Comparison of survivorship between standard and long-stem souter-strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty

This study compared 107 cases of rheumatoid arthritis that had the long-stem humeral component of the Souter-Strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty introduced as a primary procedure with a similar group of 202 cases that had the standard component. Both groups were comparable with regard to age range...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery 2002-07, Vol.11 (4), p.373-376
Hauptverfasser: Trail, I.A., Nuttall, D., Stanley, J.K.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 376
container_issue 4
container_start_page 373
container_title Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery
container_volume 11
creator Trail, I.A.
Nuttall, D.
Stanley, J.K.
description This study compared 107 cases of rheumatoid arthritis that had the long-stem humeral component of the Souter-Strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty introduced as a primary procedure with a similar group of 202 cases that had the standard component. Both groups were comparable with regard to age range and sex ratio. Follow-up of the longer-stem component was somewhat shorter, being a mean of 4.4 years as opposed to 9.3 years. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were undertaken for both revision and radiologic loosening of components as terminal events. There was no significant difference between the cumulative survival of the standard and long-stem humeral implants when revision was the endpoint. Although survival of both implants was similar, the reasons for this were different. More specifically, for the standard humeral component, 25 out of 32 revisions were for humeral loosening. For the long stem, however, 5 out of a total of 7 revisions were due to instability; no long-stem humeral component had been revised for loosening. In addition, linking the components by way of a snap-fit component was associated with a higher rate of loosening; more specifically, 5 out of 16 cases were revised. As a result of this study, we recommend the use of a long-stem Souter-Strathclyde humeral component as a primary implant. Other crucial components for long-stem survival, however, are surgical technique and alignment of the implant. (J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2002;11:373-376)
doi_str_mv 10.1067/mse.2002.124428
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72028626</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1058274602000277</els_id><sourcerecordid>72028626</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-90f41135fe53cfe93b0c1b6b3e4ea684d6302f26a61a21dd24ffd20ba241dad23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kL9v2zAQhYWiRfOjnbsVXNpNDnmkaGksjDQpEKBLMxMUeaxZSKLKoxz4v48CG8iU6b3hu4fDV1VfBN8Irrc3I-EGOIeNAKWgfVddikZCrRvO36-dN20NW6Uvqiuif5zzTnH4WF0IEF0Djb6scJfG2eZIaWIpMFryIR5Spn2cWY_lCXFiVOzkbfZsDTak6W9NBUdGaSmY155t2bvh6JGVVOzAcOjTE7O57HOaB0vl-Kn6EOxA-Pmc19Xjz9s_u_v64ffdr92Ph9rJrSx1x4MSQjYBG-kCdrLnTvS6l6jQ6lZ5LTkE0FYLC8J7UCF44L0FJbz1IK-r76fdOaf_C1IxYySHw2AnTAuZLXBoNegVvDmBLieijMHMOY42H43g5sWsWc2aF7PmZHa9-HqeXvoR_St_VrkC386AJWeHkO3kIr1ysu1At83KdScOVxGHiNmQizg59DGjK8an-OYTz2v9lzA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>72028626</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of survivorship between standard and long-stem souter-strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Trail, I.A. ; Nuttall, D. ; Stanley, J.K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Trail, I.A. ; Nuttall, D. ; Stanley, J.K.</creatorcontrib><description>This study compared 107 cases of rheumatoid arthritis that had the long-stem humeral component of the Souter-Strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty introduced as a primary procedure with a similar group of 202 cases that had the standard component. Both groups were comparable with regard to age range and sex ratio. Follow-up of the longer-stem component was somewhat shorter, being a mean of 4.4 years as opposed to 9.3 years. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were undertaken for both revision and radiologic loosening of components as terminal events. There was no significant difference between the cumulative survival of the standard and long-stem humeral implants when revision was the endpoint. Although survival of both implants was similar, the reasons for this were different. More specifically, for the standard humeral component, 25 out of 32 revisions were for humeral loosening. For the long stem, however, 5 out of a total of 7 revisions were due to instability; no long-stem humeral component had been revised for loosening. In addition, linking the components by way of a snap-fit component was associated with a higher rate of loosening; more specifically, 5 out of 16 cases were revised. As a result of this study, we recommend the use of a long-stem Souter-Strathclyde humeral component as a primary implant. Other crucial components for long-stem survival, however, are surgical technique and alignment of the implant. (J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2002;11:373-376)</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-2746</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-6500</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1067/mse.2002.124428</identifier><identifier>PMID: 12195256</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Arthritis, Rheumatoid - surgery ; Biological and medical sciences ; Elbow Joint - surgery ; Female ; Humans ; Joint Prosthesis ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Orthopedic surgery ; Prosthesis Design ; Prosthesis Failure ; Reoperation ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2002-07, Vol.11 (4), p.373-376</ispartof><rights>2002 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees</rights><rights>2002 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-90f41135fe53cfe93b0c1b6b3e4ea684d6302f26a61a21dd24ffd20ba241dad23</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-90f41135fe53cfe93b0c1b6b3e4ea684d6302f26a61a21dd24ffd20ba241dad23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mse.2002.124428$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=13892685$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12195256$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Trail, I.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nuttall, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanley, J.K.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of survivorship between standard and long-stem souter-strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty</title><title>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</title><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><description>This study compared 107 cases of rheumatoid arthritis that had the long-stem humeral component of the Souter-Strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty introduced as a primary procedure with a similar group of 202 cases that had the standard component. Both groups were comparable with regard to age range and sex ratio. Follow-up of the longer-stem component was somewhat shorter, being a mean of 4.4 years as opposed to 9.3 years. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were undertaken for both revision and radiologic loosening of components as terminal events. There was no significant difference between the cumulative survival of the standard and long-stem humeral implants when revision was the endpoint. Although survival of both implants was similar, the reasons for this were different. More specifically, for the standard humeral component, 25 out of 32 revisions were for humeral loosening. For the long stem, however, 5 out of a total of 7 revisions were due to instability; no long-stem humeral component had been revised for loosening. In addition, linking the components by way of a snap-fit component was associated with a higher rate of loosening; more specifically, 5 out of 16 cases were revised. As a result of this study, we recommend the use of a long-stem Souter-Strathclyde humeral component as a primary implant. Other crucial components for long-stem survival, however, are surgical technique and alignment of the implant. (J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2002;11:373-376)</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - surgery</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Elbow Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Joint Prosthesis</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Orthopedic surgery</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Prosthesis Failure</subject><subject>Reoperation</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1058-2746</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2002</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kL9v2zAQhYWiRfOjnbsVXNpNDnmkaGksjDQpEKBLMxMUeaxZSKLKoxz4v48CG8iU6b3hu4fDV1VfBN8Irrc3I-EGOIeNAKWgfVddikZCrRvO36-dN20NW6Uvqiuif5zzTnH4WF0IEF0Djb6scJfG2eZIaWIpMFryIR5Spn2cWY_lCXFiVOzkbfZsDTak6W9NBUdGaSmY155t2bvh6JGVVOzAcOjTE7O57HOaB0vl-Kn6EOxA-Pmc19Xjz9s_u_v64ffdr92Ph9rJrSx1x4MSQjYBG-kCdrLnTvS6l6jQ6lZ5LTkE0FYLC8J7UCF44L0FJbz1IK-r76fdOaf_C1IxYySHw2AnTAuZLXBoNegVvDmBLieijMHMOY42H43g5sWsWc2aF7PmZHa9-HqeXvoR_St_VrkC386AJWeHkO3kIr1ysu1At83KdScOVxGHiNmQizg59DGjK8an-OYTz2v9lzA</recordid><startdate>20020701</startdate><enddate>20020701</enddate><creator>Trail, I.A.</creator><creator>Nuttall, D.</creator><creator>Stanley, J.K.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><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></search><sort><creationdate>20020701</creationdate><title>Comparison of survivorship between standard and long-stem souter-strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty</title><author>Trail, I.A. ; Nuttall, D. ; Stanley, J.K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-90f41135fe53cfe93b0c1b6b3e4ea684d6302f26a61a21dd24ffd20ba241dad23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2002</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - surgery</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Elbow Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Joint Prosthesis</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Orthopedic surgery</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Prosthesis Failure</topic><topic>Reoperation</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Trail, I.A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nuttall, D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanley, J.K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><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><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Trail, I.A.</au><au>Nuttall, D.</au><au>Stanley, J.K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of survivorship between standard and long-stem souter-strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty</atitle><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><date>2002-07-01</date><risdate>2002</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>373</spage><epage>376</epage><pages>373-376</pages><issn>1058-2746</issn><eissn>1532-6500</eissn><abstract>This study compared 107 cases of rheumatoid arthritis that had the long-stem humeral component of the Souter-Strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty introduced as a primary procedure with a similar group of 202 cases that had the standard component. Both groups were comparable with regard to age range and sex ratio. Follow-up of the longer-stem component was somewhat shorter, being a mean of 4.4 years as opposed to 9.3 years. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were undertaken for both revision and radiologic loosening of components as terminal events. There was no significant difference between the cumulative survival of the standard and long-stem humeral implants when revision was the endpoint. Although survival of both implants was similar, the reasons for this were different. More specifically, for the standard humeral component, 25 out of 32 revisions were for humeral loosening. For the long stem, however, 5 out of a total of 7 revisions were due to instability; no long-stem humeral component had been revised for loosening. In addition, linking the components by way of a snap-fit component was associated with a higher rate of loosening; more specifically, 5 out of 16 cases were revised. As a result of this study, we recommend the use of a long-stem Souter-Strathclyde humeral component as a primary implant. Other crucial components for long-stem survival, however, are surgical technique and alignment of the implant. (J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2002;11:373-376)</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>12195256</pmid><doi>10.1067/mse.2002.124428</doi><tpages>4</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1058-2746
ispartof Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2002-07, Vol.11 (4), p.373-376
issn 1058-2746
1532-6500
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_72028626
source MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Arthritis, Rheumatoid - surgery
Biological and medical sciences
Elbow Joint - surgery
Female
Humans
Joint Prosthesis
Male
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Orthopedic surgery
Prosthesis Design
Prosthesis Failure
Reoperation
Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases
Treatment Outcome
title Comparison of survivorship between standard and long-stem souter-strathclyde total elbow arthroplasty
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T09%3A58%3A32IST&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=Comparison%20of%20survivorship%20between%20standard%20and%20long-stem%20souter-strathclyde%20total%20elbow%20arthroplasty&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20shoulder%20and%20elbow%20surgery&rft.au=Trail,%20I.A.&rft.date=2002-07-01&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=373&rft.epage=376&rft.pages=373-376&rft.issn=1058-2746&rft.eissn=1532-6500&rft_id=info:doi/10.1067/mse.2002.124428&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E72028626%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=72028626&rft_id=info:pmid/12195256&rft_els_id=S1058274602000277&rfr_iscdi=true