Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 87-B, Issue 5 | Pages 593 - 603
1 May 2005
Harvey A Thomas NP Amis AA


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 93-B, Issue 4 | Pages 427 - 434
1 Apr 2011
Griffin M Iqbal SA Bayat A

Failure of bone repair is a challenging problem in the management of fractures. There is a limited supply of autologous bone grafts for treating nonunions, with associated morbidity after harvesting. There is need for a better source of cells for repair. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) hold promise for healing of bone because of their capacity to differentiate into osteoblasts and their availability from a wide variety of sources. Our review aims to evaluate the available clinical evidence and recent progress in strategies which attempt to use autologous and heterologous MSCs in clinical practice, including genetically-modified MSCs and those grown on scaffolds. We have compared various procedures for isolating and expanding a sufficient number of MSCs for use in a clinical setting.

There are now a number of clinical studies which have shown that implantation of MSCs is an effective, safe and durable method for aiding the repair and regeneration of bone.


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 92-B, Issue 4 | Pages 469 - 476
1 Apr 2010
Shimmin AJ Walter WL Esposito C

The survivorship of contemporary resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip using metal-on-metal bearings is better than that of first generation designs, but short-term failures still occur. The most common reasons for failure are fracture of the femoral neck, loosening of the component, osteonecrosis of the femoral head, reaction to metal debris and malpositioning of the component. In 2008 the Australian National Joint Registry reported an inverse relationship between the size of the head component and the risk of revision in resurfacing hip arthroplasty. Hips with a femoral component size of ≤ 44 mm have a fivefold increased risk of revision than those with femoral components of ≥ 55 mm irrespective of gender. We have reviewed the literature to explore this observation and to identify possible reasons including the design of the implant, loading of the femoral neck, the orientation of the component, the production of wear debris and the effects of metal ions, penetration of cement and vascularity of the femoral head. Our conclusion is that although multifactorial, the most important contributors to failure in resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip are likely to be the design and geometry of the component and the orientation of the acetabular component.