Literature DB >> 10693554

Circumferential allograft replacement of the proximal femur. A critical analysis.

F S Haddad1, M J Spangehl, B A Masri, D S Garbuz, C P Duncan.   

Abstract

The use of proximal femoral structural allografts in revision hip arthroplasty remains controversial. The current study constitutes the mean 8.8 years followup (range, 3-12.5 years) of a consecutive series of 55 proximal femoral allografts in 51 patients. In 46 patients the implant was cemented into the allograft and the distal femur, and the host proximal femur was resected at the time of reconstruction in all but seven patients. Five patients underwent revision surgery for acetabular failure, and six additional patients underwent revision surgery for failure of the proximal femoral allograft. Three patients underwent successful revision surgery and had additional proximal femoral allografts. Failure was caused by graft fracture in one patient, by deep infection in two patients, and by junctional nonunion in three patients. Junctional nonunion was seen in five patients (9%), two of whom were treated successfully with bone grafting and bone grafting and plating, respectively. Instability was observed in six patients (11%). Trochanteric nonunion was seen in 22 patients (43%) and trochanteric escape was seen in 14 patients (27%). The mean Harris hip score improved from 39 to 79 points. Resorption involving the full thickness of the allograft in at least one zone was seen in seven patients. This progressed rapidly and silently within the first 3 years but has yet to lead to the failure of any of the reconstructions. Infection was ruled out in every case. Allograft resorption was seen in seven patients and may be related to a combination of factors. It is most likely that this is an immunologic problem of slow rejection, but it is possible that the distal cement fixation led to stress shielding and resorption attributable to mechanical disuse. The possible protective role of retaining the bivalved host bone as a vascularized onlay autograft remains to be clarified. Although these results justify the continued use of structural allografts for selected patients, continued followup is warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10693554     DOI: 10.1097/00003086-200002000-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  11 in total

1.  Initial stability of circumferential meshes with impacted bone allografts for massive femoral defects.

Authors:  Agustín José Guala; Martin Buttaro; Francisco Piccaluga
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2007-04-20       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Revision of the deficient proximal femur with a proximal femoral allograft.

Authors:  Oleg Safir; Catherine F Kellett; Michael Flint; David Backstein; Allan E Gross
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-30       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  CT Lesion Model-Based Structural Allografts: Custom Fabrication and Clinical Experience.

Authors:  Jan Claas Brune; Uwe Hesselbarth; Philipp Seifert; Dimitri Nowack; Rüdiger von Versen; Mark David Smith; Dirk Seifert
Journal:  Transfus Med Hemother       Date:  2012-11-13       Impact factor: 3.747

Review 4.  Management bone loss of the proximal femur in revision hip arthroplasty: Update on reconstructive options.

Authors:  Vasileios I Sakellariou; George C Babis
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2014-11-18

5.  Proximal femoral replacement in non-oncologic patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Ivan De Martino; Rocco D'Apolito; Allina A Nocon; Thomas P Sculco; Peter K Sculco; Mathias P Bostrom
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-11-10       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Reconstructed the bone stock after femoral bone loss in Vancouver B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures using cortical strut allograft and impacted cancellous allograft.

Authors:  Donghai Li; Qinsheng Hu; Pengde Kang; Jing Yang; Zongke Zhou; Bin Shen; Fuxing Pei
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Age, gender, obesity, and depression are associated with patient-related pain and function outcome after revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jasvinder A Singh; David Lewallen
Journal:  Clin Rheumatol       Date:  2009-08-31       Impact factor: 2.980

8.  Proximal femoral allograft for major segmental femoral bone loss: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  B A Rogers; A Sternheim; D Backstein; O Safir; A E Gross
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2011-10-13

9.  Cemented allograft-prosthesis composite reconstruction for the proximal femur tumor.

Authors:  Li Min; Fan Tang; Hong Duan; Yong Zhou; Wen-Li Zhang; Rui Shi; Chong-Qi Tu
Journal:  Onco Targets Ther       Date:  2015-08-25       Impact factor: 4.147

10.  CIRCUMFERENTIAL PROXIMAL FEMORAL ALLOGRAFTS IN REVISION SURGERY ON TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: CASE REPORTS WITH A MINIMUM FOLLOW-UP OF 20 YEARS.

Authors:  Bruno Dutra Roos; Milton Valdomiro Roos; Antero Camisa Júnior
Journal:  Rev Bras Ortop       Date:  2015-12-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.