Midterm results following uncemented, modular, fully porous coated stem used in revision total hip arthroplasty: Comparison of two stem systems.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 27408508.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.jor.2016.06.024 and PMC identifier 4932618.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Aim of this study was to evaluate stem subsidence and survivorship of implant following implantation of Revitan (Zimmer) and MP (Waldemar Link) stems. Retrospective case series with clinical and radiological follow-up of 1-10 years. 47 Revitan and 57 MP stems were analyzed. In 12 cases there was subsidence of the stem present. Two Revitan stems and one MP stem were revised as a result of subsidence. Failure rate was 4.3% for Revitan, 1.8% for MP stem and difference was not statistically significant. There is no significant difference in subsidence or survivorship between Revitan and MP stems.
Anatomy
- hip