Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Corail® Hip System pp 155–190Cite as

The Corail Revision Family

  • Chapter

  • 1418 Accesses

Abstract

Revision hip surgery is a complex and challenging task. The frequency of revision surgery is increasing with time and the need for a conservative approach to preserve bone stock and load the femur as physiologically as possible is paramount. The various options for reconstruction of the femur are discussed in the following chapter.

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_5

References

  1. Allan G, Lavoie GJ, McDonald S et al (1991) Proximal femoral allografts in revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73:235–240

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Blackley HRL, Davis AM et al (2001) Proximal femoral allografts for reconstruction of bone stock in revision arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83:346

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Crawford SA, Siney PD, Wroblewski BM (2000) Revision of failed total hip arthroplasty with a proximal femoral modular cemented stem. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82(5):684–688

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Gie GA, Linder L, Ling LS et al (1993) Contained morselized allograft in revision total hip arthroplasty surgical technique. Orthop Clin North Am 24:717–725

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Halliday BR, English HW, Timperley AJ et al (2003) Femoral impaction grafting with cement in revision total hip replacement. Evolution of the technique and results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85(6):809–817

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Moreland JR, Moreno MA (2001) Cementless femoral revision arthroplasty of the hip: minimum 5 years follow up. Clin Orthop Relat Res Dec(393):194–201

    Google Scholar 

  7. Norwegian Arthroplasty Register annual report 2009

    Google Scholar 

  8. Paprosky WG, Greidanus NV, Antoniou J (1999) Minimum 10-year-results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res Dec(369): 230–242

    Google Scholar 

  9. Reikerås O, Gunderson RB (2006) Excellent results with femoral revision surgery using an extensively hydroxyapa-tite-coated stem: 59 patients followed for 10–16 years. Acta Orthop 77(1):98–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Seth S, Leopold M et al (1999) Current status of impaction allografting for revision of a femoral component. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:1337–1345

    Google Scholar 

  11. Swedish Arthroplasty Register annual report 2008

    Google Scholar 

Referneces

  1. Benson E, Christensen C, Monesmith E et al (2000) Particulate bone grafting of osteolytic femoral lesions around stable cementless stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res Dec(381): 58–67

    Google Scholar 

  2. Learmonth ID, Hussell JG, Grobler GP (1996) Unpredictable progression of osteolysis following cementless hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand 67:245–248

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Maloney W, Jasty M, Harris WH (1990) Endosteal erosion in association with stable uncemented femoral components J Bone Joint Surg Am 72:1025–1034

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wanz Z, Dorr LD (1996) Natural history of femoral focal osteolysis with proximal ingrowth smooth stem implant. J Arthroplasty 11:718–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

References

  1. Ferney BJ, Blumenfeld TJ, Bargar WL (2007) Time to revision of primary THA is shorter for specialists than non specialists. Clin Orthop Relat Res 485:175–179

    Google Scholar 

  2. Pinaroli A, Lavoie F, Cartillier J-C et al (2009) Conservative femoral stem revision: avoiding therapeutic escalation J Arthroplasty 24(3):365–373

    Google Scholar 

  3. Reikeras O, Gunderson RB (2006) Excellent results with femoral revision surgery using an extensively hydroxyapa-tite-coated stem: 59 patients followed for 10–16 years. Acta Orthop 77(1):98–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

References

  1. Board TN, Gambhir AK, Hoad-Reddick A et al (2008) Uncemented Stems in Revision Hip Arthroplasty. Presented at the British Hip Society meeting, Norwich, 2008

    Google Scholar 

  2. Crawford SA, Siney PD, Wroblewski BM (2000) Revision of failed total hip arthroplasty with a proximal femoral modular cemented stem. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82(5):684–688

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Halliday BR, English HW, Timperley AJ et al (2003) Femoral impaction grafting with cement in revision total hip replacement. Evolution of the technique and results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85(6):809–817

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Paprosky WG, Greidanus NV, Antoniou J (1999) Minimum 10-year-results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res Dec(369): 230–242

    Google Scholar 

  5. Paprosky WG, Burnett RS (2002) Assessment and classification of bone stock deficiency in revision total hip arthro-plasty. Am J Orthop 31(8):459–464

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Reikerås O, Gunderson RB (2006) Excellent results with femoral revision surgery using an extensively hydroxyapa-tite-coated stem: 59 patients followed for 10–16 years. Acta Orthop 77(1):98–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Vidalain JP (1998) HA coated long stems in revision arthroplasty. Retrospective analysis of a continuous series of 109 KAR™ prostheses. Paper presented at the European Hip Society meeting. Beaune, 1998

    Google Scholar 

References

  1. Chandler HP, Ayres DK, Tan RC (1995) Revision total hip replacement using the S-ROM femoral component. Clin Orthop Relat Res 130:319–322

    Google Scholar 

  2. Gie GA, Linder L, Ling RS et al (1993) Impacted cancellous allografts and cement for revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73:14–21

    Google Scholar 

  3. Harris WH, Mulroy RD, Malone WJ et al (1991) Intraoperative measurement of rotational stability of femoral components of total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res May; (266):119–121

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hozack WJ, Mesa JJ, Rothman RH (1996) Head-neck modularity for total hip arthroplasty; Is it necessary? J Arthroplasty 11:397–399

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Kempf JF, Hhuten D, Giraud P et al (1989) Résultats des rescellements fémoraux. Rev Chir Orthop 75(1):48–52

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kim YK, Kim HJ, Song WS et al (2004) Experience with the BICONTACT revision stems with distal interlocking. J Arthroplasty 19:27–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Mahomed N, Schaztker J, Hearn T (1993) Biomechanical analysis of a distally interlocked press-fit femoral total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 8:129–132

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Massin P, Geais L, Astoin E et al (2000) The anatomic basis for the concept of lateralized femoral stem: a frontal plane radiographic study of the proximal femur. J Arthroplasty 15:93–101

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Migaud H, Jardin C, Fontaine C et al (1997) Reconstruction fémorale par des allogreffes spongieuses impactées et proté-gées par un treillis métallique au cours de révisions de pro-thèses totales de hanche. Dix neuf cas au recul moyen de 83 mois. Rev Chir Orthop 83:360–367

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Migaud H, Gueguen G, Duhamel A (2000) Reprise fémorale dans les arthroplasties de la hanche. Avantages et inconvé-nients des abords osseux extensifs Rev Chir Orthop 86(I):69–72

    Google Scholar 

  11. Philippot R, Delangle F, Verdot FX et al (2009) Femoral deficiency reconstruction using a hydroxyapatite-coated locked modular stem. A series of 43 total hip revisions. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 95(2):119–26

    Google Scholar 

  12. Raman R, Kamath RP, Parikh A et al (2005) Revision of cemented hip arthroplasty using a hydroxyapatite-ceramic-coated femoral component. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:1061–1067

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rubasch HE, Harris WH (1988) Revision of nonseptic loose, cemented femoral components using modern cementing techniques. J Arthroplasty 3:241–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Subramanian S, Argawal M, Board T et al (2010) Distally locked, fully hydroxyapatite coated modular long stems in salvage revision hip arthroplasty: a report of early experience Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 20:17–21

    Google Scholar 

  15. Trikha SP, Siongh S, Rayhnam OW et al (2005) Hydroxyapatite-ceramic-coated-femoral stems in revision hip surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 87:1055–1060

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Vidalain JP (2001) Advantages of a modular interlcked ha coated stem in revisions with major bone deficiencies. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(II):112

    Google Scholar 

  17. Vives P, Plaquet JL, Leclair A et al (1992) Revision of inter-locking rod for loosening of THP. Concept - preliminary results Acta Orthop Belg 58(1):28–35

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wagner H (1989) Revisions prothese für das Hüftgelenk. Ortopäde 75(I):25–60

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

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

    Tim Board

Authors
  1. Tim Board
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tim Board .

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

Board, T. (2011). The Corail Revision Family. In: Vidalain, JP., et al. The Corail® Hip System. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18396-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18396-6_5

  • 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