scholarly journals Hip resurfacing increases bone strains associated with short-term femoral neck fracture

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (10) ◽  
pp. 1319-1325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason P. Long ◽  
Thomas J. Santner ◽  
Donald L. Bartel
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Femoral Neck Fracture ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Bone Strains ◽  
Neck Fracture

Femoral Neck Fracture After Birmingham Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty

2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 147-153 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gulraj S. Matharu ◽  
Callum W. McBryde ◽  
Matthew P. Revell ◽  
Paul B. Pynsent
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Femoral Neck Fracture ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Birmingham Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Neck Fracture

Predictors of Femoral Neck Fracture Following Hip Resurfacing: A Cadaveric Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 110-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward T. Davis ◽  
Michael Olsen ◽  
Rad Zdero ◽  
Gemma M. Smith ◽  
James P. Waddell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Femoral Neck Fracture ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Cadaveric Study ◽  
Neck Fracture

scholarly journals Femoral Neck Fractures Complicating Metal-on-Metal Resurfaced Hips: A Report of 2 Cases

2005 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 69-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
H Sharma ◽  
B Rana ◽  
C Watson ◽  
AC Campbell ◽  
BJ Singh
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Femoral Neck Fracture ◽  
Hip Replacement ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Review Of The Literature ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Metal On Metal ◽  
Hip Disease ◽  
Neck Fracture ◽  
Technical Complication

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty is increasingly popular for younger patients with advanced hip disease. Intra-operative or immediate postoperative femoral neck fracture after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing is a well-described technical complication, ranging from 0% to 1.5%. We report 2 cases of late femoral neck fracture occurring 8 and 15 months following the index operation, with a review of the literature. We recommend that patient selection should be of prime importance before embarking on metal-on-metal surface hip replacement to avoid such complications.

scholarly journals Performance of the resurfaced hip. Part 2: The influence of prosthesis stem design on remodelling and fracture of the femoral neck

2009 ◽  
Vol 224 (7) ◽  
pp. 841-851 ◽  
Author(s):  
A S Dickinson ◽  
A C Taylor ◽  
J R T Jeffers ◽  
M Browne
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Femoral Neck Fracture ◽  
Bone Remodelling ◽  
Stress Shielding ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Bone Adaptation ◽  
Implant Loosening ◽  
Stem Design ◽  
Neck Fracture ◽  
Neck Strength

Hip resurfacing is a popular treatment for osteoarthritis in young, active patients. Previous studies have shown that occasional failures — femoral neck fracture and implant loosening, possibly associated with bone adaptation — are affected by prosthesis sizing and positioning, in addition to patient and surgical factors. With the aim of improving tolerance to surgical variation, finite element modelling was used to indicate the effects of prosthesis metaphyseal stem design on bone remodelling and femoral neck fracture, with a range of implant orientations. The analysis suggested that the intact femoral neck strength in trauma could be maintained across a wider range of varus—valgus orientations for short-stemmed and stemless prostheses. Furthermore, the extent of periprosthetic bone remodelling was lower for the short-stemmed implant, with slightly reduced stress shielding and considerably reduced densification around the stem, potentially preventing further progressive proximal stress shielding. The study suggests that a short-stemmed resurfacing head offers improved tolerance to misalignment and remodelling stimulus over traditional designs. While femoral neck fracture and implant loosening are multifactorial, biomechanical factors are of clear importance to the clinical outcome, so this may reduce the risk for patients at the edge of the indications for hip resurfacing, or shorten the surgical learning curve.

BIOMECHANICAL STUDY ON MECHANISMS OF FEMORAL NECK FRACTURE AFTER HIP RESURFACING ARTHROPLASTY

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (05) ◽  
pp. 1950042
Author(s):  
WEN-HSIANG CHOU ◽  
CHIEN-WEI LIU
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Femoral Neck Fracture ◽  
Recovery Period ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Shielding Effect ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Neck Fracture ◽  
The Impact

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is a long-established procedure. It is a minimally invasive surgery where the surgical wound is relatively small to facilitate a shorter recovery period. HRA remained a popular option among the patients allowing better range of motion of the joint compared to that of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although HRA is associated with the above advantages, complications involving femoral neck fractures after surgery still occur. Therefore, the present study attempts to assess the impact of stress under various alignment conditions and different scenarios in surgical errors upon the femoral neck in hip resurfacing prostheses (HRP) that may be encountered during the procedure using finite element analysis (FEA) technique. The results showed that anteversion implantation errors on femoral components should be avoided, and that the main reason that causes femoral neck fracture is related to the stress shielding effect generated internally in the femoral neck. Methods to prevent the incidence of such events are a major obstacle to be solved in the future.

Hip resurfacing arthroplasty for patients with inflammatory arthritis: a systematic review

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-17
Author(s):  
Kyle W. Morse ◽  
Edwin P. Su
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Femoral Neck Fracture ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Inflammatory Arthritis ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Harris Hip Score ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Hip Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Resurfacing Arthroplasty ◽  
Neck Fracture

Introduction: Modern metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty has led to decreased revision rates and high implant survival rates as compared to prior generations of resurfacing. Many of the series that report on resurfacing outcomes focus upon patients treated with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis. Patients with inflammatory arthritis such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are also treated in these series, however, their outcomes following resurfacing are underreported. The aim of this study was to determine complications that may occur following hip resurfacing in patients with inflammatory arthritis. A secondary aim was to determine functional outcomes following resurfacing. Methods: A search was performed in MEDLINE (PubMed/OVID), Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. 5 studies met eligibility criteria. This review includes 196 hips; 120 had a diagnosis of AS or seronegative spondyloarthropathy and 76 had a diagnosis of RA or juvenile RA. 8 revisions were reported at a mean time of 64.2 (8.67-275.58) weeks. Results: Femoral neck fracture was the most common indication for revision, occurring in 3.06% of all hips at 34.5 weeks (16.0-52.0). 2 infections, 2 reports of acetabular radiolucency, and no dislocations were reported. The University of California at Los Angeles score, Harris Hip Score, and Range of Motion were the most common functional outcomes measured, which increased in the majority of studies following resurfacing. Conclusions: Femoral neck fracture was the most common reason for revision in patients with inflammatory arthritis following resurfacing and there were no dislocations reported. Following resurfacing, these patients have improved functional outcomes.

Femoral neck fracture following hip resurfacing

2008 ◽  
Vol 90-B (11) ◽  
pp. 1522-1527 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. T. Davis ◽  
M. Olsen ◽  
R. Zdero ◽  
J. P. Waddell ◽  
E. H. Schemitsch
Keyword(s):  
Femoral Neck ◽  
Femoral Neck Fracture ◽  
Hip Resurfacing ◽  
Neck Fracture
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document