Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
8799343 | The Journal of Arthroplasty | 2018 | 25 Pages |
Abstract
Both cup types combined with augments displayed minimal relative motion that was within the accepted range thought to allow osseointegration, although the traditional surface proved superior to the newer surface. This difference was more pronounced at low BMD, with the well-established PAC cup displaying less relative motion than the more porous GAC cup, consistent with better osseointegration than the more porous cup. This suggests that the more porous implant may be less advantageous than traditional PAC cups, particularly in cases with poorer bone stock.
Related Topics
Health Sciences
Medicine and Dentistry
Orthopedics, Sports Medicine and Rehabilitation
Authors
Nicholas A. MD, Rudi G. MD, Maciej B. MD, Matthias C. MD, Thomas PhD, Sebastian PhD,