Scientific Articles   |    
Total Hip Arthroplasty with the Lord ProsthesisA LONG-TERM FOLLOW-UP STUDY
Peter Grant, MD1; Lars Nordsletten, MD, PHD1
1 Orthopaedic Centre, Ullevål University Hospital, Kirkeveien 166, N-0407 Oslo, Norway. E-mail address for P. Grant: peter.grant@ioks.uio.no. E-mail address for L. Nordsletten: lars.nordsletten@rh.uio.no
View Disclosures and Other Information
The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their research or preparation of this manuscript. They did not receive payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors are affiliated or associated.
Investigation performed at the Orthopaedic Centre, Ullevål University Hospital, Oslo, Norway

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated
J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2004 Dec 01;86(12):2636-2641
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case


Background: The Lord prosthesis has been used rather extensively for total hip arthroplasty. In 1981, we began a prospective study for the purpose of determining the long-term results associated with the use of this prosthesis. In the present report, we describe the results for the living patients after a mean duration of follow-up of 17.5 years (range, fifteen to twenty years).

Methods: One hundred and two patients (116 hips) with a mean age of sixty-two years at the time of the index arthroplasty were included in the study. Eighty-nine hips were in women, and twenty-seven were in men. The Lord femoral prosthesis (with a 32-mm head) and the Lord threaded cup were used in all patients. The protocol included radiographic analysis, recording of complications, and a clinical evaluation. The patients were evaluated at one to four years, five to nine years, and fifteen to twenty years.

Results: One patient (one hip) refused to participate and forty-two patients (forty-five hips) died with the femoral component in place, leaving fifty-nine patients (seventy hips) available for clinical assessment. One femoral component was revised because of mechanical loosening, and one was revised because of a stem fracture. One stem appeared to be loose radiographically. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis with revision of the femoral component because of mechanical loosening, stem fracture, or radiographic loosening as the end point revealed a cumulative survival rate of 98% (95% confidence interval, 95.3% to 100.7%) (with twenty-eight hips at risk) at 17.5 years. Seventeen acetabular components were revised because of mechanical loosening, and sixteen were considered to be radiographically loose. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis with revision of the acetabular component because of mechanical or radiographic loosening as the end point revealed a cumulative survival rate of 65% (95% confidence interval, 53% to 72%) (with twenty-two hips at risk) at 17.5 years.

Conclusions: We believe that the survival rate of the Lord femoral component after 17.5 years of follow-up was excellent. However, there was a substantial rate of proximal femoral bone loss. The results associated with the threaded cup were rather poor, and many patients had a loose implant but few symptoms. We recommend that patients with these implants be followed closely so that revision can be performed before substantial destruction of the acetabulum has occurred.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic study, Level II-1 (prospective cohort study). See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $35
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org


    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe

    Related Content
    The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
    JBJS Case Connector
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    JBJS Jobs
    Ohio - OhioHealth Research and Innovation Institute (OHRI)
    Louisiana - Ochsner Health System
    Pennsylvania - Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center