Abstract
Thirty-two elderly patients with a femoral neck fracture treated by bipolar hemiarthroplasty and 36 patients (matched for age) with an Austin-Moore hemiarthroplasty were followed-up and compared. Bipolar replacement resulted in a higher percentage of satisfactory results, less postoperative pain, greater range of movement, more rapid return to unassisted activity, fewer unsatisfactory results and no acetabular erosion. The device functioned as bipolar in all the cases studied for inner-bearing motion.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chen SC, Sarkar S, Pell LH (1980) A radiological study of the movements of the two components of the Monk prosthesis (hard-top duo-pleet) in patients. Injury 12:243–249
D'Arcy J, Devas MB (1976) Treatment of fracture of the femoral neck by replacement with the Thompson prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 58:279–286
Devas M, Hinves B (1983) Prevention of acetabular erosion after hemiarthroplasty for fractured neck of femur. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 65:548–551
Drinker H, Murray WR (1979) The universal proximal endoprosthesis: a short term comparison with conventional hemiarthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 61:1167–1174
Giliberty RP (1983) Hemiarthroplasty of the hip using a low friction bipolar endoprosthesis. Clin Orthop 175:86–92
Gingras MB, Clarke J, Evarts CM (1980) Prosthetic replacement in femoral neck fractures. Clin Orthop 152:147–157
Kaltsas DS, Klugman DJ (1986) Acetabular erosion: a comparison between the Austin Moore and Monk hard top prosthesis. Injury 17:230–236
Lestrange NR (1990) Bipolar arthroplasty for 496 hip fractures. Clin Orthop 251:7–19
Leyshon RL, Matthews JP (1984) Acetabular erosion and the monk “hard top” prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 66:172–174
Lindberg HO, Carlsson AS (1983) Seven year follow up of total hip replacement with the Brunswik prosthesis. Acta Orthop Scand 54:891–895
Lippert FG III, Harrington RM, Veress SA, Fraser C, Green D, Bahniuk E (1982) A comparison of convergent and biplane x-ray photogrammetry systems used to detect total joint loosening. J Biomech 15:677–682
Long JW, Knight W (1980) Bateman UPF prosthesis in fractures of femoral neck. Clin Orhtop 152:198–201
Meyers S (1981) Prosthetic replacement in hip fractures: a comparison between the Moore and Christiansen endoprostheses. Clin Orthop 160:57–62
Morgensen B, Ekelund L, Hansson LI, Lidgren L, Selvik G (1982) Surface replacement of the hip in chronic arthritis. Acta Orthop Scand 53:929–936
Moshein J, Alter AH, Elconin KB, Adams WW, Isaacson J (1990) Transcervical fractures of the hip treated with the Bateman bipolar prosthesis. Clin Orthop 251:48–53
Nottage WM, McMaster WC (1990) Comparison of bipolar implants with fixed neck prosthesis in femoral neck fractures. Clin Orthop 251:38–43
Phillips TW (1987) The Bateman bipolar femoral head replacement. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 69:761–764
Soreide O, Molster A, Raugstad TS (1980) Replacement with the Christiansen endoprosthesis in acute femoral neck fractures: a 5 year follow up study. Acta Orthop Scand 51:137–144
Sutherland CJ, Wilde AH, Borden LS, Marks KE (1982) A ten year follow up of one hundred consecutive Muller curved stem total hip replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 64:970–982
Vazquez-Vela E, Vazquez-Vela G (1990) Acetabular reaction to the Bateman bipolar prosthesis. Clin Orthop 251:87–91
Verberne GHM (1983) A femoral head prosthesis with a built in joint. A radiological study of the movements of the two components. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 65:544–547
Wetherell RG, Hinves BL (1982) The Hastings bipolar hemiarthroplasty for subcapital fractures of the femoral neck. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 72:788–793
Whittaker RP, Abeshaus MM, Scholl HW, Chung SMR (1972) Fifteen years' experience with metallic endoprosthetic replacement of the femoral head for femoral neck fractures. J Trauma 12:799–806
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Malhotra, R., Arya, R. & Bhan, S. Bipolar hemiarthroplasty in femoral neck fractures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 114, 79–82 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00422830
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00422830