Shoulder arthroplasty has experienced exponential growth in the past 10–15 years, largely due to improvements in anatomical design, increased application of technology to address various clinical pathology, and improved access to experienced shoulder surgeons. Glenohumeral arthritis has historically been the most common indication for a shoulder replacement, and glenoid wear has been the main concern with regards to longevity of the prosthesis. Attempts to improve glenoid components involve alterations in peg or keel configuration, as well as the introduction of metal backed constructs. Early experience with metal backed components led to very poor results with often catastrophic loosening and destruction of glenoid bone. Proximal humerus fractures are another common indication for a shoulder arthroplasty, and in these cases, tuberosity fixation and healing are the challenge precluding a consistently successful result. More recently, base plate fixation in the setting of a reverse shoulder arthroplasty has come to the forefront as a significant factor.
The indications for cementless acetabular fixation have been broadened because our data supports the use of
The indications for cementless acetabular fixation have been broadened because our data supports the use of
Purpose. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of the revision TKA in which
The indications for cementless acetabular fixation have been broadened because our data supports the use of
The indications for cementless acetabular fixation have been broadened because our data supports the use of
The authors studied the short-term results following patellar resurfacing using
Purpose. A
Introduction. Acetabular component loosening with associated bone loss is a challenge in revision hip arthroplasty.
Although total hip arthroplasty is highly successful for treatment of osteoarthrosis of hip joint, it is skill demanding surgery to perform and even more challenging in case of revision with bone defects. There are many options available for reconstruction of acetabular bony defects. Here, we evaluate the outcome of acetabular bony defect reconstructed with
Introduction: It is desirable to delay or avoid total joint replacement in young patients who have osteonecrosis of femoral head. There are some head preserving surgical procedures that attempt this including osteotomy, core decompression, and bone grafting. The vascularized fibular graft has been reported to be a reliable procedure, but unfortunately it has donor site morbidity and is considered technically demanding. Therefore, materials have been developed to substitute for structural fibular graft. New
Compromised patellar bone stock poses significant the chnical problems in primary and revision knee arthroplasty. In these situations, traditional approaches have included: non resurfacing, patellectomy, patellar bone grafting, ‘Gull-Wing’ osteotomy. A new material (Trabecular Metal) fabricated using a tantalum metal and vapor deposition techhnique that create a metallic strut configuration with 80%porosity, and physical and mechanical properties similar to bone has been introduced. The authors studied the short-term results following patellar resurfacing using
Background. Synthetic interbody spinal fusion devices are used to restore and maintain disc height and ensure proper vertebral alignment. These devices are often filled with autograft bone to facilitate bone bridging through the device while providing mechanical stability. Nonporous polyetheretherketone (PEEK) devices are widely used clinically for such procedures. 1.
The introduction of porous tantalum metal (Trabecular Metal; Zimmer, Warsaw, IN) for acetabular component fixation in total hip arthroplasty has shown optimum fixation qualities and “gap filling” effect. Recently,
Introduction: Porous Tantalum has been used in a variety of clinical settings since 1997. The use of
Purpose. To evaluate the five year Radiostereometric Analysis (RSA) results of the NexGen LPS
The
Management of severe bone loss in total knee arthroplasty presents a formidable challenge. This situation may arise in neglected primary knee arthroplasty with large deformities and attritional bone loss, in revision situations where osteolysis and loosening have caused large areas of bone loss and in tumor situations. Another area of large bone loss is frequently seen in periprosthetic fractures.
Introduction:
The best treatment method of large acetabular bone defects at revision THR remains controversial. Some of the factors that need consideration are the amount of residual pelvic bone removed during revision; the contact area between the residual pelvic bone and the new implant; and the influence of the new acetabular construct on the centre of rotation of the hip. The purpose of this study was to compare these variables in two of the most used surgical techniques used to reconstruct severe acetabular defects: the