The aim of this study was to give estimates of the incidence of component incompatibility in hip and knee arthroplasty and to test the effect of an online, real-time compatibility check. Intraoperative barcode registration of arthroplasty implants was introduced in Denmark in 2013. We developed a compatibility database and, from May 2017, real-time compatibility checking was implemented and became part of the registration. We defined four classes of component incompatibility: A-I, A-II, B-I, and B-II, depending on an assessment of the level of risk to the patient (A/B), and on whether incompatibility was knowingly accepted (I/II).Aims
Materials and Methods
Aims
Patients and Methods
Increasing innovation in rapid prototyping (RP)
and additive manufacturing (AM), also known as 3D printing, is bringing
about major changes in translational surgical research. This review describes the current position in the use of additive
manufacturing in orthopaedic surgery. Cite this article:
Between 1988 and 1998 we implanted 318 total hip replacements (THRs) in 287 patients using the Plasmacup (B. Braun Ltd, Sheffield, United Kingdom) and a conventional metal-on-polyethylene articulation. The main indications for THR were primary or secondary osteoarthritis. At follow-up after a mean 11.6 years (7.6 to 18.4) 17 patients had died and 20 could not be traced leaving a final series of 280 THRs in 250 patients. There were 62 revisions (22.1%) in 59 patients. A total of 43