Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Fixation for the millennium: the hip.

Aaron G Rosenberg1

  • 1Department of Orthopedics, Arthritis and Orthopedics Institute, Rush Medical College, Chicago, Illinois 60612, USA.

The Journal of Arthroplasty
|June 18, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Early outcomes of a modern cemented total knee arthroplasty : is tibial loosening a concern?

The bone & joint journal·2021
Same author

Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients Less Than 50 Years of Age: Results at a Mean of 13 Years.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2019
Same author

Elevated Serum Metal Levels from Vitamin Supplementation: A Case Report.

JBJS case connector·2017
Same author

TKA patients with unsatisfying knee function show changes in neuromotor synergy pattern but not joint biomechanics.

Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology·2017
Same author

Heterotopic Ossification Prophylaxis After Total Hip Arthroplasty: Randomized Trial of 400 vs 700 cGy.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2016
Same author

Surgical Anatomy of the Knee A Review of Common Open Approaches.

Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013)·2016

For hip replacements, cementless acetabular fixation is standard for revisions, while femoral component fixation remains debated. Both cemented and cementless options show effectiveness, with modularity aiding adaptability.

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic Surgery
  • Biomaterials Science
  • Medical Device Engineering

Background:

  • Acetabular component fixation in primary total hip arthroplasty is generally straightforward.
  • Cemented acetabular component fixation is less commonly practiced by current surgeons but remains a viable option.
  • Cementless acetabular fixation is reliable and has become the standard for most revision hip surgeries.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To review current practices and evidence regarding acetabular and femoral component fixation in total hip arthroplasty.
  • To compare the efficacy and reliability of cemented versus cementless fixation methods.
  • To explore considerations for revision hip arthroplasty component fixation.

Main Methods:

  • Review of existing literature and surgical practices.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of outcomes associated with cemented and cementless fixation techniques.
  • Evaluation of component design features and their impact on fixation.

    • Main Results:

    • Cementless acetabular fixation is the prevalent choice for revision total hip arthroplasty.
    • Femoral component fixation presents more controversy, with both cemented and cementless stems demonstrating effectiveness.
    • Revision components are predominantly cementless and coated, though roughened, tapered designs and modularity offer advantages.

    Conclusions:

    • Cementless fixation is a reliable standard for acetabular components in revision hip surgery.
    • Femoral component fixation strategies require careful consideration due to ongoing debate and varied outcomes.
    • Advancements in component design, such as modularity and surface treatments, enhance intraoperative adaptability and revision success.