|
Àΰø°üÀý |Àΰø°üÀýÀ̶õ|°ü·Ã³í¹®|°í°üÀý|½½°üÀý|°ß°üÀý|ÁÖ°üÀý|±âŸ°üÀý| |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
ÃÖ±ÙÀÇ Àΰø°üÀý ³í¹®
Áß¿¡¼ Áß¿äÇÑ °Í¸¸ ¹ßÃé ÇÏ¿´½À´Ï´Ù.
New :¿Ö ƼŸ´½ ÇÕ±Ý-½û±âÇüÅ ( Ti- tapered design)°¡ ¹«½Ã¸àÆ® ½ºÅÛÀ¸·Î ÁÁÀº°¡. ÃÖ±ÙÀÇ Ti-tapered cementless stemÀÇ ÁÁÀº °á°ú°¡ ¹ßÇ¥µÇ°í ÀÖ´Ù. À̵éÀÇ ÁÖÀåÀ» µéÀ¸¸é ´ÙÀ½°ú °°Àº ÀÌÀ¯¿¡¼ÀÌ´Ù 1) ȸÀü-¿òÁ÷ÀÓ º¯Çü¿¡ ´ëÇÑ °ÇÑ ¾ÈÁ¤¼ºÀÌ´Ù(maximal rotational stability), ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ Á¾Ãà , ȸÀü¿¡´ëÇÑ ¾ÈÁ¤¼ºÀº üÁߺÎÇϸ¦ ÇÔÀ¸·Î½á ´õ¿í °ÇÏ¿© Áø´Ù .À̰ÍÀº °ñ ³»¼ºÀåÀ» ½ÃÄѼ ÁÁÀº ÀÓ»óÀû ¾ÈÁ¤¼ºÀ» °ÅµÎ°í ÀÖ´Ù. 2) »ý¿ªÇÐ ½ÇÇè¨èÀ¸·Îµµ ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ ¾ÈÁ¤¼ºÀº ½Ã¸àÆ® ½ºÅÛ°ú ¹ö±Ý°¡´Â ÁÁÀº ¼ºÀûÀ» º¸¿©ÁÖ¾ú´Ù. 3) ¶ÇÇÑ ±ÙÀ§ºÎÀÇ ¿øÇüÀÇ ¹Ì¼¼Æ÷¸» ÄÚÆÃÀº ºñ±¸ÄÅÀÇ ÇÃ¶ó½ºÆ½ÀÇ ¹Ì¸³ÀÚÀÇ ¿øÀ§ºÎ À̵¿À» ¹æÁöÇÏ´Â È¿°ú°¡ ÀÖ´Ù. ¨ç Sakalkale DP, Eng K, Hozack WJ and Rothman RH : Minimum 10-year results of a Tapered cementless hip replacement . Clin Orthop , 362: 134-144, 1999 ¨è Sharkey PF , Albert TJ, Humel EL and Rothman RH : Initial stability of a wedge-shaped prosthesis in the femoral canal. Semin Arthroplasty 1: 87-90,1990 ÀúÀÚ:ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ ÁÁÀº µðÀÚÀÎÀÇ ½ºÅÛÀº 2 ¼¼´ë ½Ã¸àÆ®±â¹ýÀÇÀΰø°üÀý ġȯ¼ú ¸¸Å ÁÁ´Ù. ÃÖ±Ù ÀÌ¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ³í¹®À¸·Î Hozack ÀÇ Taper-loc ½ºÅÛÀÇ 2-6³âÀÇ °á°ú 100 % survival rate( Hozack W , Gardener R, Hearn S , Eng K, Rothman R : Taperloc femoral component : a 2-6 year study of the first 100 consecutive cases. J Arthroplasty 9: 489-493, 1994) PellegriniµîÀÇ Tri-lock ½ºÅÛÀÇ »ç¿ë°á°ú 6.5³âÀÇ °á°ú ´ÜÁö 2%¿¡¼¸¸ Àçġȯ( °á±¹Àº 98% ÀÇ ¼º°ø·ü)À» º¹Çϰí ÀÖÀ¸¸ç( Pellegrini VD Jr , Hughes SS and Evarts CM. A collarless cobalt-chrome femoral component in uncemented total hip arthroplasty: five- to eight- year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg , 74B:814-821,1992 ) McLaughlin JR and Lee KR Àº 10.2 ³âÀÇ °á°ú 98 %ÀÇ °ñ³»¼ºÀå °íÁ¤°ú ´ÜÁö 1 %¿¡¼¸¸ ºÒ·®ÀÇ °á°ú¸¦ º¸°íÇÏ¿´´Ù( .McLaughlin JR and Lee KR : Total hip arthroplasty in young patients. 8- to 13- year results using an uncemented stem. Clin Orthop 373: 153-163, 2000) New-Àΰø°üÀý Àüġȯ¼ú°ú ¾ç±Ø¼º ¹Ýġȯ¼ú ¾î´À°ÍÀÌ ÁÁÀ»±î? Bipolar versus Total hip arthroplasty for hip osteonecrosis in the same patient . 28¸íÀÇ ´ëÅð°ñµÎ ¹«Ç÷¼º±«»ç( ¿¬·É 20-50¼¼)¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ÇÑÂÊÀº Àΰø°üÀý Àü ġȯ(total hip arthroplasty), ¹Ý´ëÆíÀº ¹Ýġȯ( bipolar hemiarthroplasty)À» ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿© ºñ±³ÇÑ ³í¹®ÀÌ´Ù. Æò±Õ 6.4³âÀÇ °á°ú ¹Ýġȯ¼úÀ» ¹ÞÀº ȯÀÚ 89.3%°¡ ¿¬°ñÀÌ À¯ÁöµÇ¾î ÀÖ¾ú´Ù. Áï ÀÓ»óÀûÀ¸·Î ´ëÅ𠵿Åë, µÐºÎ µ¿Åë, °ñ¿ëÇØ, Å»±¸, ÀçġȯÀ² µîÀÇ Â÷À̰¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù. À̵éÀº ¿ÀÈ÷·Á ÀþÀº ȯÀÚ¿¡¼ ¾ç±Ø¼º ¹Ýġȯ¼úÀ» ±ÇÀ¯ÇÏ´Â ÆíÀÌ´Ù. Âü°í¹®Çå -Chan YS and Shih CH : Bipolar versus Total hip arthroplasty for hip osteonecrosis in the same patient . Clin Orthop 379: 169-177,2000 ÀúÀÚÀÇ Àǰß: ÃÖ±Ù¿¡´Â Àΰø°üÀý Àüġȯ¼úÀ» ÁÖÀåÇÏ´Â ÆíÀÌ´Ù. µ¿Åë, °ñ¿ëÇØ°¡ ´õ Àû¾ú´Ù°í ¹ßÇ¥ÇÑ ¹Ì±¹ ³í¹®ÀÌ ´õ ¸¹´Ù. New: Àΰø°üÀý¿¡¼ ºñ±¸ÄÅ ¶óÀÌ³Ê »êÈÇö»ó(Oxidation)Àº ¾î¶»°ÔÇÏ¿©
³í¹®Á¦¸ñ:¼ö»êÈ ÀÎȸ¼® ÄÚÆÃºñ±¸ÄÅ¿¡¼ ¹ßÇöµÈ ¼ö»êÈÀÎȸ¼®¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ Á¦3ÀÚ °ñ¿ëÇØÁõ: severe osteolysis after third -body wear due to hydroxyapatite particles from acetabular cup coating-JBJS 80B pp267-272
Å»¶ôÇÑ HA¹Ì¸³ÀÚÀÇ ¹®Á¦ÀÌ´Ù. Bauerµî¿¡ ÀÇÇÑ 4°¡Áö disintegration modes´Â ´ÙÀ½°ú °°´Ù.
2) chemical dissolution at neutral PH: 3) delamination due to bond failure 4) mechanical abrasion because of lack of primary stability Morscher µîÀÇ ÀúÀÚ´Â HA coatingµÈ plastic RM cupÁß¿¡¼, 15³â ¸¸¿¡ ÀçġȯÇÑ 24¸íÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ÇÏ¿´´Ù. ÀÌÁß ½ÉÇÑ °ñ¿ëÇØÁõÀÌ Á¸ÀçÇÏ´Â 6·Ê¸¦ ´ë»óÀ¸·Î ÇÏ¿© Á¶»çÇÑ °á°ú HA particles ÀÌ polyethylene ºñ±¸ÄÅ ³»¿¡ ÆÄ¹¯Çô(embedded) ÀÕ¾ú°í ºñ±¸ÄŰú ´ëÅð°ñµÎÀÇ ÀÇ ½ÉÇÑ ¸¶Âû¼º ¸¶¸ê(abrasion wear)°ú ºñ±¸ÄÅÀÇ ÇØ¸® ±ÙÀ§ ´ëÅðºÎÀÇ °ñ¿ëÇØ°¡ °üÂûµÇ¾ú´Ù.ÀÌ·Î½á ±×µéÀº plastic ¿¡ HA coating ÄÅÀ» ´õÀÌ»ó ±ÇÀ¯ÇÏÁö ¾Ê¾Ò´Ù. ÀÌ³í¹®ÀÇ ¹®Á¦Á¡À¸·Î ÁöÀûÇÑ¹Ù¿Í °°ÀÌ ÃÖ±Ù¿¡´Âpolyethylene¿¡ HA coatingÀ» ÇÏÁö ¾ÊÀ¸¸ç ÇöÀç´Â °³¼±ÀÌ µÈ metal surface¿¡ coatingÀ» ÇϰíÀÖ´Ù. HA µÎ²²µµ 300 um ¾Æ´Ï¶ó sprayed coatingÀ»ÇÑ´Ù. ![]() ![]() ![]()
±×·¯³ª HozackÀº DupeyÀÇ trilock dual-lockÀ¸·Î RorabeckÀº Mallroy-Head stemÀ¸·Î ¹«½Ã¸àÆ®½ºÅÛ À̳ª ½Ã¸àÆ®½ºÅÛÀ̳ª ºñ½ÁÇÑ °á°ú¸¦ º¸°íÇÏ¿´´Ù. Á¦1¼¼´ë cementless stem À̶õ - (
crude instrumentation, limited implant inventory, suboptimal pore size,
porous coating instability)
Garbuz ¿¡ ÀÇÇϸé Type 2B( major column defect)ÀÇ ºñ±¸Àç°Ç¼úÀÇ ¼º°ø·üÀº ¾î¶² ºñ±¸ÄÅÀ» ¼±ÅÃÇÏ´À³Ä¿¡ ´Þ·ÁÀÖ´Ù.Roof ring¿¡ cement cupÀº 100 %¼º°ø·üÀ» ¾òÀ» ¼ö ÀÖ°í structural graft ¸¦ ÇÒ°æ¿ì ºñ±¸ÄÅÀÇ 50% ¹Ì¸¸ ¿¡¼¸¸ »ç¿ëµÇ¾î¾ß Çϳª 50% ÀÌ»óÀÇ Ä¿¹ö°¡ ÇÊ¿äÇÒ¶§´Â roof reinforcement ring¿¡ cement cupÀÌ choice ¶ó°í º¸°íÇÔ ( CORR 323 p 98-107) ij³ª´Ù toronto mount sinai º´¿ø Impacted graft ¿ËÈ£·ÐÀÚ - Sloof TJ ³×µ¨¶õµå Nijemegen º´¿ø Âü°í ¼Àû Wear debris in Total Joint replacements : AAOS 2:1 p212-220, 1994
Àçġȯ¼ú¿¡¼ ¹«½Ã¸àÆ® ±¤¹üÀ§ ¹Ì¼¼Æ÷¸»Çü ½ºÅÛÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ Àçġȯ¼ú Revision of Loose cementless femoral prostheses to larger porous coated components
Impaction Bone-Grafting before insertion of a femoral stem with cement in revision total hip arhtroplasty- JBJS 79A: Dec, 1834-1841.¹«±Õ¼º À̿Ͽ¡ ÀÇÇÑ Àΰø°í°üÀý Àçġȯ ¼ö¼ú¿¡¼ ´ëÅð°ñ¼ö°³»¿¡ ´Ù¾çÇÑ µ¿Á¾°ñ(allograft) À̽ÄÈÄ ¿¡ Ä®¶ó¾ø´Â ¿øÃßÇüÀÇ ±¤ÅÃÀÌ ³ª´Â ½ºÅÛ( collarless polished tapered femoral stem ¼ÒÀ§ "CPT ½ºÅÛ" )À» ÀÌ¿ëÇ× Àçġȯ¼úÀÇ °á°ú Æò±Õ 30 °³¿ùÀÇ ÃßÀû Á¶»ç °á°ú ¼ö¼úÁß ´ëÅð °ñÀý(12%) °ú ¼ö¼úÈÄÀÇ °ñÀý ,Å»±¸, ¼öÁ÷ ÇϰÀǼҰß(38 %)¿¡¼ °üÂûÀÌ µÇ¾ú´Ù. À̽ÄÇÑ µ¿Á¾°ñÀÇ °ñ¼ÒÁÖÈ¿Í ÀçÇü¼º(94 %)°üÂû µÇ¾ú´Ù. 2³âÀÇ °üÂû ±â°£À̾úÀ¸³ª À̰ÍÀº °ÆÁ¤½º·¯¿î °á°ú¶ó´Â º¸°íÀÌ´Ù.---ÀÌ³í¹®Àº ¸¹Àº ³í¶õÀÇ ¼ÒÁö°¡ ÀÖ´Ù.--------
¹Ý¸é¿¡ ³×µ¨¶õµåÀÇ Sloff(1996)µîÀº 81¸í 91°í°üÀýÀ» ´ë»óÀ¸·Î acetabular and femoral reconstructon with impacted graft and cemnent¸¦ ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿© 5³â ÃßÀû Á¶»ç °á°ú 11.4%ÀÇ ½ÇÆÐ¸¸ º¸¾Ò´Ù°í ÇÏ¸é¼ ÀÌÀúÀÚµéÀº À̹æ¹ý(Ling technique)À» °í¼ö ÇÒ¶æÀ» ¹àÇû´Ù(by CORR 324 p108-115).Gabuz, Morsi µî(1996)ÀÇ ³í¹®µµ À¯»çÇÏ´Ù(CORR 324, p108-115) .CharnleyÇü Àΰø°í°üÀý ġȯ¼úÈİíÁ¤ ½ÇÆÐÀÇ ¹«±Õ¼º ¿äÀÎ (factors affecting aseptic failure of fixation after primary Charnley total hip arthroplasty)-JBJS 79-A, November, p1618-1627,1997
5 °¡Áö ¹æ»ç¼± ¼Ò°ßÀ̶õ ( 1.¼öÁ÷Çϰ(subsidence), 2.¹æ»ç¼± Åõ°ú¼±(demarcation of cement), 3 ½Ã¸àÆ®¿Í º¸Ã¶¹°ÀÇ ºÐ¸®(separation of component from the cement), 4.½Ã¸àÆ® ÀÇ ÆÄ±« (fracture of the cement ),5.°ñ¼ö°³»ÀÇ ° Çü¼º (endosteal cavitation) ÀÌ´Ù-- -ÀÌÁß¿¡¼ ºñ±¸ÄÅ ÀÌ¿ÏÀÇ °¡Àå À§ÇèÇÑ ¿äÀÎÀº ÇÃ¶ó½ºÆ½ ¶óÀ̳ÊÀÇ ´â¾ÆÁü{(rapid wear of polyethylene(0.2mm or more)]À¸·Î ¹àÇôÁ£À¸¸ç , ºñ±¸ÀÇ ºñÈļº °üÀý¿°(hypertrophic osteoarthrosis)ÀÌ ¼ÒÄÏÀÇ »ýÁ¸À²À» ³ôÇú´Ù°í ÇÞ´Ù. ½ºÅÛÀº °ñ¼ö°ÀÇ ºñÁ¤»óÀûÀÎ ±âÇÏÇüÅ [(unfavorable geometry of the medullary canal( so-called stovepipe or large canal )]¸¦ À§Çè¿ä¼Ò ·Î ¹ßÇ¥ ÇÏ¿´´Ù.--- -ÇØ¼®-½Ã¸àÆ®Çü Àΰø°üÀýÀÇ °íÁ¤ ½ÇÆÐÀÇ 5°¡Áö sign°ú, ÃÖ±Ù¿¡ ¸ðµç ¹®Á¦´Â polyethylene liner ´â¾ÆÁü ¿¡ ÃÊÁ¡À» µÎ°í Àִٴµ¥ ÁÖ¸ñÀÌ µÈ´Ù..-by S Kobayashi, K Takaoka, N Saito and K Hisa Matsumoto Japan
-°ñ¿ëÇØÀÇ ÃøÁ¤Àº °¡Àå ±ä°Å¸® x ÀÏÂ÷¼±ÀÇ Á÷°¢°Å¸® (lesion size(cm2)= length x width)·Î ÇÏ¿´À¸¸ç Æò±Õ 2.6 x 1.7 cm ¿´´Ù-- by W Maloney, P Herzwurm, W Papprosky,H Rubash and C Engh-ÇØ¼®-ÃÖ±Ù¿¡ °ñ¹Ý°ñ °ñ¿ëÇØ¿¡ ´ëÇÏ¿© Àû±ØÀûÀÎ Ä¡·á¸¦ Çϰí ÀÖ´Ù, ¹«½Ã¸àÆ® ÄÅÀÎ °æ¿ì ¹«Áõ»ó¿¡ °ñ¹ÝÀÇ °ñ¿ëÇØ°¡ ÀÖÀ»½Ã ±×Å©±â¿¡ µû¶ó À§ÇèÁõÈıºÀ¸·Î Ç¥½ÃÇÏ¿© ¾ÕÀ¸·Î ¼ö¼úÀ» ±ÇÀ¯ÇÒ ¼öÀÖÀ¸¸®¶ó°í º»´Ù.-
¹æ»ç¼±ÀûÀ¸·Î´Â 94 %¿¡¼ °ñ¼º¾ÈÁ¤À» ,3 %¿¡¼ ¾ÈÁ¤µÈ ¼¶À¯¼º °íÁ¤À» ,´ÜÁö 3 %¿¡¼¸¸ ºÒ¾ÈÁ¤ÀÇ ¼Ò°ßÀ» º¸¿´´Ù , ¶ÇÇÑ °ñ¼Ò½Çµµ 6 %¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ °á°ú´Â ÇϹٵåÀÇ ÇØ¸®½ºÀÇ hybrid Àΰø°üÀý º¸´Ù ÁÁÀº °á°ú¸¦ º¸¿´´Ù.Mulroy ¿Í Harrisº¸°í¿¡ÀÇÇϸé 11³âÀÇ ÃßÀú°á°ú ´ëÅð½ºÅÛÀÇ ÀÌ¿Ï(loosening)Àº 3 % , Àçġȯ·ü(revision)Àº 5 % ,´ëÅð°ñ¼Ò½Ç(osteolysis)Àº 7 %¸¦ º¸¿´À¸¸ç , 12³âÀÇ Ã߽ðá°ú¿¡¼ ´ëÅð½ºÅÛ Àçġȯ·üÀº 6 %, °ñ¼Ò½ÇÀ²Àº 12 %¸¦ º¸°íÇÏ¿´´Ù.-from Total Hip arthroplasty with uncemented femoral component -excellent results at ten -year follow-up-J.bone&joint Surg.79- B,p900-907,1997-»ç¿ëµÈ ½ºÅÛÀº Taperloc(Biomet,inc,Warsaw,Indinan,USA)¿´´Ù. -¼ÒÀ§ Hybrid
hip( ¾Æ·¡±×¸² ÂüÁ¶)_º¸´Ù ÁÁÀº °á°ú¸¦ º¸°íÇÏ´Â
¹«½Ã¸àÆ®Çü Àΰø°üÀý ġȯ¼ú ³í¹®ÀÌ ¸¹ÀÌ ³ª¿À°í ÀÖ´Ù.
![]()
- ¸¸ÀÏ 2mm ÀÇ ÀüÀ§³ª ¶Ç´Â 2mm ÀÌ»óÀÇ ¹æ»ç¼± À½¿µ°¨¼Ò¼±Áß¿¡¼ ÀÌ µÑ Áß¿¡ Çϳª°¡ Á¸ÀçÇϸé ÀçġȯÀ²ÀÌ 27 % À̸ç , ¸¸ÀÏ µÎ°³ ¸ðµÎ Á¸ÀçÇÑ´Ù¸é ÀçġȯÀ²Àº 50 % ¿¡ ´ÞÇÑ´Ù°í ÇÒ ¼ö ÀÖ ´Ù. - ¶ÇÇÑ 5 ³â À̳»¿¡ °ñ ¿ëÇØ (lytic lesion)¼Ò°ßÀÌ Á¸ÀçÇϸé 10³â À̳»¿¡ ½ÇÆÐÇÒ À² Àº Ãʱ⿡ ¼ö¼ú°á°ú°¡ ÁÁ¾Æµµ 50 % ÀÌ´Ù ¶ó°í º¸°íÇÔ. -from Kobayashi A, Donnelly WJ, Scott G and Freeman MAR: Early radiological observations may predict the long-term survival of femoral hip rpostheses J Bone Joint Surg 79-B: 583-589,1997- -for individual prosthesies , migration of <2mm and the absence of an RLL of ¡Â 2mm at two years predict a 6 % chance of revision over approximately ten years. If either 2mm of migration or an RLL of 2mm is present, the chance of revision rise to 27 %, and if both radiological signs are present they are 50 %. If at five years a lytic lesion has developed, whatever the situation at two years, there is approximately a 50 % chance of failure in the following five years
Zweymuller stem¿¡ ´ëÇÑ º¸°í·Î 88¼¼ ³ëÀο¡°Ô °í°üÀý Àüġȯ¼úÀ» ½ÃÇàÇÏ¿© ¼º°øÀûÀÎ °á°ú¸¦ ¾ò¾ú´Ù( Harris score 44-84.9), ¾ÈÁ¤ÀûÀÎ °ñÀ¯ÇÕÀº 28 %¿¡¼ ¾ò¾ú´Ù. °ú¿¬ ³ëÀο¡¼µµ ¹«¸®ÇÏ°Ô ¹«½Ã¸àÆ® °í°üÀý ġȯ¼úÀ» °ú°¨È÷ ÇÒ¼ö ÀÖ´ÂÁö ¾î·Á¿î ¹®Á¦ÀÌ´Ù.
2 Fracture of an alumina ceramic head in total hip arthroplastyThe journal of arhtroplasty vol 10-6,1995 p851 3. Fracture of the femoral head after ceramic-on-polyethyelene total hip arthroplasty:The journal of arhtroplasty vol 10-6,1995 p855 4.Ceramic head failure :The journal of arhtroplasty vol 10-6,1995 p860 ÀÌ·¯ÇÑ ¹®Á¦Á¡Àº ½ºÅÛÀÇ ÄÜ(CONE) Áï ¼¼¶ó¹Í º¼°ú ½ºÅÛÀÇ ¿¬°áºÎÀ§ÀÇ °æºÎ (TRUNION)¿Í ¿ÏÀü Á¢ÃËÀÌ µÇÁö ¾Ê¾Æ¼ ¿À´Â ¹®Á¦Á¡À¸·Î ÁöÀûÇϰí ÀÖ´Ù , ´â¾ÆÁüÀº ±âÁ¸ÀÇ Charnley ½ºÅÛÀº 0.08-0.21mm/yr À̳ª ,¼¼¶ó¹ÍÀº 2 um/yr ·Î½á ±âÁ¸ÀÇ Charnley½ºÅÛº¸´Ù 1000 ¹è³ª ´ú´â¾ÆÁö´Â °ÍÀÌ´Ù. 1989³â Dorre º¸°í¿¡ÀÇÇÏ¸é ´ÙÀ½°ú °°´Ù. ![]()
2) ±ÙÀ§ºÎ¿¡ ȨÀ» ÆÇ ½ºÅÛÀÇ ¾Ð¹Ú °íÁ¤ ¹æ¹ý (press fit shot blasted proximally ridged stem 3) ¼ö»êÈ ÀÎȸ¼® µµÆ÷ ½ºÅÛ(proximally HA coating stem)ÀÇ »ç¿ë 4) ½Ã¸àÆ® °íÁ¤ ¹ý(cementing)À»
Àΰø °í°üÀý Àüġȯ¼ú¿¡¼ ºñ±¸ ÀçÇü¼º¿¡ »ç¿ë µÇ´Â ÀÚ°¡°ñ À̽İú °Å´ë µ¿Á¾°ñ(allograft)ÀÌ½Ä -- MGH Hospital :Shinar AA and Harris WH : JBJS 79-A:159-176 ,Feb.,1997
Àçġȯ¼ú¿¡¼ ¹«½Ã¸àÆ® ÄÅÀ¸·Î ÇØºÎÇÐÀûÀ̳ª ,¾ß°£ »ó¹æ(hiher hip center) ¿¡ À§Ä¡ÇÏ¿©µµ ¼÷ÁÖ°ñÀÌ 70%ÀÌ»óÀÇ Ä¿¹ö¸¸ ÇÒ¼ö ÀÖ´Ù¸é °Å´ë µ¿Á¾°ñ À̽ÄÀº ÇÊ¿äÄ¡ ¾Ê´Ù°í ÇÑ´Ù. Barrack(1990)µî¿¡ ÀÇÇÏ¸é °Å´ë ÀÚ°¡°ñÀ̽ÄÀº ºñ±¸ÄÅÀ» 35-40%¸¸ Ä¿¹öÇÏ¿©¾ß µÇ°í ,¹«½Ã¸àÆ®ºñ±¸ÄÅÀ» »ç¿ë½Ã´Â Àû¾îµµ 50%ÀÌ»ó º»ÀÎ( host bone)ÀÇ ºñ±¸ ¿Í Á¢ÃËÀÌ µÇ¾î¾ß ÇÑ´Ù°í ÇÑ´Ù. ¹Ý¸é Chandler(1992), Penenbergµî(1989)¿¡ ÀÇÇÏ¸é °Å´ë µ¿Á¾°ñ(bulk allograft)À» ¹«½Ã¸àÆ® ÄÅ¿¡ »ç¿ë½Ã´Â ¸¹Àº ½ÇÆÐ°¡ ÀÖ´Ù°í ÇÑ´Ù 2-4³âÀÇ ÃßÀû °üÂû °á°ú 15-65%ÀÇ ½ÇÆÐ¸¦ º¸°íÇÏ¿´´Ù.
Periprosthetic Osteolysis in THA the role of particulate wear debris---Malony WJ JBJS :77-A,1448-1461,1995 1. isolation and characterization of wear particles generated in patients who had failure of a hip arthroplasty without cement------Maloney WJ JBJS :77-A,1301,1995 2.Increasing prevalence of Femoral lysis in cementless THA---Harris JOA 10-4,407,1995
2. A Multicenter 10-year Study of cemented revision THA in Pts ypunger than 55 year old : JOA Vol 9:6, P595,1994 p 595 °á°ú ; After 10 years -survival rate 65% of cup, 61% of stem increase failure rate in longer follow up study 3. Acetabular revision with the Burch-Schnieder antiprotrusion cage and cancellous Allograft----------------- JOA ,10:3, p 307, 1995 4. The clinical and radiological results of revision of low friction arthroplasty in elderly - Wrobleski BM : Inte Orthopedics , 19: 6,p335 ,1995 5. long term results of aspetic cemented Charnley revision-Cimbrelo EG JOA 10:2 ,121,1995 pistoning of the prosthesis and the cement within the bone and calcar pivot was the most frequent type of stem loosening- Harris Àǰ߰ú ´Þ¸§ 6. Isolation & characterization of Wear particles generated in patients who have failure of a hip arthroplasty without cement--- Maloney WM: JBJS,77-A ,1301,1995. average particle sizes-- less than 1micron ( 0.63 micrometer) total number of particles associated with bipolar was 2 times than fixed cup abundant particulate polyethylene and metal debris in the soft tissue membranes around filed femoral components that ewere inserted without cement Ti -stem °ú proximal porocoat Ti-mesh pad ¿¡¼ ¸¹Àºmetal particle ÀÌ ³ª¿Â´Ù. 6-1 Schmalzried¿¡ ÀÇÇϸé semiquantitative grading system °ú polarized light microscopy ¿¡ ÀÇÇÏ¿© knee¿Í hip À» ºñ±³ÇÏ¿© failed knee ¿¡¼ ÈξÀ ¸¹Àº more particle and larger range of particle size( 2micron) °¡ È®ÀÎÀÌ µÇ¾ú´Ù°í ÇÔ Æò±ÕÀÇ partcle size´Â 1 micron ÀÌÇÏ¿´´Ù ±×·¯³ª Huo ¿¡ ÀÇÇϸé paricle ÀÌ joint capsule º¸´Ù femoral endosteal lysis¿¡¼ ´õ¸¹ÀÌ ¹ß°ßÀÌ µÇ¾ú´Ù°í ÇÔ¶ÇÇÑ ±×ÀÇ º¸°í¿¡ ÀÇÇϸé Ti À̳ª CoCrÀÇ ÁÖÀ§ÀÇ paricle debris ´Â Â÷À̰¡ ¾ø¾ú´Ù°í ÇÔ ------- JBJS 78A :1241, 1996 7.Early loosening of the femoral component at the cement-prosthesis interface after THR --Mohler CG et al : JBJS,77-A ,1315,1995. mechanical fatigue failure of cement was major cause of aseptic loosening of femoral component--------ÇØ°áÃ¥À¸·Î- CoCr stem, cobra-shaped proximal part stem, and slight longer stem-À» Iowa ´ëÇп¡¼ °³¹ß early loosening- was average 5 yrs radiolucent zone 1 of Gruen many of stem rotated in the cement : no gross fracture of the cement mantle were apparent Autopsy studies- long-term failure of fixation of cemented femoral component is mechanical nature, with fracture of the cement and debonding of the component from the cement initiating the loosening process Debonding is initial factor in the loosening of the cemented stem- methods of improve bond between prosthesis and the cement - txtured finished on the stem and precoating with PMMA so called interfacial porosity is not affected by such factors centrifugation or surface finish and may adversely influence bonding the cement to the implant Mechanical study demonstrated that micromotion is increased at the cement- prosthesis interface compared with that at the bone-cement interface Recommend with a more rectangular stem geometry and a polished surface finish to modify Iowa stem |