Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Corail® Hip System pp 89–154Cite as

Corail® Outcomes

  • Chapter

Abstract

The critical appraisal of the available literature together with clinical expertise is essential for the practice of evidence-based orthopaedic surgery.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References_4

Reference

  1. Amadio PC (1993) Outcomes measurements. J Bone Joint Surg Am 75(11):1583–1584

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Ashby E, Grocott MP, Haddad FS (2008) Outcome measures for orthopaedic interventions on the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90(5):545–549

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Campbell D, Mercer G, Nilsson KG et al (2011) Early migration characteristics of a hydroxyapatite-coated femoral stem: an RSA study. Int Orthop (SICOT) 35:483–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Graves SE (2010) The value of arthroplasty registry data. Acta Orthop 81(1):8–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Karachalios T, Tsatsaronis C, Efraimis G et al (2004) The long-term clinical relevance of calcar atrophy caused by stress shielding in total hip arthroplasty: a 10-year, prospective, randomized study. J Arthroplasty 19 (4): 469–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C (2007) The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet 370(9597): 1508–1519

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. McCalden RW, Naudie DD, Yuan X et al (2005) Radiographic methods for the assessment of polyethylene wear after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87 (10):2323–2334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Migliore A, Perrini MR, Romanini E et al (2009) Comparison of the performance of hip implants with data from different arthroplasty registers. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91 (12): 1545–1549

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Guidance for the selection of prosthesis for primary total hip replacement. www.nice.org.uk. Accessed 05 Jan 2010

    Google Scholar 

  10. Poolman RW, Swiontkowski MF, Fairbank JC et al (2009) Outcome instruments: rationale for their use. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(suppl 3):41–49

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ranstam J, Robertsson O (2010) Statistical analysis of arthroplasty register data. Acta Orthop 81(1):10–14

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA et al (1996) Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ 312:71–72

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Schemitsch EH, Bhandari M, Boden SD et al (2010) The evidence-based approach in bringing new orthopaedic devices to market. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(4):1030–1037

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Söderman P, Malchau H (2001) Is the Harris hip score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res Mar(384):189–197

    Google Scholar 

  15. Wylde V, Blom AW (2009) Assessment of outcomes after hip arthroplasty. Hip Int 19(1):1–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

  1. Al Hertani W, Waddell JP, Anderson GI (2000) The effect of partial vs. full hydroxyapatite coating on periprosthetic bone quality around the canine madreporic femoral stem. J Biomed Mater Res 53:518–524

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Baltopoulos P, Tsintzos C, Papadakou E et al (2008) Hydroxyapatite-coated total hip arthroplasty: the impact on thigh pain and arthroplasty survival. Acta Orthop Belg 74:323–331

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bauer TW, Geesink RCT, Zimmerman R et al (1991) Hydroxyapatite-coated femoral stems. Histological analysis of components retrieved at autopsy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 73:1439–1452

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bloebaum RD, Merrel M, Gutske K et al (1991) Retrieval analysis of a hydroxyapatite-coated hip prosthesis. Clin Orthop Rel Res Jun(267):97–102

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bloebaum RD, Zou L, Bachus KN et al (1997) Analysis of particles in acetabular components from patients with osteolysis. Clin Orthop Rel Res May(338):109–118

    Google Scholar 

  6. Boldt J (2009) Bone remodeling in cementless HA-coated stems after 20 years. 10th EFFORT. Vienna, 2009

    Google Scholar 

  7. Campbell D, Mercer G, Nilsson KG et al (2011) Early migration characteristics of a hydroxyapatite-coated femoral stem: an RSA study. Int Orthop (SICOT) 35:483–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chambers B, St Clair SF, Froimson MI (2007) Hydroxyapatite-coated tapered cementless femoral components in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 22:71–74

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Chatelet JC, Setiey L (2004) Femoral component revision with hydroxyapatite-coated revision stems. In: Epinette JA, Manley MT (eds) Fifteen years of clinical experience with hydroxyapatite coatings in joint arthroplasty. Springer, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  10. Coathup MJ, Blunn GW, Flynn N et al (2001) A comparison of bone remodeling around hydroxyapatite-coated, porous-coated and grit-blasted hip replacements retrieved at post-mortem. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83:118–123

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Crawford CH, Malkani AL, Incavo SJ et al (2004) Femoral component revision using an extensively hydroxyapatite-coated. J Arthoplasty 19:8–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Devane PA, Horne JG, Martin K et al (1997) Three-dimensional polyethylene wear of a press-fit titanium pros-thesis. Factors influencing generation of polyethylene debris. J Arthroplasty 12:256–266

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Engh CA, Bobyn JD, Glassman AH (1987) Porous-coated hip replacement; the factors governing bone-ingrowth, stress-shielding and clinical results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 69:45–55

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Epinette JA, Manley MT (2008) Uncemented stems in hip replacement -hydroxyapatite or plain porous: does it mat-ter? Based on a prospective study of HA Omnifit stems at 15-years minimum follow-up. Hip Int 18:69–74

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Figved W, Opland V, Frihagen F et al (2009) Cemented ver-sus uncemented hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(9):2426–2435 [Epub 2009 Jan 7]

    Google Scholar 

  16. Froimson MI, Garino J, Machenaud A, Vidalain JP (2007) Minimum 10-year results of a tapered, titanium, hydroxyap-atite-coated hip stem: an independent review. J Arthroplasty 22:1–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Geesink RG (2002) Osteoconductive coatings for total joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 395:53–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Geesink RGT (1999) HA coatings in orthopaedic surgery. Raven Press, New-York

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hardy DCR, Frayssinet P, Guilhem A et al (1991) Bonding of hydroxyapatite-coated femoral prostheses: histopathol-ogy of specimens from four cases. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73:732–740

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Havelin LI, Espehaug B, Vollset SE et al (1995) Early asep-tic loosening of uncemented femoral components in pri-mary total hip replacement. A review based on the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. J Bone Joint Surg Br 77(1):11–17

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Karachalios T, Tsatsaronis C, Efraimis G et al (2004) The long-term clinical relevance of calcar atrophy caused by stress shielding in total hip arthroplasty: a 10-year, prospec-tive, randomized study. J Arthroplasty 19:469–475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kärrholm J, Malchau H, Snorrason F et al (1994) Micromotion of femoral stems in total hip arthroplasty: a randomized study of cemented hydroxyapatite-coated and porous-coated stems with roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 76:1692–1705

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kelly SJ, Robbins CE, Bierbaum BE et al (2007) Use of a hydroxyapatite-coated stem in patients with Dorr type C femoral bone. Clin Orthop Relat Res 465:112–116

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Paulsen A, Pedersen AB, Johnsen SP et al (2007) Effect of hydroxyapatite coating on risk of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty in younger patients: findings from the Danish hip Arthroplasty Registry. Acta Orthop 78:622–628.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Philippot R, Delangle F, Verdot FX et al (2009) Femoral defi-ciency reconstruction using a hydroxyapatite-coated locked modular stem. A series of 43 total hip revisions. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95:119–126 [Epub 2009 Mar 17]

    Google Scholar 

  26. Pinaroli A, Lavoie F, Cartillier JC et al (2009) Conservative femoral stem revision: avoiding therapeutic escalation. J Arthroplasty 24:365–373 [Epub 2008 Apr 11]

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rajaratnam SS, Jack C, Tavakkolizadeh A et al (2008) Long-term results of a hydroxyapatite-coated femoral component in total hip replacement: a 15-to 21-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90:27–30

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Reikeras O, Gunderson RB (2006) Excellent results with femoral revision surgery using an extensively hydroxyapa-tite-coated stem. Acta Orthop 77:98–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Restrepo C, Lettich T, Roberts N et al (2008) Uncemented total hip arthroplasty in patients less than twenty-years. Acta Orthop Belg 74:615–622

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sanchez-Sotelo J, Lewallen DG, Harmsen WS et al (2004) Comparison of wear and osteolysis in hip replacement using two different coatings of the femoral stem. Int Orthop 28:206–210 [Epub 2004 Apr 29]

    Google Scholar 

  31. Shah NN, Edge AJ, Clark DW (2009) Hydroxyapatite-ceramic-coated femoral components in young patients fol-lowed-up for 16 to 19 years: an update of a previous report. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:865–869

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Søballe K, Gotfredsen K, Brockstedt-Rasmussen H et al (1991) Histological analysis of a retrieved hydroxyapatite coated femoral prosthesis. Clin Orthop 272:255–258

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Søballe K, Toksvig-Larsen S, Gelinek J et al (1993) Migration oh hydroxyapatite coated femoral stems: a roent-gen stereophotogrammetric study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 75:681–687

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Tian H, Zhang K, Liu Y (2007) Long-term clinical and radiological results of entirely hydroxyapatite-coated femo-ral components. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 87:3200–3202; Chinese

    Google Scholar 

  35. Vidalain JP (2004) Corail® stem long-term results based upon the 15-year ARTRO Group experience. In: Epinette JA, Manley MT (eds) Fifteen years of clinical experience with hydroxyapatite coatings in joint arthroplasty. Springer, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  36. Vidalain JP (2004) Hydroxyapatite and infection: results of a consecutive series of 49 infected total hip replacements. In: Epinette JA, Manley MT (eds) Fifteen years of clinical expe-rience with hydroxyapatite coatings in joint arthroplasty. Springer, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wangen H, Lereim P, Holm I et al (2008) Hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 30 years: excellent ten to 16-year follow-up results with a HA-coated stem. Int Orthop 32:203–208 [Epub 2007 Feb 15]

    Google Scholar 

Reference

  1. Engh CA, Claus AM, Hopper RH (2001) Long-term results using the anatomic medullary locking hip prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res Dec(393):137–146

    Google Scholar 

  2. Froimson MI, Garino J, Machenaud A et al (2007) Minimum 10-year results of a tapered, titanium, hydroxyapatite-coated hip stem an independent review. J Arthroplasty 22(1):1–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hallan G, Lie SA, Furnes O et al (2007) Medium-and long-term performance of 11,516 uncemented primary femoral stems from the Norwegian arthroplasty register. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(12):1574–1580

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Reikeras O, Gunderson RB (2003) Excellent results of HA coating on a grit-blasted stem, 245 patients followed for 8–12 years. Acta Orthop Scand 74(2):140–145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Røkkum M, Reigstad A (1999) Total hip replacement with an entirely hydroxyapatite-coated prosthesis: 5 years’ fol-low-up of 94 consecutive hips. J Arthroplasty 14(6):689

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Vedantam R, Ruddlesdin C (1996) The fully hydroxyapatite-coated total hip implant. Clinical and roentgenographic results. J Arthroplasty 11(5):534

    Google Scholar 

  7. Vidalain JP (2004) Corail® stem long term results upon 15 years ARTRO Group experience. In: Epinette JA, Manley MT (eds) Fifteen years of clinical experience with hydroxy-apatite coating in joint arthroplasty. Springer, France, p 217

    Google Scholar 

Reference

  1. Engh CA, Massin P, Suthers KE (1990) Roentgenographic assessment of the biologic fixation of porous surfaced femo-ral components. Clinl Orthop Relat Res 257:107–127

    Google Scholar 

  2. Epinette JA, Geesink RGT (1995) Radiographic assess-ment of cementless hip prosthesis: ARA a proposed new scoring system. In: L’expansion scientifique (ed) Cahiers d’enseignement de la sofcot: hydroxyapatite coated hip and knee arthroplasty. Paris, France, p 114–126

    Google Scholar 

  3. Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC (1979) Modes of fail-ures of cemented stem type femoral components. A radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–27

    Google Scholar 

Reference

  1. Boldt JG, Dilawari P, Agarwal S et al (2001) Revision total hip arthroplasty using impaction bone grafting with cemented nonpolished stems and charnley cups. J Arthroplasty 16(8):943–952

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Branson JJ, Goldstein WM (2003). Primary total hip arthro-plasty. AORN J 78(6):947–953, 956–969; quiz 971–974

    Google Scholar 

  3. Hallan G, Lie SA, Furnes O et al (2007) Medium- and long-term performance of 11,516 uncemented primary femoral stems from the Norwegian arthroplasty register. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(12):1574–1580

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kwong LM, Jasty M, Mulroy RD et al (1992) The histology of radiolucent line. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74(1):67–73

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Lavernia C, D’Apuzzo M, Hernandez V, Lee D (2004) Thigh pain in primary total hip arthroplasty: the effects of elastic moduli. J Arthroplasty 19(7 suppl 2):10–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Müller LA, Wenger N, Schramm M et al (2010) Seventeen-year survival of the cementless CLS Spotorno stem. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 130(2):269–275

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Vidalain JP (2010). Twenty-year results of the cementless Corail® stem. Int Orthop 35(2):189–194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

References

  1. Amstutz HC, Sakai DN (1975) Total joint replacement for ankylosed hips. J Bone Joint Surg Am 5:619–625

    Google Scholar 

  2. Asayama I, Naito M, Fujisawa M et al (2002) Relationship between radiographic measurements of reconstructed hip joint position and the Trendelenburg sign. J Arthroplasty 17:747–751

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Béguin L, Limozin R, Demangel et al (2002) Boiterie et défaut de latéralisation dan les arthroplasties de hanche. Rev Chir Orthop Oct 88(6):25

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH (2002) Soft tissue balancing: the hip. J Arthroplasty 17(suppl 1):17–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Charles MN, Bourne RB, Davey JR et al (2004) Soft tissue balancing of the hip: the role of femoral offset restoration J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:1078–1088

    Google Scholar 

  6. Davey JR, O’Connor DO, Burke DW et al (1993) Femoral component offset: its effect on strain in bone-cement. J Arthroplasty 8:23–26

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Devane P, Home G, Winemaker M et al (1997) The effect of restoring femoral offset during THR on 3D volumetric wear J Bone Joint Surg Br 79(suppl):385

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dolhain P, Tsigaras H, Bourne R et al (2002) The effective-ness of dual offset stems in restoring offset during total hip replacement. Acta Orthop Belg 68:490–499

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Engh CA, Massin P, Suthers KE (1990) Roentgenographic assessment of the biologic fixation of porous-surfaced femoral components. Clin Orthop Relat Res Aug(257):107–128

    Google Scholar 

  10. Epinette JA, Geesink R et al Etude radiologique des pro-thèses de hanche non cimentées. Proposition d’un nouveau système d’évaluation: le score ARA. In: Duparc J (ed) Cahier d’enseignement de la SOFCOT. Elsevier, Paris, pp 107–119

    Google Scholar 

  11. Fessy MH, N’Diaye A, Carret JP et al (1999) Locating the center of rotation of the hip Surg Radiol Anat 21:247–250

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Frain P (1978) Moyen fessier et appui unipodal. Variations géométriques sur le thème des ostéotomies fémorales et pel-viennes Rev Chir Orthop 64:445–458

    Google Scholar 

  13. Girard J, Touraine D, Soenen M et al (2005) Mesure de la pénétration céphalique sur des radiographies numérisées: reproductibilité et précision. Rev Chir Orthop 91:137–142

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Harris WH (1969) Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthro-plasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 51:737–755

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kärrholm J, Garellick G, Herberts P (2005) The Swedish hip arthroplasty register, Annual Report 2005

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lecerf G, Fessy MH, Philippot R et al (2009) Femoral off-set: anatomical concept, definition, assessment, implications for preoperative templating and hip arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 95(3):210–219

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. McGrory BJ, Morrey BF, Cahalan TD et al (1995) Effect of femoral offset on range of motion and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty J Bone Joint Surg Br 77:865–889

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Merle d’Aubigné (1990) Cotation chiffrée de la fonction de la hanche. Rev Chir Orthop 76:371–374

    Google Scholar 

  19. Noble PC, Lindahl LJ, Jay JL et al (1986) Femoral anatomy and the design of total hip replacements. Trans Orthop Res 11:335

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ramaniraka NA, Rakotomanana LR, Rubin PJ et al (2000) Prothèse totale de hanche sans ciment: influence des paramètres extramédullaires sur la stabilité primaire et lescontraintes à l’interface os-prothèse. Rev Chir Orthop 86:590–597

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Rubin PJ, Leyvraz PF, Aubaniac JM et al (1992) The mor-phology of the proximal femur. A three-dimensional radio-graphic analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 74:28–32

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Spalding TJ (1996) Effect of femoral offset on motion and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty J Bone Joint Surg Br 78:997

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Steinberg B, Harris WH (1992) The offset problem in total hip arthroplasty. Contemp Orthop 24:556–562

    Google Scholar 

  24. Yamaguchi T, Naito M, Asayama I et al (2004) Total hip arthroplasty: the relationship between posterolateral recon-struction, abductor muscle strength, and femoral offset. J Orthop Surg 12:164–167

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Reference

  1. Espehaug B, Furnes O, Havelin LI et al (2006) Registration completeness to the Norwegian arthroplasty register. Acta Orthop 77:49–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hallan G, Lie SA, O Furnes et al (2007) Medium- and long-term performance of 11516 uncemented primary femoral stems from the Norwegian arthroplasty register. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89-B(12):1574–1580

    Google Scholar 

  3. Havelin LI, Espehaug B, Engesæter LB (2002) The performance of two hydroxyapatite- coated acetabular cups compared with Charnley cups. From the Norwegian arthroplasty register. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:839–845

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Reikerås O, Gunderson RB (2003) Excellent results of HA coating on a grit-blasted stem: 245 patients followed for 8–12 years. Acta Orthop Scand 74(2):140–145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Røkkum M, Reigstad A (1999) Total hip replacement with an entirely hydroxyapatite-coated prosthesis: 5 years’ fol-low-up of 94 consecutive hips. J Arthroplasty 14(6): 689–700

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Reference

  1. Capello WN, D’Antonio JA, Feinberg JR et al (2003) Ten-year results with hydroxyapatite-coated total hip femoral components in patients less than fifty years old. A concise follow up of a previous report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:885–889

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dorr LD, Kane TJ 3rd, Conaty JP (1994) Long-term results of cemented total hip arthroplasty in patients 45 years old or younger. A 16 year follow up study. J Arthroplasty 19:453–456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Eskelinen A, Remes V, Helenius I et al (2006) Uncemented total hip arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis in young patients. A mid- to long-term follow up study from the Finnish arthroplasty register. Acta Orthop 77(1):57–70

    Google Scholar 

  4. Furnes O, Lie SA, Espehaug B et al (2001) Hip disease and the prognosis of total hip replacements. A review of 53,698 primary total hip replacements reported to the Norwegian arthroplasty register 1987–99. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83-B:579–586

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hallan G, Lie SA, Furnes O et al (2007) Medium- and long-term performance of 11,516 uncemented primary femoral stems from the Norwegian arthroplasty register. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(12):1574–1580

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Johnsen S, Sørensen HT, Lucht UT et al (2006) Patient-related predictors of implant failure after primary total hip replacement in the initial, short-, and long-terms: a nation-wide Danish followup study including 36984 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:1303–1308

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kawamura H, Dunbar MJ, Murray P et al (2001) The porous coated anatomic total hip replacement. A ten to fourteen-year follow up study of a cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83:1333–1338

    Google Scholar 

  8. Wangen H, Lereim P, Holm I et al (2008) Hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 30 years: excellent ten to 16-year follow up results with a HA coated stem. Int Orthop 32(2):203–208

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Wroblewski BM, Siney PD, Fleming PA (2002) Charnley low-frictional torque arthroplasty in patients under the age of 51 years. Follow up to 33 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:540–543

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Reference

  1. Baker RP, Squires B, Gargan MF et al (2006) Total hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty in mobile, independent patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the femo-ral neck. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88-A:2583–2589

    Google Scholar 

  2. Blomfeldt R, Törnkvist H, Eriksson K et al (2006) A ran-domized controlled trial comparing bipolar hemiarthroplasty with total hip replacement for displaced intracapsular frac-tures of the femoral neck in elderly patients. J. Bone Joint Surg Br 89-B:160–165

    Google Scholar 

  3. Casteleyn PP, Melon C, Opdecam P (1977) Treatment of intracapsular femoral neck fractures by femoral prostheses. Acta Orthop Belg 43: 693–701

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Christiaensen T (1969) A new hip prosthesis with trunnion-bearing. Acta Chir Scand 135:43–46

    Google Scholar 

  5. Christie J, Burnett R, Potts HR et al (1994) Echocardiography of transatrial embolism during cemented and uncemented hemi-arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br 76-B:409–412

    Google Scholar 

  6. Clark DI, Ahmed AB, Baxendale BR et al (2001) Cardiac output during hemiarthroplasties of the hip. A prospective, controlled trial of cemented and uncemented prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83:414–418

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. D’Arcy J, Devas M (1976) Treatment of fractures of the femoral neck by replacement with the Thompson prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 58:279–286

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ding M, Dalstra M, Danielsen CC et al (1997) Age varia-tions in the properties of human tibial trabecular bone. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79:995–1002

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Ding M, Dalstra M, Linde F et al (1998) Mechanical proper-ties of the normal human tibial cartilage-bone complex in relation to age. Clinic Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 13:351–358

    Google Scholar 

  10. Dorr LD, Glousman R, Sew Yoy AL et al (1986) Treatment of femoral neck fractures with total hip replacement versus cemented and noncemented hemiarthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1:21–28

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Dutton A, Rubash HE (2008) Hot topics and controversies in arthroplasty: cementless femoral fixation in elderly patients. Instr Course Lect 57:255–259

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Engh CA, Glassman AH, Bobyn JD (1986) Surgical princi-ples in cementless total hip arthroplasty. Tech Orthop 1:35–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Figved W, Dybvik E, Frihagen F et al (2007) Conversion from failed hemiarthroplasty to total hip arthroplasty: a Norwegian arthroplasty register analysis of 595 hips with previous femoral neck fractures. Acta Orthop 78:711–718

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Garden RS (1961) Low angle fixation in fractures of the femoral neck. J Bone Joint Surg Br 43:647–663

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gingras MB, Clarke J, Evarts CM (1980) Prosthetic replace-ment in femoral neck fractures. Clin Orthop 152:147–157

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hestermans Y, Amiri-Lamraski A, Bertrand P et al (1985) Traitement des fractures intracapsulaires du col fémoral du vieillard par prothèse de Thompson. Acta Orthop Belg 51:298–309

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Jensen JS (1984) Determining factors for the mortality fol-lowing hip fractures. Injury 15:411–414

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Johnell O, Nilsson B, Obrant K (1984) Age and sex pattern of hip fracture - changes in 30 years. Acta Orthop Scand 55:290–292

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Leighton RK, Schmidt AH, Collier P (2007) Advances in the treatment of intracapsular hip fractures in the elderly. Injury 38(suppl 3):524–534

    Google Scholar 

  20. Macaulay W, Nellans KW, Garvin KL et al (2008) Prospective randomized clinical trial comparing hemiarthro-plasty to total hip arthroplasty in the treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures. J Arthroplasty 23(suppl 1):2–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Maxted MJ, Denham RA (1984) Failure of hemiarthroplasty for fractures of the neck of the femur. Injury 15:224–226

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Meyer S (1981) Prosthetic replacement in hip fractures: a comparison between the Moore and Christiansen endopros-theses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 160:57–62

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Moore AT (1953) The Moore self-locking Vitallium pros-thesis in fresh femoral neck fractures. A new low posterior approach (The Southern exposure). In: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Instructional Course Lectures, 3rd edn. vol 16.CV Mosby, Louis, pp 309–321

    Google Scholar 

  24. Mueller SM, Mizuno S, Glowacki J (1998) The effect of age on the osteogenic potential of human bone marrow cells cultured in three-dimensional collagen sponges. Bone 23:S536

    Google Scholar 

  25. Obrant KJ, Carlsson AS (1987) Survival of hemiarthro-plasties after cervical hip fractures. Orthopedics 10: 1153–1156

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Parker MJ, Palmer CR (1993) A new mobility score for pre-dicting mortality after hip fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Br 75:797

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Parker MJ, Gurusamy K (2006) Arthroplasties (with and without bone cement) for proximal femoral fractures in adults (review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 3. Art. No.: CD001706. doi 10.1002/14651858. CD001706.pub3

    Google Scholar 

  28. Qureshi KN, Hodkinson HM (1974) Evaluation of a ten-question mental test in the institutionalized elderly. Age Ageing 3:152

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Rogmark C, Johnell O (2005) Orthopaedic treatment of dis-placed femoral neck fractures in elderly patients. Disabil Rehabil 27:1143–1149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Sikorski JM, Millar AJ (1977) Systemic disturbance from Thompson’s arthroplasty: a age-matched and sex-matched controlled retrospective survey. J Bone Joint Surg Br 59:398–401

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sonstegaard DA, Kaufer H, Matthews LS (1974) A bio-chemical evaluation of implant, reduction and prosthesis in the treatment of intertrochanteric hip fractures. Orthop Clin North Am 5:551

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wagner J, DeMarneffe R (1968) Mechanical study of the cemented Austin Moore hip prosthesis. Acta Orthop Belg 34:253

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Weinrauch PC, Moore WR, Shooter DR et al (2006) Early prosthetic complications after unipolar hemiarthroplasty. ANZ J Surg 76:432–435

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Whittaker RP (1972) Fifteen years experience with metallic endoprosthetic replacement of the femoral head for femoral neck fractures. J Trauma 12:799

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wakefi eld Orthopaedic Clinic, 270 Wakefi eld Street Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia

    Scott Brumby

Authors
  1. Scott Brumby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Scott Brumby .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. “La Boiserie”, Rue du Pont de Thé 8, 74940, Annecy le Vieux, France

    Jean-Pierre Vidalain

  2. Centre Orthopédique Santy, Av. Paul Santy 24, 69008, Lyon, France

    Tarik Aït Si Selmi

  3. Musgrave Park Hospital, Stockman’s Lane, BT9 7JB, Belfast, UK

    David Beverland

  4. Warwick Hospital, Lakin Road, CV34 5BW, Warwick, UK

    Steve Young

  5. The Centre for Hip Surgery, Wrightington Hospital, Appley Bridge, WN6 9EP, Wigan, UK

    Tim Board

  6. Department of Orthopaedics, Siloah Privat Hospital, Worbstreet 324, 3073, Guemligen, Switzerland

    Jens Boldt

  7. Wakefield Orthopaedic Clinic, 270 Wakefield Street, Adelaide, South Australia, 5000, Australia

    Scott Brumby

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Brumby, S. (2011). Corail® Outcomes. In: Vidalain, JP., et al. The Corail® Hip System. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18396-6_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18396-6_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-18395-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-18396-6

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation