Exeter short stems compared with standard length Exeter stems : experience from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry
Choy, Godwin G.H., Roe, John A., Whitehouse, Sarah L., Cashman, Kara S., & Crawford, Ross W. (2013) Exeter short stems compared with standard length Exeter stems : experience from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Journal of Arthroplasty, 28(1), pp. 103-109.
The standard Exeter stem has a length of 150mm with offsets 37.5mm to 56mm. Shorter stems of lengths 95mm, 115mm and 125mm with offsets 35.5mm or less are available for patients with smaller femurs. Concern has been raised regarding the behaviour of the smaller implants. This paper analysed data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry comparing survivorship of stems of offset 35.5mm or less with the standard stems of 37.5mm offset or greater. At seven years there was no significant difference in the Cumulative Percent Revision Rate in the short stems (3.4%, 95% CI 2.4-4.8%) compared with the standard length stems (3.5%, 95% CI 3.3-3.8%) despite its use in a greater proportion of potentially more difficult developmental dysplasia of the hip cases.
Impact and interest:
Citation counts are sourced monthly from and citation databases.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
|Item Type:||Journal Article|
|Keywords:||exeter; short stem; small stem; stem survivorship; registry|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > MEDICAL AND HEALTH SCIENCES (110000) > CLINICAL SCIENCES (110300) > Orthopaedics (110314)|
|Divisions:||Current > Schools > School of Chemistry, Physics & Mechanical Engineering
Past > QUT Faculties & Divisions > Faculty of Science and Technology
Current > Institutes > Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2012 Elsevier|
|Copyright Statement:||This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Arthroplasty. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Arthroplasty, [VOL 28, ISSUE 1, (2013)] DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.06.016|
|Deposited On:||11 Oct 2012 05:58|
|Last Modified:||04 Feb 2014 23:05|
Repository Staff Only: item control page