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: 24413 HIP REVISION SURGERY USING A CEMENTLESS STRAIGHT TAPERED STEM: MINIMUM 10-YEAR RESULTS Martin STEINDL, Matthias BRENNER, Peter RITSCHL, Karl ZWEYMÜLLER Orthopaedisches Krankenhaus Gersthof, Vienna (AUSTRIA) This study was designed to evaluate the minimum 10 year results of a cementless straight tapered stem with rectangular cross-section for revision. Between October 1991 and the end of 1998, 129 patients (138 hips) underwent revision surgery. 51 patients (54 hips) died during the follow-up time. Their implants had been followed radiographically. Four of them had been revised again, 3 for aseptic loosening and one because of a periprosthetic fracture. 13 patients refused to come to follow-up because of poor cooperation or advenced age. None of these patients were revised. Five patients were lost to follow-up. Seven patients had to be revised 1.4 to 11 years post surgery, 6 for low-grade infection and one for periprosthetic fracture. This left a total of 59 hips (54 patients) for analysis at a follow-up time of 10.0 to 16.9 (mean 12.3) years. For radiographic FU, monitor-guided ap and axial radiographs were recorded. These were analyzed according to Gruen. From a total of 59 hips reviewed more than 10 yeas postop. 56 were classified as stable. Two patients were at risk, both presented with osteolytic lesions, one of them with metal-on-polyethylene and one with metal-on-metal articulation. One patient was revised because of aseptic loosening after 14 years. Again a cementless revision stem was inserted. The results of the study are showing that the SLR-revision stem is a valuable implant for cementless fixation in revision surgery. 48
Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Abstract number: 24499 AETIOLOGY OF INTRA-PROSTHETIC DISLOCATION Remi PHILIPPOT 1 , Bertrand BOYER 2 , Frederic FARIZON 1 1 CHU Saint etienne, Saint Etienne (FRANCE), 2 Hopital Nord, Saint Etienne (FRANCE) Dual mobility significantly reduces the risk of prosthetic instability. This mechanical complication occurs when the prosthetic head moves out from the retentive polyethylene liner, such phenomenon called intra-prosthetic dislocation reports a tenyear incidence of 2% in the literature.We prospectively analysed all intra-prosthetic dislocations having occurred since 1985 in our department in order to investigate patient- and implant-related risk factors.91 intra-prosthetic dislocations occurred with NOVAE (SERF) cups in 85 patients of mean age 50.7 years. Intra-prosthetic dislocation occurred after a mean period of 8.8 years. A PRO (SERF) stem was implanted in 56 cases and a PF (SERF) stem in 35. The stems were different from one another in their neck diameter and material: 13 mm titanium neck and 16 mm stainless steel neck respectively.When taking both prosthetic features into account, no significant difference could be established regarding the time between implantation and dislocation. Comparison between these two prosthetic features was performed by means of two continuous homogeneous series which included 240 patients implanted with PF stems and 382 patients with PRO stems. At a mean 15year follow-up, the two series reported a non-statistically different intra-prosthetic dislocation rate of 4%.In both series, young age and large diameter cups were considered predisposing factors for intra-prosthetic dislocation. Therefore, unlike suggested by several authors, prosthetic neck material and diameter do not appear as the main predictors for intra-prosthetic dislocation which is highly promoted by patient-related features. 49
- Page 1 and 2: Seventh SICOT/SIROT Annual Internat
- Page 3 and 4: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Elbow
- Page 5 and 6: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hand/W
- Page 7 and 8: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 9 and 10: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 11 and 12: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 13 and 14: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 15 and 16: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 17 and 18: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 19 and 20: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 21 and 22: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 23 and 24: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 25 and 26: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 27 and 28: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 29 and 30: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 31 and 32: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 33 and 34: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 35 and 36: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 37 and 38: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 39 and 40: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 41 and 42: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 43 and 44: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 45 and 46: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 47: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 51 and 52: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- Page 53 and 54: Poster Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip Ab
- 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
Poster<br />
Topic: Arthroplasty - Hip<br />
Abstract number: 24499<br />
AETIOLOGY OF INTRA-PROSTHETIC DISLOCATION<br />
Remi PHILIPPOT 1 , Bertrand BOYER 2 , Frederic FARIZON 1<br />
1 CHU Saint etienne, Saint Etienne (FRANCE), 2 Hopital Nord, Saint Etienne<br />
(FRANCE)<br />
Dual mobility significantly reduces the risk of prosthetic instability. This mechanical<br />
complication occurs when the prosthetic head moves out from the retentive<br />
polyethylene liner, such phenomenon called intra-prosthetic dislocation reports a tenyear<br />
incidence of 2% in the literature.We prospectively analysed all intra-prosthetic<br />
dislocations having occurred since 1985 in our department in order to investigate<br />
patient- and implant-related risk factors.91 intra-prosthetic dislocations occurred with<br />
NOVAE (SERF) cups in 85 patients of mean age 50.7 years. Intra-prosthetic<br />
dislocation occurred after a mean period of 8.8 years. A PRO (SERF) stem was<br />
implanted in 56 cases and a PF (SERF) stem in 35. The stems were different from<br />
one another in their neck diameter and material: 13 mm titanium neck and 16 mm<br />
stainless steel neck respectively.When taking both prosthetic features into account,<br />
no significant difference could be established regarding the time between<br />
implantation and dislocation. Comparison between these two prosthetic features was<br />
performed by means of two continuous homogeneous series which included 240<br />
patients implanted with PF stems and 382 patients with PRO stems. At a mean 15year<br />
follow-up, the two series reported a non-statistically different intra-prosthetic<br />
dislocation rate of 4%.In both series, young age and large diameter cups were<br />
considered predisposing factors for intra-prosthetic dislocation. Therefore, unlike<br />
suggested by several authors, prosthetic neck material and diameter do not appear<br />
as the main predictors for intra-prosthetic dislocation which is highly promoted by<br />
patient-related features.<br />
49