Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Indikationen bei modularen Implantaten

  • Chapter
Modulare Revisionsendoprothetik des Hüftgelenks

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

Access this chapter

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 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Bos I, Berner J, Diebold J, Loers U (1995) Histologische und morphometrische Untersuchungen am Femur mit stabilen Hüftgelenkendoprothesen. Eine Autopsiestudie mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der zur Spätlockerung führenden Faktoren. Z Orthop 133:460–466

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cameron H (1994) The two to six jear results with a proximally modular noncemented total hip replacement used in hip revisions. Clin Orthop 298:47–53

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Dorr LD, Dierdorf D, Carn RM (1987) Principles of cementless total hip hip revision and use of the APR revision hip. Tech Orthop 2:20–33

    Google Scholar 

  4. Elke R, Morscher E, Schwaller C, Zimmerli W (2004) Revisionsendoprothetik. In: Tschauner C (Hrsg) Orthopädie und Orthopädisiche Chirurgie — Becken, Hüfte. S 382–409

    Google Scholar 

  5. Engh CA, Glassmann AH (1990) Cementless revision of failed total hip replacement. Orthop Rev 14:23–28

    Google Scholar 

  6. Gebert C, Hardes J, Hoffmann C, Winkelmann W, Gosheger G (2002) Options for surgical treatment of malignant bone tumors. Chirurg 73:1162–1169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Gradinger R, Rechl H, Ascherl R, Plotz W, Hipp E (1993) Partial endoprosthetic reconstruction of the pelvis in malignant tumors. Orthopäde 22:167–173

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Heller KD, Prescher A, Zilkens KW, Forst R (1997) Anatomical study on femoral vein occlusion during simulated hip arthroplasty. Surgical and radiologic anatomy. J Clin Anat 119:133–137

    Google Scholar 

  9. Incavo SJ, Beard DM, Pupparo F, Ries M, Wiedel J (1998) One stage revision of periprosthetic fractures around loose cemented total hip arthroplasty. Am J Orthop 35–41

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lawrence J, Engh C, Macalino G (1993) Revision total hip arthroplasty: long term results without cement. Clin Orthop 24:635–644

    Google Scholar 

  11. Longjohn DB, Dorr LD (1999) Bone stock loss and allografting: Femur. In: Bono JV et al. (eds) Revision total hip arthroplasty. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokio

    Google Scholar 

  12. Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM (1994) Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty: a 6 jear follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty 9:33–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schmalzried T, Jasty M, Harris WH (1992) Periprosthetic bone loss in total hip arthroplasty. Polyethylene wear debris and the concept of the effective joint space. J Bone Joint Surg 74-A:849–863

    Google Scholar 

  14. Schutzer SF, Harris WH (1994) High placement of porous coated acetabular components in complex total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 9:359–367

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Thornhill TS (1998) Mechanisms of failure of total hip arthroplasty. In: Bono JV et al. (eds) Revision total hip arthroplasty. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokio, pp 1–2

    Google Scholar 

  16. Van Flandern G (1998) Implant inventory. In: Bono JV et al. (eds) Revision total hip arthroplasty. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York Tokio, pp 160–164

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wahl B, Graßhoff H, Meinecke I, Neumann HW (2001) Die operative Therapie bei periprothetischer Femurschaftfraktur nach Hüfttotalendoprothesen — Indikation und Ergebnis. Orthopäd Prax 37/8:516–521

    Google Scholar 

  18. Weinhardt C, Czosnowski W, Heller KD (2003) Eine Kniegelenkprothese mit femoralem Hülsenschaft zur Vermeidung einer interprothetischen Femurfraktur. 33: 142–144

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wirtz DC, Niethard FU (1997) Ursachen, Diagnostik und Therapie der aseptischen Hüftendoprothesenlockerung — eine Standortbestimmung. Z Orthop 135:270–280

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wirtz DC, Heller KD, Holzwarth U, Siebert CH, Pitto RP, Zeiler G, Blencke BA, Forst R (2000) A modular femoral implant for uncemented stem revision in THR. Int Orthop 24:134–138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Zehntner MK, Ganz R (1994) Midterm results (5,5–10 years) of acetabular allograft reconstruction with the acetabular reinforcement ring during total hip revision. J Arthroplasty 9:469–479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. K.-D. Heller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Schloss-Str. 85, 40477, Düsseldorf

    Peter Thümler (Professor, Dr. med.) (Professor, Dr. med.)

  2. Erlangen-Nürnberg, Rathsberger Str. 57, 91054, Erlangen

    Raimund Forst (Professor, Dr. med.) (Professor, Dr. med.)

  3. Rummelsberg 71, 90592, Schwarzenbruck

    Günther Zeiler (Professor, Dr. med.) (Professor, Dr. med.)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer Medizin Verlag Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Heller, KD. (2005). Indikationen bei modularen Implantaten. In: Thümler, P., Forst, R., Zeiler, G. (eds) Modulare Revisionsendoprothetik des Hüftgelenks. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26803-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-26803-0_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-20060-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-26803-1

  • eBook Packages: Medicine (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation