Copyright
©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Orthop. Mar 18, 2020; 11(3): 167-176
Published online Mar 18, 2020. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v11.i3.167
Published online Mar 18, 2020. doi: 10.5312/wjo.v11.i3.167
Count (valid percent) | Mean (range) | |
Sex | ||
Male | 57 (49) | |
Female | 59 (51) | |
Age at operation (yr) | 73 (39-95) | |
ASA | ||
1 | 21 (20) | |
2 | 54 (51) | |
3 | 31 (30) | |
4 and 5 | 0 | |
Missing data | 10 | |
Cause for revision | ||
Aseptic loosening | 80 (69) | |
Periprosthetic fracture | 17 (15) | |
Infection | 14 (12) | |
Other | 5 (4) | |
Missing data | 2 | |
Revised stem | ||
BiMetric | 38 (32) | |
Spotorno | 20 (17) | |
Lubinus | 22 (19) | |
Spectron | 7 (6) | |
Corail | 6 (5) | |
Taperloc | 2 (2) | |
Scanhip | 2 (2) | |
Müller | 4 (3) | |
Girdlestone | 4 (3) | |
Osteostynthesis | 3 (3) | |
Other | 7 (6) | |
Missing data | 1 | |
Cemented | 72 (62) | |
Not cemented | 44 (38) |
- Citation: Dyreborg K, Petersen MM, Balle SS, Kjersgaard AG, Solgaard S. Observational study of a new modular femoral revision system. World J Orthop 2020; 11(3): 167-176
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2218-5836/full/v11/i3/167.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v11.i3.167