RESUMO
Objective We aimed to investigate whether there is a change in the postoperative lateral and vertical femoral offset (FO) in patients who underwent bipolar straight stem hemiarthroplasty (SSHA) and calcar stem hemiarthroplasty (CRHA) and whether this change makes a difference in the comparison of both groups. Material and methods This study included 109 patients who met these criteria. Patients are divided into two groups according to treatment methods. There were 58 patients (group 1) who underwent SSHA due to intracapsular (AO type 31-B neck and 31-C head fracture) femur fracture, and there were 51 patients (group 2) who underwent CRHA due to extracapsular (AO type 31-A intertrochanteric) femur fracture. We analyzed femoral vertical and lateral femoral offset, Wiberg angle, and head-neck angle difference in both groups. Results The median age was significantly higher in the CRHA group (p=0.042). The Harris hip score (HHS) was significantly higher in the SSHA group (p=0.023). The femoral offset difference was 5 mm in the SSHA group, while it was significantly lower (-6 mm) in the CRHA group (p<0.001). The Wiberg angle difference did not differ significantly between patient groups (p=0.214). The limb length difference was found to be similar in both surgical groups (p=0.483). Conclusions The study results show that there was no negative correlation between clinical and radiological outcomes in the SSHA group, whereas there was a negative correlation between clinical and radiological outcomes in the CRHA group. It is very difficult to control vertical and lateral offset reconstruction, especially in extracapsular hip fractures reconstructed by hemiarthroplasty. Deficiencies in lateral and vertical stabilization restoration may be associated with poor clinical outcomes in CRHA patients. Orthopedic surgeries should be performed carefully when restoring leg length and femoral offset, especially calcar replacement hemiarthroplasties.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This study investigated the design and osseointegration process of transitive porous implants that can be used in humans and all trabecular and compact bone structure animals. The aim was to find a way of forming a strong and durable tissue bond on the bone-implant interface. METHODS: Massive and transitive porous implants were produced on a direct metal laser sintering machine, surgically implanted into the skulls of sheep and kept in place for 12 weeks. At the end of the 12-week period, the Massive and porous implants removed from the sheep were investigated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to monitor the osseointegration process. RESULTS: In the literature, each study has selected standard sizes for pore diameter in the structures they use. However, none of these involved transitional porous structures. In this study, as opposed to standard pores, there were spherical or elliptical pores at the micro level, development channels and an inner region. Bone cells developed in the inner region. Transitive pores grown gradually in accordance with the natural structure of the bone were modeled in the inner region for cells to develop. Due to this structure, a strong and durable tissue bond could be formed at the bone-implant interface. CONCLUSIONS: Osseointegration processes of Massive vs. porous implants were compared. It was observed that cells were concentrated on the surface of Massive implants. Therefore, osseointegration between implant and bone was less than that of porous implants. In transitive porous implants, as opposed to Massive implants, an outer region was formed in the bone-implant interface that allowed tissue development.