12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Indications, methods, and results of cemented, hybrid, and cement-free implantation of THR.

      Surgical technology international
      Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip, methods, Cementation, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prosthesis Failure, Treatment Outcome

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          THR has become one of the most widely performed operations in orthopaedic surgery. In Germany, more than 180,000 THRs are currently done annually with increasing tendency. We use four different types of endoprostheses: (1) cemented, (2) cement-less, (3) hybrid (cement-free implanted socket and cemented stem), and (4) hemi-endoprosthesis (cemented stem without socket). A total number of 600 patients were included in a prospective follow-up study during 5 to 20 years, with a mean follow-up period of 10 years. The relevant question of whether to use a cemented, hybrid, or cement-free version of THR is, in our opinion, no longer a concern. All the methods have their advantages, disadvantages, indications, and contraindications. After the "Endler-era", significant differences are not noted between the groups of cemented, hybrid, and cement-less implants that impact on the clinical results and loosening rates.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Comments

          Comment on this article