This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowReprints and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Head, W. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Head, W. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Vol 66, Issue 1 28-34, Copyright © 1984 by Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc


JOURNAL CONTENTS

Total articular resurfacing arthroplasty. Analysis of component failure in sixty-seven hips

WC Head

Total articular resurfacing arthroplasty with the Tara device was performed on sixty-seven hips in sixty-three patients from 1978 to 1981. I analyzed the results, paying particular attention to prosthetic failure. Loosening of the femoral component occurred in one hip and loosening of the acetabular component, in seven hips. All eight required revision to conventional total hip replacement. Fifteen other patients in the series had radiographic evidence of component failure but have had no significant pain to date. They were regarded as having impending failure. Four of the fifteen showed significant stress-shielding on the femoral side, two with simultaneous acetabular lucency at the bone-cement interface. The other eleven showed progressive acetabular lucency. The total anticipated failure rate was 34.3 per cent (11.9 per cent definite and 22.4 per cent anticipated). The ages of the patients at surgery averaged 49.1 years in the actual failure group and 34.2 years in the impending failure group. Factors that may have been responsible for the unacceptably high incidence of component failure include the young age of the patients in whom this operation was performed and their high activity level. Additional reasons for mechanical failure (both definite and anticipated) on the acetabular side include poor cement distribution with resultant micromotion and increased frictional torque with the larger-diameter component of the prosthesis.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JBJSHome page
J. R. Lieberman, D. J. Berry, M. A. Montv, R. K. Aaron, J. J. Callaghan, A. Rayadhyaksha, and J. R. Urbaniak
Osteonecrosis of the Hip: Management in the Twenty-first Century
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., May 1, 2002; 84(5): 834 - 853.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JBJSHome page
M. W. HUNGERFORD, M. A. MONT, R. SCOTT, C. FIORE, D. S. HUNGERFORD, and K. A. KRACKOW
Surface Replacement Hemiarthroplasty for the Treatment of Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., November 1, 1998; 80(11): 1656 - 64.
[Abstract] [Full Text]