12 research outputs found
Association between infection with Helicobacter pylori, Chlamydia pneumoniae and the risk of ischemic stroke subtypes: Results from a population-based case-control study.
Minimally invasive treatment of depression fractures of the tibial plateau using balloon repositioning and tibioplasty
Long-term results with the Atlas IIIp elastic cementless acetabular component in total hip replacement
Purpose
Modular cementless elastic acetabular systems have advantages over cemented and hard shell cementless acetabular systems. There are few reports on the medium-term and long-term follow up of this particular type of implant. This study describes our experience with the Atlas IIIp modular acetabular system, which is a thin shell cementless elastic acetabular implant for total hip replacement commercialized under this name in many countries.
Methods
We prospectively followed 244 patients treated with Atlas IIIp acetabular system between 2001 and 2004. Minimum ten year follow up was available for 148 hips (139 patients) from the original cohort of 263 hips (244 patients). One hundred five patients had died from unrelated causes and were excluded from the results. Post-operative and follow up radiographs of patients were assessed; and Harris hip scores were used as clinical outcome. Revision for any reason was defined as the end point for survivorship analysis.
Results
The mean pre-operative Harris hip score was 48 (S.D. 16) and the average post-operative score was 82 (S.D. 12). The mean follow up in our series was 11.5 years, ranging from ten to 13.5 years. Thirteen hips required further surgery in our cohort; of which ten cases required cup revision. The 13-years cumulative implant survival was 91.2 % and the risk of implant revision was 8.8 % at 13 years in 148 hips (139 patients). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed the implant survival rate of 95.2 % at ten years for revision for any reason and 99.4 % for aseptic loosening.
Conclusions
Our clinical experience with this acetabular cup suggests good long-term survival rates that are similar to other cups on the market. The clinical experience in this study shows long-term survival rates that are consistent, acceptable and good results achieved with a low revision rate
Customized implants for acetabular Paprosky III defects may be positioned with high accuracy in revision hip arthroplasty
Effects of intravenous iloprost therapy in patients with bone marrow oedema of the foot and ankle
Transitioning the total hip arthroplasty technique from posterior approach in lateral position to direct anterior approach in supine position—risk factors for acetabular malpositioning and the learning curve
Burnout and its Influencing Factors among Primary Health Care Providers in the North East of Iran
Semuloparin for prevention of venous thromboembolism after major orthopedic surgery: Results from three randomized clinical trials, SAVE-HIP1, SAVE-HIP2 and SAVE-KNEE
Background: Semuloparin is a novel ultra-low-molecular-weight heparin under development for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention in patients at increased risk, such as surgical and cancer patients. Objectives: Three Phase III studies compared semuloparin and enoxaparin after major orthopedic surgery: elective knee replacement (SAVE-KNEE), elective hip replacement (SAVE-HIP1) and hip fracture surgery (SAVE-HIP2). Patients/Methods: All studies were multinational, randomized and double-blind. Semuloparin and enoxaparin were administered for 7-10days after surgery. Mandatory bilateral venography was to be performed between days 7 and 11. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of any deep vein thrombosis, non-fatal pulmonary embolism or all-cause death. Safety outcomes included major bleeding, clinically relevant non-major (CRNM) bleeding, and any clinically relevant bleeding (major bleeding plus CRNM). Results: In total, 1150, 2326 and 1003 patients were randomized in SAVE-KNEE, SAVE-HIP1 and SAVE-HIP2, respectively. In all studies, the incidences of the primary efficacy endpoint were numerically lower in the semuloparin group vs. the enoxaparin group, but the difference was statistically significant only in SAVE-HIP1. In SAVE-HIP1, clinically relevant bleeding and major bleeding were significantly lower in the semuloparin vs. the enoxaparin group. In SAVE-KNEE and SAVE-HIP2, clinically relevant bleeding tended to be higher in the semuloparin group, but rates of major bleeding were similar in the two groups. Other safety parameters were generally similar between treatment groups. Conclusions: Semuloparin was superior to enoxaparin for VTE prevention after hip replacement surgery, but failed to demonstrate superiority after knee replacement surgery and hip fracture surgery. Semuloparin and enoxaparin exhibited generally similar safety profiles. \ua9 2012 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis