Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 100-B, Issue SUPP_11 | Pages 41 - 41
1 Aug 2018
Thaler M Krismer M Dammerer D Ban M Nogler M
Full Access

In recent years, the direct anterior approach (DAA) has become a standard approach for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). With the increasing use of the DAA in primary cases also more and more revision surgeries are performed through the same interval. With ability to extend the DAA interval proximally and distally, loose cups, loose stems, and even periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPF) can be treated. Especially, PPF are devastating complications causing functional limitations and increased mortality. Therefore, we conducted a study to report the outcome of surgical treatment of PPF with the DAA interval.

We report on the one year complications and mortality in 40 cases with a mean clinical follow-up of 1.5 years. Mean age of patients was 74.3 years. Fractures were classified as Vancouver B2 (36), and B3 (N=4). In 14 cases, a standard stem was used, and in 26 cases a modular revision stem. In 30 cases, a distal extension +/- tensor release was used, in 4 cases a proximal tensor release was done, and in the remaining 6 cases revision could be performed without extension of the approach.

Median cut/suture time was 152 minutes (IQR 80 – 279). The overall complication rate in our patient group was 12.5%. 2 patients died in the first three months after operation. One patient had a transient femoral nerve palsy, which completely recovered.

The DAA interval to the hip for the treatment of PFF showed similar results compared with other approaches regarding mortality, complications, fracture healing, dislocation rate and clinical results. We conclude that femoral revision in case of PPF in the DAA interval is a safe and reliable procedure. Each Vancouver type of periprosthetic fracture can be treated by use of this approach.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 93-B, Issue 8 | Pages 1049 - 1053
1 Aug 2011
Putzer D Mayr E Haid C Reinthaler A Nogler M

In revision total hip replacement, bone loss can be managed by impacting porous bone chips. In order to guarantee sufficient mechanical strength, the bone chips have to be compacted. The aim of this study was to determine in an in vitro simulation whether the use of a pneumatic hammer leads to higher primary stability than manual impaction. Bone mass characteristics were measured by force and distance variation of a penetrating punch, which was lowered into a plastic cup filled with bone chips. From these measurements bulk density, contact stiffness, impaction hardness and penetration resistance were calculated for different durations of impaction.

We found that the pneumatic method reached higher values of impaction hardness, contact stiffness and bulk density suggesting an increase in stability of the implant. No significant differences were found between the two different methods concerning the penetration resistance. The pneumatic method might reduce the risk of fracture in vivo, as force peaks are smaller and applied for a shorter period. Results from manual impaction showed higher variability and depend much on the experience of the surgeon. The pneumatic hammer is a suitable tool to standardise the impaction process.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 88-B, Issue 2 | Pages 168 - 172
1 Feb 2006
Mayr E de la Barrera JM Eller G Bach C Nogler M

In navigated total hip arthroplasty, the pelvis and the femur are tracked by means of rigid bodies fixed directly to the bones. Exact tracking throughout the procedure requires that the connection between the marker and bone remains stable in terms of translation and rotation. We carried out a cadaver study to compare the intra-operative stability of markers consisting of an anchoring screw with a rotational stabiliser and of pairs of pins and wires of different diameters connected with clamps. These devices were tested at different locations in the femur. Three human cadavers were placed supine on an operating table, with a reference marker positioned in the area of the greater trochanter. K-wires (3.2 mm), Steinman pins (3 and 4 mm), Apex pins (3 and 4 mm), and a standard screw were used as fixation devices. They were positioned medially in the proximal third of the femur, ventrally in the middle third and laterally in the distal portion. In six different positions of the leg, the spatial positions were recorded with a navigation system.

Compared with the standard single screw, with the exception of the 3 mm Apex pins, the two-pin systems were associated with less movement of the marker and could be inserted less invasively. With the knee flexed to 90° and the dislocated hip rotated externally until the lower leg was parallel to the table (figure-four position), all the anchoring devices showed substantial deflection of 1.5° to 2.5°. The most secure area for anchoring markers was the lateral aspect of the femur.