Author’s response: Letter “Short proximal components in modular revision stems carry a higher risk for stem fractures”

Abstract

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Herold

Nötzli

Eijer

. Short proximal components in modular revision stems carry a higher risk for stem fractures. Hip Int. Epub ahead of print 22 October 2019. DOI: 10.1177/1120700019884049.

Tsikandylakis

Mohaddes

Cnudde , et al. Head size in primary total hip arthroplasty. EFORT Open Rev 2018; 3: 225–231.

Krull

Morlock

Bishop

. Factors influencing taper failure of modular revision hip stems. Med Eng Phys 2018; 54: 65–73.

Orthoload. Instant of peak force, https://orthoload.com/database/?implantId=12&activityId=217&activityIndentationLevel=2&parameterId=145&parameterIndentationLevel=1&patientId=ebl&fileId=ebl361k&fileType=t&selectBox=file (accessed 07 April 2020).

Ladurner

Zdravkovic

Grob

. Femoral bone restoration patterns in revision total hip arthroplasty using distally fixed modular tapered titanium stems and an extended trochanteric osteotomy approach. J Arthroplasty 2018; 33: 2210–2217.

Fink

. What can the surgeon do to reduce the risk of junction breakage in modular revision stems? Arthroplasty Today 2018; 4: 306–309.