 111 and 112: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 113 and 114: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 115 and 116: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 117 and 118: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 119 and 120: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 121 and 122: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 123 and 124: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 125 and 126: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 127 and 128: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 129 and 130: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 131 and 132: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 133 and 134: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 135 and 136: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 137 and 138: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 139 and 140: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 141 and 142: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 143 and 144: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 145 and 146: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 147 and 148: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 149 and 150: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 151 and 152: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 153 and 154: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
- Page 155 and 156: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Knee A
Poster<br />
Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip<br />
Abstract number: 26233<br />
THE CLINICAL RESULTS OF MODIFIED TRANSTROCHANTERIC CURVED<br />
VARUS OSTEOTOMY FOR OSTEONECROSIS OF THE FEMORAL HEAD<br />
Tamaoki SATOSHI, Atsumi TAKASHI, Nakanishi RYOUSUKE<br />
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Fujigaoka Hospital Showa University School of<br />
Medicine, Yokohama (JAPAN)<br />
Objective: Since 2004, in addition to original curved varus osteotomy (CVO) for<br />
Idiopathic osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ION), we have intentionally performed<br />
anterior or posterior rotation without incising the articular capsule to obtain a more<br />
extensive, viable area in the loaded portion. In this study, we investigated the extent<br />
of the viable area loaded portion after original and modified CVO. Methods: The<br />
subjects were 34 patients (18 males, 16 females, 38 joints) who underwent curved<br />
varus osteotomy. From these patients, 12 patients (14 joints) underwent a modified<br />
CVO. The mean rate of the viable area for the loaded portion on anteroposterior<br />
radiographs before surgery was 33%. Investigations were performed on the percent<br />
viable area in the preoperative/postoperative weighted portion. In addition, in patients<br />
for whom transtrochanteric curved varus osteotomy was combined with<br />
anterior/posterior rotation, we measured the extent of viable area in the loaded<br />
portion when the extent of curved varus osteotomy without rotation was performed<br />
based on a schematic drawing that we prepared. Results: In this study, the<br />
combination of CVO and anterior/posterior rotation significantly increased the percent<br />
viable area from 65% to 84%. Conclusion: The modified curved varus could be a<br />
vilable approach for patients with a viable area in the anterior or posterior region.<br />
The extent of post operative viable area on the loaded portion proved to be better<br />
than the original procedure.<br />
106