Abstract

The number of hip replacement procedures in the United States is expected to increase four‐fold by 2030. Younger patients, those under 65 years old, are expected to account for 53% of hip replacements in 2030, compared to 44% in 2005. As midterm review results are becoming available worldwide now, the problem that perplexes surgeons is the alteration of limb length which has been an ancillary goal of Total Hip Replacements. The lack of modularity in neck lengths and offsets in resurfacing arthroplasty clearly limits the change in limb lengths achievable for the hip. The goal of this study is to scrutinize the various parameters that affect implant seating in resurfacing arthroplasty and to determine the alteration of limb length achievable during surgery.

Highlights

  • The number of hip replacement procedures in the United States is expected to increase by four–fold by 2030 1

  • The ease of revising a failed femoral component of surface replacement arthroplasty (SRA) compared to a standard stem is a pivotal factor in decision making for the younger arthritic patient 7

  • As midterm review results for resurfacing arthroplasty are becoming available worldwide the problem that perplexes surgeons is the alteration of limb lengths during surgery, which is achieved in total hip arthroplasty (THA)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The number of hip replacement procedures in the United States is expected to increase by four–fold by 2030 1 Younger patients, those under 65 years old, are expected to account for 53% of hip replacements in 2030, compared to 44% in 2005 .2-4. Those under 65 years old, are expected to account for 53% of hip replacements in 2030, compared to 44% in 2005 .2-4 This group of patients in particular causes a dilemma for the arthroplasty surgeon as they will probably outlive the implant 5. In THA, there are various components to mix and match during trial implantations in surgery to determine the final implant, but SRA is limited by the lack of modularity and its precise component fit of the implants This lack of modularity in resurfacing arthroplasty clearly limits the change in limb lengths achievable during this procedure 9

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.