Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis
Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revis...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Autor*in: |
Meneghini, R Michael [verfasserIn] |
---|
Format: |
E-Artikel |
---|---|
Sprache: |
Englisch |
Erschienen: |
2006 |
---|
Schlagwörter: |
---|
Anmerkung: |
© Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 |
---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research - London : Biomed Central, 2006, 1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt. |
---|---|
Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:1 ; year:2006 ; number:1 ; day:02 ; month:10 |
Links: |
---|
DOI / URN: |
10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 |
---|
Katalog-ID: |
SPR029951313 |
---|
LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
001 | SPR029951313 | ||
003 | DE-627 | ||
005 | 20230519184919.0 | ||
007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
008 | 201007s2006 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
024 | 7 | |a 10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 |2 doi | |
035 | |a (DE-627)SPR029951313 | ||
035 | |a (SPR)1749-799X-1-5-e | ||
040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
041 | |a eng | ||
100 | 1 | |a Meneghini, R Michael |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
245 | 1 | 0 | |a Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis |
264 | 1 | |c 2006 | |
336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
500 | |a © Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 | ||
520 | |a Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery. | ||
650 | 4 | |a Femoral Component |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Stem Diameter |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Rotational Stability |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Stem Size |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
650 | 4 | |a Torque Resistance |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
700 | 1 | |a Hallab, Nadim J |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Berger, Richard A |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Jacobs, Joshua J |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Paprosky, Wayne G |4 aut | |
700 | 1 | |a Rosenberg, Aaron G |4 aut | |
773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research |d London : Biomed Central, 2006 |g 1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt. |w (DE-627)518346145 |w (DE-600)2252548-8 |x 1749-799X |7 nnns |
773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:1 |g year:2006 |g number:1 |g day:02 |g month:10 |
856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_11 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_20 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_22 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_23 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_24 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_31 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_39 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_40 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_60 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_62 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_63 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_65 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_69 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_73 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_74 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_95 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_105 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_110 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_151 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_161 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_170 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_206 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_213 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_230 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_285 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_293 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_602 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2003 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2005 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2009 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2011 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2014 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2055 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_2111 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4012 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4037 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4112 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4125 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4126 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4249 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4305 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4306 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4307 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4313 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4322 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4323 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4324 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4325 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4338 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4367 | ||
912 | |a GBV_ILN_4700 | ||
951 | |a AR | ||
952 | |d 1 |j 2006 |e 1 |b 02 |c 10 |
author_variant |
r m m rm rmm n j h nj njh r a b ra rab j j j jj jjj w g p wg wgp a g r ag agr |
---|---|
matchkey_str |
article:1749799X:2006----::tmimtrnrttoasaiiyneiinoahprhols |
hierarchy_sort_str |
2006 |
publishDate |
2006 |
allfields |
10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 doi (DE-627)SPR029951313 (SPR)1749-799X-1-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Meneghini, R Michael verfasserin aut Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery. Femoral Component (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Diameter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rotational Stability (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Size (dpeaa)DE-He213 Torque Resistance (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hallab, Nadim J aut Berger, Richard A aut Jacobs, Joshua J aut Paprosky, Wayne G aut Rosenberg, Aaron G aut Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:02 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2006 1 02 10 |
spelling |
10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 doi (DE-627)SPR029951313 (SPR)1749-799X-1-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Meneghini, R Michael verfasserin aut Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery. Femoral Component (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Diameter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rotational Stability (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Size (dpeaa)DE-He213 Torque Resistance (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hallab, Nadim J aut Berger, Richard A aut Jacobs, Joshua J aut Paprosky, Wayne G aut Rosenberg, Aaron G aut Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:02 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2006 1 02 10 |
allfields_unstemmed |
10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 doi (DE-627)SPR029951313 (SPR)1749-799X-1-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Meneghini, R Michael verfasserin aut Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery. Femoral Component (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Diameter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rotational Stability (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Size (dpeaa)DE-He213 Torque Resistance (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hallab, Nadim J aut Berger, Richard A aut Jacobs, Joshua J aut Paprosky, Wayne G aut Rosenberg, Aaron G aut Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:02 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2006 1 02 10 |
allfieldsGer |
10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 doi (DE-627)SPR029951313 (SPR)1749-799X-1-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Meneghini, R Michael verfasserin aut Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery. Femoral Component (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Diameter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rotational Stability (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Size (dpeaa)DE-He213 Torque Resistance (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hallab, Nadim J aut Berger, Richard A aut Jacobs, Joshua J aut Paprosky, Wayne G aut Rosenberg, Aaron G aut Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:02 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2006 1 02 10 |
allfieldsSound |
10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 doi (DE-627)SPR029951313 (SPR)1749-799X-1-5-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Meneghini, R Michael verfasserin aut Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis 2006 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery. Femoral Component (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Diameter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rotational Stability (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Size (dpeaa)DE-He213 Torque Resistance (dpeaa)DE-He213 Hallab, Nadim J aut Berger, Richard A aut Jacobs, Joshua J aut Paprosky, Wayne G aut Rosenberg, Aaron G aut Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research London : Biomed Central, 2006 1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt. (DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 1749-799X nnns volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:02 month:10 https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 kostenfrei Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 1 2006 1 02 10 |
language |
English |
source |
Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research 1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt. volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:02 month:10 |
sourceStr |
Enthalten in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research 1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt. volume:1 year:2006 number:1 day:02 month:10 |
format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
institution |
findex.gbv.de |
topic_facet |
Femoral Component Stem Diameter Rotational Stability Stem Size Torque Resistance |
isfreeaccess_bool |
true |
container_title |
Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research |
authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Meneghini, R Michael @@aut@@ Hallab, Nadim J @@aut@@ Berger, Richard A @@aut@@ Jacobs, Joshua J @@aut@@ Paprosky, Wayne G @@aut@@ Rosenberg, Aaron G @@aut@@ |
publishDateDaySort_date |
2006-10-02T00:00:00Z |
hierarchy_top_id |
518346145 |
id |
SPR029951313 |
language_de |
englisch |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR029951313</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519184919.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2006 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1749-799X-1-5</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR029951313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)1749-799X-1-5-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Meneghini, R Michael</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Femoral Component</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Stem Diameter</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rotational Stability</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Stem Size</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Torque Resistance</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hallab, Nadim J</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Berger, Richard A</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jacobs, Joshua J</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Paprosky, Wayne G</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rosenberg, Aaron G</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research</subfield><subfield code="d">London : Biomed Central, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)518346145</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2252548-8</subfield><subfield code="x">1749-799X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2006</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:02</subfield><subfield code="g">month:10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-1-5</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2006</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">02</subfield><subfield code="c">10</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
author |
Meneghini, R Michael |
spellingShingle |
Meneghini, R Michael misc Femoral Component misc Stem Diameter misc Rotational Stability misc Stem Size misc Torque Resistance Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis |
authorStr |
Meneghini, R Michael |
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)518346145 |
format |
electronic Article |
delete_txt_mv |
keep |
author_role |
aut aut aut aut aut aut |
collection |
springer |
remote_str |
true |
illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
issn |
1749-799X |
topic_title |
Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis Femoral Component (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Diameter (dpeaa)DE-He213 Rotational Stability (dpeaa)DE-He213 Stem Size (dpeaa)DE-He213 Torque Resistance (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
topic |
misc Femoral Component misc Stem Diameter misc Rotational Stability misc Stem Size misc Torque Resistance |
topic_unstemmed |
misc Femoral Component misc Stem Diameter misc Rotational Stability misc Stem Size misc Torque Resistance |
topic_browse |
misc Femoral Component misc Stem Diameter misc Rotational Stability misc Stem Size misc Torque Resistance |
format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research |
hierarchy_parent_id |
518346145 |
hierarchy_top_title |
Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research |
isfreeaccess_txt |
true |
familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)518346145 (DE-600)2252548-8 |
title |
Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis |
ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR029951313 (SPR)1749-799X-1-5-e |
title_full |
Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis |
author_sort |
Meneghini, R Michael |
journal |
Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research |
journalStr |
Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research |
lang_code |
eng |
isOA_bool |
true |
recordtype |
marc |
publishDateSort |
2006 |
contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
author_browse |
Meneghini, R Michael Hallab, Nadim J Berger, Richard A Jacobs, Joshua J Paprosky, Wayne G Rosenberg, Aaron G |
container_volume |
1 |
format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
author-letter |
Meneghini, R Michael |
doi_str_mv |
10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 |
title_sort |
stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis |
title_auth |
Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis |
abstract |
Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery. © Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 |
abstractGer |
Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery. © Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 |
abstract_unstemmed |
Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery. © Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006 |
collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 |
container_issue |
1 |
title_short |
Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis |
url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 |
remote_bool |
true |
author2 |
Hallab, Nadim J Berger, Richard A Jacobs, Joshua J Paprosky, Wayne G Rosenberg, Aaron G |
author2Str |
Hallab, Nadim J Berger, Richard A Jacobs, Joshua J Paprosky, Wayne G Rosenberg, Aaron G |
ppnlink |
518346145 |
mediatype_str_mv |
c |
isOA_txt |
true |
hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
doi_str |
10.1186/1749-799X-1-5 |
up_date |
2024-07-04T02:48:02.763Z |
_version_ |
1803614979636592640 |
fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR029951313</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230519184919.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201007s2006 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/1749-799X-1-5</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR029951313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)1749-799X-1-5-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Meneghini, R Michael</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Meneghini et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2006</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background Proximal femoral bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty often requires bypassing the deficient metaphyseal bone to obtain distal fixation. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of stem diameter and length of diaphyseal contact in achieving rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods Twenty-four cadaveric femoral specimens were implanted with a fully porous-coated stem. Two different diameters were tested and the stems were implanted at multiple contact lengths without proximal bone support. Each specimen underwent torsional testing to failure and rotational micromotion was measured at the implant-bone interface. Results The larger stem diameter demonstrated a greater torsional stability for a given length of cortical contact (p ≤ 0.05). Decreasing length of diaphyseal contact length was associated with less torsional stability. Torsional resistance was inconsistent at 2 cm of depth. Conclusion Larger stem diameters frequently used in revisions may be associated with less diaphyseal contact length to achieve equivalent rotational stability compared to smaller diameter stems. Furthermore, a minimum of 3 cm or 4 cm of diaphyseal contact with a porous-coated stem should be achieved in proximal femoral bone deficiency and will likely be dependent on the stem diameter utilized at the time of surgery.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Femoral Component</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Stem Diameter</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Rotational Stability</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Stem Size</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Torque Resistance</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hallab, Nadim J</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Berger, Richard A</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Jacobs, Joshua J</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Paprosky, Wayne G</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rosenberg, Aaron G</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research</subfield><subfield code="d">London : Biomed Central, 2006</subfield><subfield code="g">1(2006), 1 vom: 02. Okt.</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)518346145</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2252548-8</subfield><subfield code="x">1749-799X</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:1</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2006</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">day:02</subfield><subfield code="g">month:10</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-1-5</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">1</subfield><subfield code="j">2006</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="b">02</subfield><subfield code="c">10</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
score |
7.3991575 |