Comparison of the 5-Year Outcomes Between Standard and Short Fit-and-Fill Stems in Japanese Populations.
Cementless stem
Fit-and-fill stems
Japanese Orthopedic Association score
Stress shielding
Total hip arthroplasty
Journal
Arthroplasty today
ISSN: 2352-3441
Titre abrégé: Arthroplast Today
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101681808
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2022
Jun 2022
Historique:
received:
01
12
2021
revised:
12
03
2022
accepted:
25
03
2022
entrez:
1
7
2022
pubmed:
2
7
2022
medline:
2
7
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Fit-and-fill stems are known to have excellent outcomes; however, severe stress shielding has been reported in Japanese populations. Short fit-and-fill stems were modified for Asians; however, there have been no previous reports of its outcome. In this study, we compared the 5-year (mean 68-month) outcomes of 2 fit-and-fill stems with different lengths (standard or short). We reviewed 100 total hip arthroplasties in each standard- or short-stem group. Radiographs were evaluated for femoral morphology, stress shielding, bone remodeling, and fixation. Clinical evaluation was performed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores. There was no difference in the degree of stress shielding between the 2 groups. Significant differences were observed in radiolucent lines in zone 4 ( The outcomes of both standard and short fit-and-fill stems were favorable. There were no significant differences in the stress shielding or JOA scores. Although there were a few differences in bone remodeling and factors affecting stress shielding, stem length reduction has been achieved without adverse effects with the Japanese femur.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Fit-and-fill stems are known to have excellent outcomes; however, severe stress shielding has been reported in Japanese populations. Short fit-and-fill stems were modified for Asians; however, there have been no previous reports of its outcome. In this study, we compared the 5-year (mean 68-month) outcomes of 2 fit-and-fill stems with different lengths (standard or short).
Material and methods
UNASSIGNED
We reviewed 100 total hip arthroplasties in each standard- or short-stem group. Radiographs were evaluated for femoral morphology, stress shielding, bone remodeling, and fixation. Clinical evaluation was performed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores.
Results
UNASSIGNED
There was no difference in the degree of stress shielding between the 2 groups. Significant differences were observed in radiolucent lines in zone 4 (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
The outcomes of both standard and short fit-and-fill stems were favorable. There were no significant differences in the stress shielding or JOA scores. Although there were a few differences in bone remodeling and factors affecting stress shielding, stem length reduction has been achieved without adverse effects with the Japanese femur.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35774886
doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2022.03.023
pii: S2352-3441(22)00093-0
pmc: PMC9237240
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
108-114Informations de copyright
© 2022 The Authors.
Références
Bone. 1993 May-Jun;14(3):231-42
pubmed: 8363862
Bone. 2016 Oct;91:180-5
pubmed: 27457689
Int Orthop. 2019 Sep;43(9):2039-2046
pubmed: 30232526
Bone Joint J. 2017 Jan;99-B(1):29-36
pubmed: 28053254
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990 Aug;(257):107-28
pubmed: 2199114
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008 Jul;90(7):1524-30
pubmed: 18594102
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989 Oct;(247):138-47
pubmed: 2791383
J Arthroplasty. 2017 Feb;32(2):601-609
pubmed: 27597431
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1987 Jan;69(1):45-55
pubmed: 3818732
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006 Dec;453:75-80
pubmed: 17016216
J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2016 Dec;24(3):317-322
pubmed: 28031498
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000 Oct;82(10):1414-20
pubmed: 11057469
J Arthroplasty. 2019 Dec;34(12):2992-2998
pubmed: 31447254
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979 Jun;(141):17-27
pubmed: 477100
J Orthop Sci. 2008 Nov;13(6):498-503
pubmed: 19089536
J Arthroplasty. 2013 Dec;28(10):1736-40
pubmed: 23540537
SICOT J. 2016 Jan 22;2:2
pubmed: 27163091
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Oct;(235):148-65
pubmed: 3416522
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Jan;467(1):146-54
pubmed: 18975042
J Arthroplasty. 1988;3(2):117-21
pubmed: 3397741
J Arthroplasty. 2007 Feb;22(2):195-203
pubmed: 17275633