OSSEOINTEGRATION OF HYDROXYAPATITE-COATED FEMORAL COMPONENTS

Nakashima Y, Noguchi Y, Jingushi S, et al. OSSEOINTEGRATION OF HYDROXYAPATITE-COATED FEMORAL COMPONENTS. Orthop Procs. 2004;86-B(SUPP_IV):420-420. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.86BSUPP_IV.0860420

Nakashima, Y, et al. “OSSEOINTEGRATION OF HYDROXYAPATITE-COATED FEMORAL COMPONENTS.” Orthopaedic Proceedings, vol. 86-B, no. SUPP_IV, 2004, pp. 420-420., https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.86BSUPP_IV.0860420

Nakashima, Y., Noguchi, Y., Jingushi, S., Shuto, T., Yamamoto, T., Suenaga, E., Kannekawa, Y., & Iwamoto, Y. (2004). OSSEOINTEGRATION OF HYDROXYAPATITE-COATED FEMORAL COMPONENTS. Orthopaedic Proceedings, 86-B(SUPP_IV), 420-420. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.86BSUPP_IV.0860420

Nakashima, Y., Noguchi, Y., Jingushi, S., Shuto, T., Yamamoto, T., Suenaga, E. et al. (2004) “OSSEOINTEGRATION OF HYDROXYAPATITE-COATED FEMORAL COMPONENTS.” Orthopaedic Proceedings, 86-B(SUPP_IV), pp. 420-420. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.86BSUPP_IV.0860420

Nakashima, Y, Y Noguchi, S Jingushi, T Shuto, T Yamamoto, E Suenaga, Y Kannekawa, and Y Iwamoto. “OSSEOINTEGRATION OF HYDROXYAPATITE-COATED FEMORAL COMPONENTS.” Orthopaedic Proceedings 86-B, no. SUPP_IV (2004): 420-420. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.86BSUPP_IV.0860420

Nakashima Y, Noguchi Y, Jingushi S, Shuto T, Yamamoto T, Suenaga E, et al. OSSEOINTEGRATION OF HYDROXYAPATITE-COATED FEMORAL COMPONENTS. Orthop Procs. 2004 Apr 1;86-B(SUPP_IV):420-420. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.86BSUPP_IV.0860420

Copy to clipboard

BibTeX

EndNote

RIS

Abstract

Purpose: Osseointegration is crucial for favorable outcomes after total hip arthroplasty (THA) using cement-less femoral components. Osseointegration is recognized on radiographs as the endosteal spot weld, which is the bony bridge between the implant and surrounding bone (Engh et al, CORR, 1989). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic results for patients who had hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated rough surfaced implants compared with those who had identical implants without HA-coating at three-year minimum follow-up.

Methods: Ninety-one patients, one hundred and two hips who had primary THA with titanium arc sprayed rough surfaced femoral implants were retrospectively studied. Sixty-four hips had received HA-coated implants (HA) and 38 hips had an identical component but without HA (Non-HA). Radiographical parameters analyzed included 1) endosteal spot welds, 2) radiolucent lines, 3) calcar responses, 4) pedestal formation, 5) implant loosening, 6) endosteal osteolysis.

Results: At a minimum follow up of 3 years after operation (mean, 5.5 years), the mean Harris hip score was 89.4 points in the HA group and 89.0 points in the Non-HA group. The radiographic analysis did show the significantly earlier appearance of the endosteal spot welds in HA group. The spot welds at 1 and 2 year after operation were present in 48% and 70% of HA group, while 13% and 42% of Non-HA group. There was no significance at 3 years (71% vs 66%). More than 80% of the spot welds were seen at Gruen zone 6 in the both groups. No differences were noted regarding the radiolucent lines, calcar response, pedestal formation between the groups. There were no implant loosening and osteolysis in both groups.

Conclusions: These results suggest that the use of HA-coating does provide improved fixation in the early periods and the possibility of improved durability.

The abstracts were prepared by Nico Verdonschot. Correspondence should be addressed to him at Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.