The influence of implant design on periprosthetic bone remodelling of two types of uncemented HA-coated hip stems. A two-year follow-up study using DEXA

TY - JOUR

T1 - The influence of implant design on periprosthetic bone remodelling of two types of uncemented HA-coated hip stems. A two-year follow-up study using DEXA

AU - Van Der Wal, B C H

AU - Rahmy, A I A

AU - Grimm, B

AU - Blake, G M

AU - Heyligersi, I C

AU - Tonino, A J

PY - 2006/1

Y1 - 2006/1

N2 - Proximal bone resorption and an increased fracture rate in the ABG-I stem has been shown. For these reasons the ABG-I stem design was changed to the ABG-II. In this study periprosthetic bone loss around the ABG-I vs ABG-II is compared to verify if the design changes resulted in improved proximal bone preservation. Methods: 51 patients were randomised to either the ABG-I or ABG-II hip prosthesis. Periprosthetic BMD change at various time points was measured using DEXA. Between the two groups (age, gender, weight etc.) no statistical difference was encountered. Compared to the baseline at two years the ABG-II preserved bone better proximally (e.g. zone 7: ABG-II: -3.7%, ABG-I: - 11.9%, p=0.05) than the ABG-I. Distally, the trend was opposite and less bone loss was measured for the ABG-I than the ABG-II in zones 3, 4 and 5 (n.s.). Conclusion: this study confirms the philosophy behind the design changes from the ABG-I to ABG-II stem where increased elasticity, more proximal HA-coating, a shorter and distally polished stem, were meant to reduce proximal bone resorption. In future this may lead to fewer periprosthetic fractures and to less complicated revision surgery

AB - Proximal bone resorption and an increased fracture rate in the ABG-I stem has been shown. For these reasons the ABG-I stem design was changed to the ABG-II. In this study periprosthetic bone loss around the ABG-I vs ABG-II is compared to verify if the design changes resulted in improved proximal bone preservation. Methods: 51 patients were randomised to either the ABG-I or ABG-II hip prosthesis. Periprosthetic BMD change at various time points was measured using DEXA. Between the two groups (age, gender, weight etc.) no statistical difference was encountered. Compared to the baseline at two years the ABG-II preserved bone better proximally (e.g. zone 7: ABG-II: -3.7%, ABG-I: - 11.9%, p=0.05) than the ABG-I. Distally, the trend was opposite and less bone loss was measured for the ABG-I than the ABG-II in zones 3, 4 and 5 (n.s.). Conclusion: this study confirms the philosophy behind the design changes from the ABG-I to ABG-II stem where increased elasticity, more proximal HA-coating, a shorter and distally polished stem, were meant to reduce proximal bone resorption. In future this may lead to fewer periprosthetic fractures and to less complicated revision surgery

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 8

EP - 17

JO - HIP INTERNATIONAL

JF - HIP INTERNATIONAL

IS - 1

ER -