8-year follow-up after cementless hip arthroplasty with a second generation spongy metal total hip replacement

Hans Gollwitzer, Ludger Gerdesmeyer, Carsten Horn, Peter Diehl, Andreas Töpfer, Reiner Gradinger

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Scopus citations

Abstract

We studied a consecutive series of 81 cementless total hip arthroplasties in 80 patients using the second generation ESKA cementless spongy metal hip replacement. The study end-point was implant revision and both function as well as satisfaction with treatment outcome were assessed. Mean age at the time of surgery was 50.9 years [range 23-73]. no patient was lost to follow-up and 75 patients (76 hips) could be included in the final analysis at a mean follow-up of 7.9 years [range 7.0-10.0]. Survival rate without loosening as the end-point was 100% for the femoral component and 99% for the acetabular component (one cup revision). Two cups and one stem had to be revised for recurrent dislocation, resulting in a total implant survival at follow-up of 99% for the femoral component and 96% for the acetabular component. Very good functional results were obtained with a mean Merle d' Aubigné score of 15.5 ± 2.9 at 7.9 years after surgery. Satisfaction with treatment outcome was reported in 88%. 95% of patients would recommend the performed procedure to a friend. Peri-operative complications without revision occurred in eleven patients (14%). We report excellent survival rates of the cementless spongy metal hip arthroplasty at a mean follow-up of eight years, particularly considering the young age of many of the patients.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)359-366
Number of pages8
JournalHIP International
Volume19
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009

Keywords

  • Arthroplasty
  • Cementless
  • Hip
  • Integration
  • Joint replacement
  • Loosening
  • Young adult

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of '8-year follow-up after cementless hip arthroplasty with a second generation spongy metal total hip replacement'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this