Long-Term Comparison of Porous Versus Hydroxyapatite Coated Sleeve of a Modular Cementless Femoral Stem (SROM) in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty
Abstract Hydroxyapatite (HA) is commonly used on femoral stems to assist in osseous integration but there is limited evidence of the benefit it provides. We report a prospective comparison of 117 and 102 patients receiving either porous or HA coated sleeves respectively. Patients were evaluated at m...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Journal of arthroplasty 2015-10, Vol.30 (10), p.1777-1780 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1780 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 10 |
| container_start_page | 1777 |
| container_title | The Journal of arthroplasty |
| container_volume | 30 |
| creator | Tudor, Francois S., MBBS, MSc, FRCS (Tr & Orth) Donaldson, James R., MBBS, FRCS (Tr & Orth) Rodriguez-Elizalde, Sebastian R., MB, FRCSC Cameron, Hugh U., MB, ChB, FRCSC |
| description | Abstract Hydroxyapatite (HA) is commonly used on femoral stems to assist in osseous integration but there is limited evidence of the benefit it provides. We report a prospective comparison of 117 and 102 patients receiving either porous or HA coated sleeves respectively. Patients were evaluated at mean of 12.5 years in the porous and 13.7 years in the HA groups. The mean Harris Hip Score was 94.7 and 94.5 in the porous and HA groups respectively. One porous and 2 HA stems required revision. This study demonstrates that there is no long-term advantage to using an HA coating on the sleeve of this modular stem and confirms excellent long-term results for the SROM stem in a primary arthroplasty setting. Level of evidence: II (prospective cohort study). |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.arth.2015.04.031 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1762094575</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0883540315003216</els_id><sourcerecordid>1732818227</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-9601bb0eb0167062c27bf4cf61683a7b80ebf13c876121a3255e04cfba93fc933</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNks1u1DAUhS0EokPhBVggL8siwT9xnJEQUjWiDNJUrZiBreU4N-AhiYPtVOQteGQcTWHBAnV1F-e7R7rnXIReUpJTQss3x1z7-C1nhIqcFDnh9BFaUcFZVhWkfIxWpKp4JgrCz9CzEI6EUCpE8RSdMbGWCeQr9Gvnhq_ZAXyPN64ftbfBDdi1-NZ5NwX8BXxIYzs33v2c9aijjZBQHaHB-w7gDhZa42vXTJ32eAM9DLGDEPAV9M7rDu8j9Phi_-nm-jW2A771ttd-xgcXk7i1I75MZ3g3djrE-Tl60uouwIv7eY4-X70_bLbZ7ubDx83lLjOikDFbl4TWNYE6BSFJyQyTdVuYtqRlxbWsqyS1lJtKlpRRzZkQQJJe6zVvzZrzc3Rx8h29-zFBiKq3wUDX6QHS4YrKkpF1IaR4AMpZRSvG5ANQKsoUvmQJZSfUeBeCh1aNp2AUJWrpVx3V0q9a-lWkUKnftPTq3n-qe2j-rvwpNAFvTwCk7O4seBWMhcFAYz2YqBpn_-__7p9109nBGt19hxnC0U1-SK0oqgJTRO2XD1sejApCOKMl_w2U88sd</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1715659772</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Long-Term Comparison of Porous Versus Hydroxyapatite Coated Sleeve of a Modular Cementless Femoral Stem (SROM) in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Tudor, Francois S., MBBS, MSc, FRCS (Tr & Orth) ; Donaldson, James R., MBBS, FRCS (Tr & Orth) ; Rodriguez-Elizalde, Sebastian R., MB, FRCSC ; Cameron, Hugh U., MB, ChB, FRCSC</creator><creatorcontrib>Tudor, Francois S., MBBS, MSc, FRCS (Tr & Orth) ; Donaldson, James R., MBBS, FRCS (Tr & Orth) ; Rodriguez-Elizalde, Sebastian R., MB, FRCSC ; Cameron, Hugh U., MB, ChB, FRCSC</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Hydroxyapatite (HA) is commonly used on femoral stems to assist in osseous integration but there is limited evidence of the benefit it provides. We report a prospective comparison of 117 and 102 patients receiving either porous or HA coated sleeves respectively. Patients were evaluated at mean of 12.5 years in the porous and 13.7 years in the HA groups. The mean Harris Hip Score was 94.7 and 94.5 in the porous and HA groups respectively. One porous and 2 HA stems required revision. This study demonstrates that there is no long-term advantage to using an HA coating on the sleeve of this modular stem and confirms excellent long-term results for the SROM stem in a primary arthroplasty setting. Level of evidence: II (prospective cohort study).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0883-5403</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-8406</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.04.031</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25971533</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Aged ; arthroplasty ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - instrumentation ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods ; Biomedical materials ; Cements ; Coated Materials, Biocompatible - chemistry ; Coating ; Durapatite - chemistry ; Female ; Femur - surgery ; hip ; Hip Prosthesis ; Humans ; Hydroxyapatite ; Kaplan-Meier Estimate ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Modular ; Orthopedics ; Patients ; Porosity ; Prospective Studies ; Prosthesis Design ; Prosthesis Failure ; Reoperation - instrumentation ; Sleeves ; Surgical implants ; survivorship ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome ; uncemented</subject><ispartof>The Journal of arthroplasty, 2015-10, Vol.30 (10), p.1777-1780</ispartof><rights>2015</rights><rights>Crown Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-9601bb0eb0167062c27bf4cf61683a7b80ebf13c876121a3255e04cfba93fc933</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-9601bb0eb0167062c27bf4cf61683a7b80ebf13c876121a3255e04cfba93fc933</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.04.031$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,3537,27905,27906,45976</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25971533$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tudor, Francois S., MBBS, MSc, FRCS (Tr & Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donaldson, James R., MBBS, FRCS (Tr & Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodriguez-Elizalde, Sebastian R., MB, FRCSC</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cameron, Hugh U., MB, ChB, FRCSC</creatorcontrib><title>Long-Term Comparison of Porous Versus Hydroxyapatite Coated Sleeve of a Modular Cementless Femoral Stem (SROM) in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty</title><title>The Journal of arthroplasty</title><addtitle>J Arthroplasty</addtitle><description>Abstract Hydroxyapatite (HA) is commonly used on femoral stems to assist in osseous integration but there is limited evidence of the benefit it provides. We report a prospective comparison of 117 and 102 patients receiving either porous or HA coated sleeves respectively. Patients were evaluated at mean of 12.5 years in the porous and 13.7 years in the HA groups. The mean Harris Hip Score was 94.7 and 94.5 in the porous and HA groups respectively. One porous and 2 HA stems required revision. This study demonstrates that there is no long-term advantage to using an HA coating on the sleeve of this modular stem and confirms excellent long-term results for the SROM stem in a primary arthroplasty setting. Level of evidence: II (prospective cohort study).</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>arthroplasty</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - instrumentation</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods</subject><subject>Biomedical materials</subject><subject>Cements</subject><subject>Coated Materials, Biocompatible - chemistry</subject><subject>Coating</subject><subject>Durapatite - chemistry</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Femur - surgery</subject><subject>hip</subject><subject>Hip Prosthesis</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Hydroxyapatite</subject><subject>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Modular</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Porosity</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Prosthesis Failure</subject><subject>Reoperation - instrumentation</subject><subject>Sleeves</subject><subject>Surgical implants</subject><subject>survivorship</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><subject>uncemented</subject><issn>0883-5403</issn><issn>1532-8406</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNks1u1DAUhS0EokPhBVggL8siwT9xnJEQUjWiDNJUrZiBreU4N-AhiYPtVOQteGQcTWHBAnV1F-e7R7rnXIReUpJTQss3x1z7-C1nhIqcFDnh9BFaUcFZVhWkfIxWpKp4JgrCz9CzEI6EUCpE8RSdMbGWCeQr9Gvnhq_ZAXyPN64ftbfBDdi1-NZ5NwX8BXxIYzs33v2c9aijjZBQHaHB-w7gDhZa42vXTJ32eAM9DLGDEPAV9M7rDu8j9Phi_-nm-jW2A771ttd-xgcXk7i1I75MZ3g3djrE-Tl60uouwIv7eY4-X70_bLbZ7ubDx83lLjOikDFbl4TWNYE6BSFJyQyTdVuYtqRlxbWsqyS1lJtKlpRRzZkQQJJe6zVvzZrzc3Rx8h29-zFBiKq3wUDX6QHS4YrKkpF1IaR4AMpZRSvG5ANQKsoUvmQJZSfUeBeCh1aNp2AUJWrpVx3V0q9a-lWkUKnftPTq3n-qe2j-rvwpNAFvTwCk7O4seBWMhcFAYz2YqBpn_-__7p9109nBGt19hxnC0U1-SK0oqgJTRO2XD1sejApCOKMl_w2U88sd</recordid><startdate>20151001</startdate><enddate>20151001</enddate><creator>Tudor, Francois S., MBBS, MSc, FRCS (Tr & Orth)</creator><creator>Donaldson, James R., MBBS, FRCS (Tr & Orth)</creator><creator>Rodriguez-Elizalde, Sebastian R., MB, FRCSC</creator><creator>Cameron, Hugh U., MB, ChB, FRCSC</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JG9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20151001</creationdate><title>Long-Term Comparison of Porous Versus Hydroxyapatite Coated Sleeve of a Modular Cementless Femoral Stem (SROM) in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty</title><author>Tudor, Francois S., MBBS, MSc, FRCS (Tr & Orth) ; Donaldson, James R., MBBS, FRCS (Tr & Orth) ; Rodriguez-Elizalde, Sebastian R., MB, FRCSC ; Cameron, Hugh U., MB, ChB, FRCSC</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c547t-9601bb0eb0167062c27bf4cf61683a7b80ebf13c876121a3255e04cfba93fc933</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>arthroplasty</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - instrumentation</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods</topic><topic>Biomedical materials</topic><topic>Cements</topic><topic>Coated Materials, Biocompatible - chemistry</topic><topic>Coating</topic><topic>Durapatite - chemistry</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Femur - surgery</topic><topic>hip</topic><topic>Hip Prosthesis</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Hydroxyapatite</topic><topic>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Modular</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Porosity</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Prosthesis Failure</topic><topic>Reoperation - instrumentation</topic><topic>Sleeves</topic><topic>Surgical implants</topic><topic>survivorship</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><topic>uncemented</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tudor, Francois S., MBBS, MSc, FRCS (Tr & Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Donaldson, James R., MBBS, FRCS (Tr & Orth)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rodriguez-Elizalde, Sebastian R., MB, FRCSC</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cameron, Hugh U., MB, ChB, FRCSC</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><jtitle>The Journal of arthroplasty</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tudor, Francois S., MBBS, MSc, FRCS (Tr & Orth)</au><au>Donaldson, James R., MBBS, FRCS (Tr & Orth)</au><au>Rodriguez-Elizalde, Sebastian R., MB, FRCSC</au><au>Cameron, Hugh U., MB, ChB, FRCSC</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Long-Term Comparison of Porous Versus Hydroxyapatite Coated Sleeve of a Modular Cementless Femoral Stem (SROM) in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of arthroplasty</jtitle><addtitle>J Arthroplasty</addtitle><date>2015-10-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1777</spage><epage>1780</epage><pages>1777-1780</pages><issn>0883-5403</issn><eissn>1532-8406</eissn><abstract>Abstract Hydroxyapatite (HA) is commonly used on femoral stems to assist in osseous integration but there is limited evidence of the benefit it provides. We report a prospective comparison of 117 and 102 patients receiving either porous or HA coated sleeves respectively. Patients were evaluated at mean of 12.5 years in the porous and 13.7 years in the HA groups. The mean Harris Hip Score was 94.7 and 94.5 in the porous and HA groups respectively. One porous and 2 HA stems required revision. This study demonstrates that there is no long-term advantage to using an HA coating on the sleeve of this modular stem and confirms excellent long-term results for the SROM stem in a primary arthroplasty setting. Level of evidence: II (prospective cohort study).</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>25971533</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.arth.2015.04.031</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0883-5403 |
| ispartof | The Journal of arthroplasty, 2015-10, Vol.30 (10), p.1777-1780 |
| issn | 0883-5403 1532-8406 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1762094575 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Aged arthroplasty Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - instrumentation Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods Biomedical materials Cements Coated Materials, Biocompatible - chemistry Coating Durapatite - chemistry Female Femur - surgery hip Hip Prosthesis Humans Hydroxyapatite Kaplan-Meier Estimate Male Middle Aged Modular Orthopedics Patients Porosity Prospective Studies Prosthesis Design Prosthesis Failure Reoperation - instrumentation Sleeves Surgical implants survivorship Time Factors Treatment Outcome uncemented |
| title | Long-Term Comparison of Porous Versus Hydroxyapatite Coated Sleeve of a Modular Cementless Femoral Stem (SROM) in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-20T11%3A14%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Long-Term%20Comparison%20of%20Porous%20Versus%20Hydroxyapatite%20Coated%20Sleeve%20of%20a%20Modular%20Cementless%20Femoral%20Stem%20(SROM)%20in%20Primary%20Total%20Hip%20Arthroplasty&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20arthroplasty&rft.au=Tudor,%20Francois%20S.,%20MBBS,%20MSc,%20FRCS%20(Tr%20&%20Orth)&rft.date=2015-10-01&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1777&rft.epage=1780&rft.pages=1777-1780&rft.issn=0883-5403&rft.eissn=1532-8406&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.arth.2015.04.031&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1732818227%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1715659772&rft_id=info:pmid/25971533&rft_els_id=S0883540315003216&rfr_iscdi=true |