Literature DB >> 12377909

Dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty : an analysis of risk factors and treatment options.

Gregory M Alberton1, Whitney A High, Bernard F Morrey.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dislocation is a leading and underemphasized cause of failure in revision total hip arthroplasty. Although this fact is generally well recognized, we are aware of no detailed assessments of this problem to date. Our purpose therefore was to evaluate the risk factors leading to instability after revision as well as the expected outcome of various treatment strategies.
METHODS: Data were obtained from 1548 revision arthroplasties in 1405 patients who were followed for a minimum of two years (range, 2.0 to 16.4 years; mean, 8.1 years) or until dislocation occurred. Revisions specifically performed because of instability were excluded from the analysis. Risk factors were recorded along with treatment strategies and their success. The statistical relevance of both sets of variables was calculated.
RESULTS: A dislocation occurred after 115 (7.4%) of 1548 revision hip arthroplasties. The use of an elevated rim liner was associated with significant decreases (p < 0.05) in dislocation following revision of femoral and acetabular components. The presence of trochanteric nonunion was a significant risk factor for subsequent dislocation (p < 0.001). Revisions with 32-mm and 28-mm-diameter femoral heads were both more stable than was revision with a 22-mm-diameter head (p < 0.05 for each). Surgery was the initial treatment for twelve of the 115 dislocations. Six of the twelve hips had no further instability. Of the 103 postoperative dislocations initially managed nonoperatively, only thirty-six did not redislocate. Thirty-eight of the sixty-seven hips that had an additional dislocation after closed treatment had repeat surgery for treatment of the instability. Only eleven of the thirty-eight hips were stable at one year after surgery. Overall, at the time of the final assessment, sixty-five (57%) of the 115 hips were stable, forty-one (36%) remained unstable, and the status of nine (8%) was unknown.
CONCLUSIONS: The risk factors for instability after a total hip revision are not the same as those after a primary procedure. The extent of the soft-tissue dissection is probably the most important variable since head size and trochanteric nonunion are related to "soft-tissue tension." Modular acetabular components with an elevated rim help to stabilize a hip undergoing a revision procedure.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12377909

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  88 in total

1.  The Frank Stinchfield Award: Dislocation in revision THA: do large heads (36 and 40 mm) result in reduced dislocation rates in a randomized clinical trial?

Authors:  Donald S Garbuz; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan; Nelson V Greidanus; Eric R Bohm; Martin J Petrak; Craig J Della Valle; Allan E Gross
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Why revision total hip arthroplasty fails.

Authors:  Bryan D Springer; Thomas K Fehring; William L Griffin; Susan M Odum; John L Masonis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-10-31       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Efficacy of revision surgery for the dislocating total hip arthroplasty: report from a large community registry.

Authors:  Tiare Salassa; Daniel Hoeffel; Susan Mehle; Penny Tatman; Terence J Gioe
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Obesity is associated with higher complication rates in revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  John W Kennedy; David Young; Dominic R M Meek; Sanjeev R Patil
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2018-01-30

5.  Do large femoral heads reduce the risks of impingement in total hip arthroplasty with optimal and non-optimal cup positioning?

Authors:  Gianluca Cinotti; Niccolò Lucioli; Andrea Malagoli; Carlo Calderoli; Ferdinando Cassese
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-02-17       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Are abductor muscle quality and previous revision surgery predictors of constrained liner failure in hip arthroplasty?

Authors:  Michael G Zywiel; Loi'y H Mustafa; Peter M Bonutti; Michael A Mont
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-02-20       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Acetabular liner with focal constraint to prevent dislocation after THA.

Authors:  Jacob T Munro; Mihai H Vioreanu; Bassam A Masri; Clive P Duncan
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  The unstable total hip replacement.

Authors:  F D'Angelo; L Murena; G Zatti; P Cherubino
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.251

9.  Stem modularity alone is not effective in reducing dislocation rate in hip revision surgery.

Authors:  Dario Regis; Andrea Sandri; Pietro Bartolozzi
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2009-11-18

10.  Mathematical evaluation of jumping distance in total hip arthroplasty: influence of abduction angle, femoral head offset, and head diameter.

Authors:  Elhadi Sariali; Jean Yves Lazennec; Frederic Khiami; Yves Catonné
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2009-06       Impact factor: 3.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.