A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Partial retention of the acetabular cement mantle in aseptic revision hip arthroplasty: is it a viable option? | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • This study looked at a special method for hip surgery where doctors decide whether to keep some cement in place instead of removing it all.
  • They examined 27 patients who had this method used on them and followed up with most of them for up to 18 years.
  • The results showed that keeping the good cement is a good choice for some patients, making it a helpful option for doctors to consider during surgery.

Article Abstract

Introduction: Choosing the most appropriate reconstruction method when addressing a cemented cup at hip revision surgery can be a difficult decision. The aim of this study is to look into the practice and results of retaining a well-fixed medial acetabular cement mantle while removing loose superolateral cement. This practice goes against a preconceived principle that if some of the cement is loose it must all be removed. So far, no significant series looking at this is available in the literature.

Methods: We assessed a cohort of 27 patients in our institution where this practice was carried out and assessed their outcomes clinically and radiographically.

Results: Of the 27 patients, 24 had follow-up ⩾2 years (2.9-17.8, mean 9.3 years). There was 1 subsequent revision for aseptic loosening at 11.9 years, 1 first-stage revision of both stem and cup for infection at 1 month, and 2 patients died without a 2-year review. 2 patients did not have radiographs available for review. 2 of the 22 patients with radiographs available had changes in lucent lines, which were not clinically significant.

Conclusion: Based on these results we conclude that retaining well-fixed medial cement during socket revision is a viable reconstruction option in carefully selected cases.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/11207000221151199DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

acetabular cement
8
cement mantle
8
retaining well-fixed
8
well-fixed medial
8
review patients
8
patients radiographs
8
cement
5
revision
5
patients
5
partial retention
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!