Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 4 of 4
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 101-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1280 - 1284
1 Oct 2019
Kang JR Logli AL Tagliero AJ Sperling JW

Aims

A number of methods have been described to remove a well-fixed humeral implant as part of revision shoulder arthroplasty. These include the use of cortical windows and humeral osteotomies. The router bit extraction technique uses a high-speed router bit to disrupt the bone-implant interface. The implant is then struck in a retrograde fashion with a square-tip impactor and mallet. The purpose of this study was to determine the characteristics and frequency of the different techniques needed for the removal of a well-fixed humeral stem in revision shoulder arthroplasty.

Patients and Methods

Between 2010 and 2018, 288 revision shoulder arthroplasty procedures requiring removal of a well-fixed humeral component were carried out at a tertiary referral centre by a single surgeon. The patient demographics, indications for surgery, and method of extraction were collected.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 1 | Pages 65 - 74
1 Jan 2016
Phadnis J Huang T Watts A Krishnan J Bain GI

Aims

To date, there is insufficient evidence available to compare the outcome of cemented and uncemented fixation of the humeral stem in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA).

Methods

A systemic review comprising 41 clinical studies was performed to compare the functional outcome and rate of complications of cemented and uncemented stems in RSA. These included 1455 cemented and 329 uncemented shoulders. The clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar.

Variables were compared using pooled frequency-weighted means and relative risk ratios (RR).


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 7 | Pages 976 - 983
1 Jul 2016
Streubel PN Simone JP Morrey BF Sanchez-Sotelo J Morrey ME

Aims

We describe the use of a protocol of irrigation and debridement (I& D) with retention of the implant for the treatment of periprosthetic infection of a total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). This may be an attractive alternative to staged re-implantation.

Patients and Methods

Between 1990 and 2010, 23 consecutive patients were treated in this way. Three were lost to follow-up leaving 20 patients (21 TEAs) in the study. There were six men and 14 women. Their mean age was 58 years (23 to 76). The protocol involved: component unlinking, irrigation and debridement (I& D), and the introduction of antibiotic laden cement beads; organism-specific intravenous antibiotics; repeat I& D and re-linkage of the implant if appropriate; long-term oral antibiotic therapy.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 96-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1359 - 1365
1 Oct 2014
Large R Tambe A Cresswell T Espag M Clark DI

Medium-term results of the Discovery elbow replacement are presented. We reviewed 51 consecutive primary Discovery total elbow replacements (TERs) implanted in 48 patients. The mean age of the patients was 69.2 years (49 to 92), there were 19 males and 32 females (37%:63%) The mean follow-up was 40.6 months (24 to 69). A total of six patients were lost to follow-up. Statistically significant improvements in range movement and Oxford Elbow Score were found (p < 0.001). Radiolucent lines were much more common in, and aseptic loosening was exclusive to, the humeral component. Kaplan–Meier survivorship at five years was 92.2% (95% CI 74.5% to 96.4%) for aseptic loosening. In four TERs, periprosthetic infection occurred resulting in failure. A statistically significant association between infection and increased BMI was found (p = 0.0268). Triceps failure was more frequent after the Mayo surgical approach and TER performed after previous trauma surgery. No failures of the implant were noted.

Our comparison shows that the Discovery has early clinical results that are similar to other semi-constrained TERs. We found continued radiological surveillance with particular focus on humeral lucency is warranted and has not previously been reported. Despite advances in the design of total elbow replacement prostheses, rates of complication remain high.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1359–65