Official Journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
Table 2 The percentage of acceptable implants for every stem design (every single parameter was evaluated; the last row shows the percentages of acceptable implants that matched all six criteria)
Reconstructive parameter | Acceptable | Stem design | Chi-square test | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Single wedge | Anatomical | Conical | |||
Combined anteversion | Yes | 153 (76.5%) | 121 (60.5%) | 197 (98.5%) | p < 0.0001 |
No | 47 (22.5%) | 79 (39.5%) | 3 (1.5%) | ||
Offset restoration | Yes | 192 (96%) | 164 (82%) | 186 (93%) | p < 0.0001 |
No | 8 (4%) | 36 (18%) | 14 (7%) | ||
Coronal tilt | Yes | 200 (100%) | 200 (100%) | 199 (99.5%) | p = 0.367 |
No | – | – | 1 (0.5%) | ||
Sagittal tilt | Yes | 199 (99.5%) | 200 (100%) | 199 (99.5%) | p = 0.605 |
No | 1 (0.5%) | – | 1 (0.5%) | ||
Canal filling | Yes | 199 (99.5%) | 177 (88.5%) | 198 (99%) | p < 0.0001 |
No | 1 (0.5%) | 23 (11.5%) | 2 (1%) | ||
Leg lengthening | Yes | 188 (94%) | 183 (91.5%) | 194 (97%) | p = 0.063 |
No | 12 (6%) | 17 (8.5%) | 6 (3%) | ||
All the parameters | Yes | 138 (69%) | 88 (44%) | 174 (87%) | p < 0.0001 |
No | 62 (31%) | 112 (56%) | 26 (13%) | ||