Acta Ortopédica Mexicana

Reyna-Olivera G, Harb-Peña EJ
Clinical and X-ray comparison between a reamed versus an unreamedacetabulum in hip hemiarthroplasty
Acta Ortop Mex 2005; 19 (s1)

Language: Inglés
References: 20
Page: 34-37
PDF: 41.71 Kb.

[Fulltext - PDF]


Every year about 20,000 people suffer hip fractures in Mexico. A high proportion of these fractures is resolved by hip hemiarthroplasty. Purpose: to clinically and radiologically compare a reamed versus an unreamed acetabulum in this kind of surgery. Material and methods: All patients, 66 in total, having undergone a hip hemiarthroplasty between January 1987 and December 1996 were assessed. Of these 66 patients, 25 were treated with acetabular reaming and 41 without reaming. Results: there were no clinically (Harris) or radiologically (Sotelo-Garza and Charnley) significant differences at six weeks, six months, one year, two year, or three years (p=0.06). The mean Harris testing score improved over time in both groups. The results according to the fracture location showed that the more proximal the fracture was, the better the outcome in both groups. Discussion: these results are significant as only patients with the proper indication and good surgical technique were included with the understanding that the main purpose was to assess pain and acetabular erosion caused by the implant.

Key words: acetabulum, arthroplasty, hip, X-ray.


  1. Lazcano MA: Hemiartroplastía de cadera tipo Lazcano para fracturas intertrocantéricas. Ciencia y cultura latinoamericana, México DF, 1998.

  2. D’Arcy J, Devas M: Treatment of fractures of the femoral neck by replacement with the Thompson prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg 1976; 58-(3): 279-286.

  3. Eiskjaer S, Ostgard SE: Survivorship analysis of hemiarthroplasties. Clinic Orthop 1993; (286): 206-211.

  4. Marjolein CH, Allen WA: Effect of hemiarthroplasty on acetabular cartilage, Rehabilitation center progress, 1996.

  5. Sauri JC, Lazcano MA: Hemiartroplastía de cadera integral Lazcano de 2 a 6 años de evolución. Informe de 49 operaciones. Rev Mex Ortop Traum 1999; 13(6): 523-525.

  6. Nottage WM, McMaster WC: Comparison of bipolar implants with fixed-neck prostheses in femoral-neck fractures. Clinic Orthop 1990; (251): 38.

  7. Kaltsas DC, Klugman DJ: Acetabular erosion: A comparison between the Austin-Moore and Monk hard top prosthesis. Injury 1986; 17(4): 230-236.

  8. Aufranc OE, Edwards JW. Instructional course, Lectures II: 163 Ann Arbor, Am. Acad. Orthop Surg 1954.

  9. Sotelo-Garza A, Charnley J: The results of Charnley arthroplasty of the hip performance for protrusion acetabuli. Clinic Orthop 1978; (132): 12-18.

  10. Thompson FR: Two and a half years, experience with a vitallium intramedullary hip prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg 1954; 36-(3): 489-500.

  11. Moore AT: The self-locking metal hip prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg 1957; 39(4)-A: 811-827.

  12. Koval KJ, Aharonoff GB, Rosenberg AD, Bernstein Rl, Zuckerman JD: Functional Outcome after hip fracture. Effect of general versus regional anesthesia. Clin Orthop 1998; (348):37-41.

  13. Kobayashi A, Donelly WJ, Scott G, Freeman MAR: Early radiological observations may predict the long-term survival of femoral hip prostheses. J Bone and Joint Surg 1997; 79(4)-B: 583-589.

  14. Kofoed H, Kofod J: Moore prosthesis in the treatment of fresh femoral neck fractures. A critical review with special attention to secondary acetabular degeneration. Injury 1983; 14(6): 531-540.

  15. Cook S, Thomas KA, Kester MA: Wear characteristics of the canine acetabulum against different femoral prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg 1989; 71-(2): 187-197.

  16. Cruess RL, Kwok DC, Due PN, Lecavalier MA, Dang GT: The response of articular cartilage to weight bearing against metal. A study of hemiarthroplasty of the hip in the dog. J Bone Joint Surg 1984; 66-(4): 592-597.

  17. Dalldorf PG, Banas MP, Hicks DG, Pellegrini VD Jr. : Rate of degeneration of human acetabular cartilage after hemiarthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 1995; 77(6)-:877-882.

  18. Harris WH: Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg 1969; 51(4): 737-755.

  19. Johnston CE, Ripley LP, Bray CB, Shaffer LW, Strong TEH, Henning GD, Pruner RA: Primary endoprosthetic replacement for acute femoral neck fractures. A Review of 150 cases. Clinic Orthop 1982; (167): 123-130.

  20. Koval KJ, Shorron ML, Aharonoff GB, Zuckerman JD: Predictors of functional recovery after hip fracture in the elderly. Clinic Orthop 1998; 348: 22-28.