الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 105 |  |  |
| | | from | 105 | | |
Abstract
Total hip replacement is a good option to manage hip arthritis in young active patients when hip resurfacing is contraindicated.
Short stem always has a proximal location in the femur so when loose, it can be revised using a standard stem. Short-stem implants mostly fit the normal anatomy of the proximal femur and this maximizes the primary stability of the stem. Also, short stems with shorter shaft allow more physiological loading of the femur and also helps to thereby limit resorption of the femur. Further advantages, using short stems reduces the risk of thigh pain and they are easily applied through the minimally invasive approach.
Implantation of standard stems can achieve less stem subsidence and ideal stem position more than short stems.
Standard stems need less experience to be applied than short stems.
The aim of this study was to compare the early results of total hip arthroplasty using a short stem with standard stems.
The study included 40 patients. 20 were managed with the short stem and the other 20 were managed by standard stems. The mean age was 38.25 years old ranging from 20 to 50 years. It included 23 males (57.5%) and 17 females (42.5%). The main indications for THR were 1ry, 2ry osteoarthritis, and AVN.
Patients were followed up for at least 12 months after surgery using Harris hip score as a method of clinical assessment and radiographs to assess mainly cup migration, stem position, and subsidence, osteointegration and radiolucency.
No patient had encountered periprosthetic fractures, infection, dislocation, DVT, neurovascular injury or heterotopic ossification.
The early results of THR showed that all the results were satisfactory and the mean HHS was 96.2 for short stem and 96.1 for the standard stem.