MIS and the Demands on Bearing Couples

  • Sabine Junk-Jantsch
  • Gerald Pflüger
Conference paper
Part of the Ceramics in Orthopaedics book series (CIO)


We started to tackle the issue of minimally invasive hip surgery in our clinic in March 2004. The first problem was to look for the ideal approach for performing minimally invasive hip arthroplasty, for alternative implants and for a reproducible procedure that could rapidly become routine practice. Based on the impressions gathered during numerous periods spent abroad, we undertook an attempt for our department to define minimal invasiveness in hip surgery. What we wanted in introducing this procedure into the routine of the department, in terms of both our demands and our expectations were the following: Definition: Minimally invasive means minimally traumatic and involves making the portal smaller and retention of all the muscle attachments in order to ensure immediate post-operative and final sufficient gait profile.


Muscle Attachment Anterolateral Approach Bearing Couple Ceramic Inlay High Carbide 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Lohmann CH: Can Metal-Metal Total Hip Arthroplasty induce Hypersensitivity reactions? Proceedings CeramTec Meeting, JA d’Antonio, M Dietrich (Eds.), Steinkopff, Darmstadt, pp33–37, 2006.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lohmann CH, Nuechtern JV, Willert HG, Junk-Jantsch S, Ruether W, Pflueger G: Hypersensitivity Reactions in Total Hip Arthroplasty, Orthopaedics, in press 2007.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lohmann CH, Pflüger G, Yazigee O, Junk-Jantsch S, Schmotzer H, Becker A, Morlock M, Willert HG: Low Carbide vs. High carbide–Is there a Difference in Tissue Response and Clinical Predictability? In: 25 Years of Cementless Arthroplasty, Santore R (ed.), in press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pflüger G, Junk-Jantsch S, Schöll V: The anterolateral approach in supine position for minimally invasive implantation of hip endoprostheses, Interact Surg (2006) 1: 21–25, Springer 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pflüger G, Junk-Jantsch S, Schöll V: Minimally Invasive Total Hip Replacement via the Anterolateral Approach in the Supine Position, Int. Orthopaedics, in press.Google Scholar
  6. 5a.
    Pflüger G, Junk-Jantsch S, Koppelent R, Results of a 5–10 Year Follow-Up Study of Hip Replacements with Metal-Metal Bearings, Radiological Findings, Interdisciplinary presentation, 2005.Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    Schöll V, Frank M, Junk-Jantsch S, Pflüger G: Kraftanalysen mittels Raspelversuchen mit modifizierten Raspelsystemen für MIS-Hüftendoprothesen, MOT, in press.Google Scholar
  8. 7.
    Watson-Jones R: Fractures of the neck of the femur, British Journal of Surgery, Vol. 23, Issue 92, p. 787–808, 1936.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 8.
    Willert HG, Buchhorn GH, Fayazzi R, Flury T, Köster G, Lohmann CH: Aseptic Loosing of Metal/Metal Endoprostheses is Associated with Lymphocytic Reactions–Signs of a Delayed Type Hypersensitivity Reaction Type IV. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (Am), 87A(1):28–37, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steinkopff Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sabine Junk-Jantsch
    • 1
  • Gerald Pflüger
    • 1
  1. 1.Evangelisches Krankenhaus WienViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations