The aim of
this work was to assess the preliminary anatomical and functional results of
patients to establish prospects. Materials and method: We report here
the preliminary results of a retrospective mono-centric, homogeneous and
continuous series, of 21 non-cemented total hip implants, implanted from January
2011 to December 2014. The mean follow-up time was 24 months. The patients were
evaluated by Harris’s hip at the last follow-up. Results: The mean age
of the intervention was 30 years. In our series, we
observed a male predominance (60% of cases). Clinically, the Harris score
varied significantly from 52.6 ± 11.4 pre-operatively to 85.1 ± 5.1 during the
last follow-up visit. Among the items in the score, pain was the parameter that
showed the greatest improvement. Thigh pain was observed in only one patient
operated on the two sides. At the level of radiology, the femoral implant showed
great stability. Bone resorption was suspected in 14 cases (66.66%), and
confirmed in 4 cases (19.04%) with excellent bone remodeling, illustrated by
the Engh and Massin scores. A loosening and a prosthetic dislocation was
observed in a patient (4.76%). Any heterotopic ossification was observed. Conclusion: Our study confirmed good clinical and radiological
results of the non-cemented hip prosthesis series in young patients. The rates
of aseptic loosening, acetabular edges or osteolysis are low and stable over
time.
References
[1]
Brooker, A.F., Bowerman, J.W., Robinson, R.A. and Rileh Jr., L.H. (1973) Ecto-Pik Ossification Following Total Hip Replacement. Incidence and a Method of Classification. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, American Volume, 55-A, 1629-1632. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-197355080-00006
[2]
Bonnomet, F., Ehlinger, M., Molina, V. and Thomazeau, H. (2006) Periprosthetic Fractures around the Hip and Knee. Classification of Fractures on Hip Prosthesis. Revue de Chirurgie Orthopedique, 92, 2S51-2S56.
[3]
Plotard, F., et al. (2008) Overall Results of a Series of 941 First-Line Implanted Arthroplasties. Orthopedic and Repair Surgery of the Motor Apparatus, 94S, S142-S145.
[4]
Pourreyron, D., Ayadi, H. and Bonnomet, F. (2008) Total Hip Prosthesis in Patients under 30 Years of Age: Presentation of the Series and Method of Analysis. Review of Orthopedic and Repair Surgery of the Motor Apparatus, 94S, S135-S137.
[5]
Fiquet, A. and Walnut, D. (2008) Total Hip Prosthesis with Double Mobility and Surgery and Minimally Invasive Maitrise Orthopédique. No. 173, April.
[6]
Cohen, G. and Rosset, P. (2009) Results of 76 Total Non-Cemented Hip Implants with Hydroxyapatite Complete Coating with a Minimum Follow-Up of Five Years. Review of Orthopedic and Traumatologic Surgery, 95S, S74-S84.
[7]
Beldame, J., et al. (2009) Osteolysis and Total Metal-to-Metal Hip Arthroplasty with Unsealed Cup. About 106 Cases. Review of Orthopedic and Traumatological Surgery, 95, 579-592.
[8]
Druon, J., Aubault, M., Le Nail, L. and Rosset, P. (2013) Retractable Femoral Stem with Hydroxylapatite Cover, Modular and with Distal Locking. Prospective Series of 47 Stems with a Minimum Setback of Five Years. Review of Orthopedic and Traumatologic Surgery, 99, S72-S76.
[9]
Portet, Y. and Reina, N. (2016) Comparative Study of Cemented vs. Cementless Hip Implants in Elderly Patients with Femoral Neck Fracture. Revue de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologique, 102, S73-S190.