Literature DB >> 18450621

The survival of support rings in complex acetabular revision surgery.

F A Carroll1, D A Hoad-Reddick, R M Kerry, I Stockley.   

Abstract

Between 1980 and 2000, 63 support rings were used in the management of acetabular deficiency in a series of 60 patients, with a mean follow-up of 8.75 years (2 months to 23.8 years). There was a minimum five-year follow-up for successful reconstructions. The indication for revision surgery was aseptic loosening in 30 cases and infection in 33. All cases were Paprosky III defects; IIIA in 33 patients (52.4%) and IIIB in 30 (47.6%), including four with pelvic dissociation. A total of 26 patients (43.3%) have died since surgery, and 34 (56.7%) remain under clinical review. With acetabular revision for infection or aseptic loosening as the definition of failure, we report success in 53 (84%) of the reconstructions. A total of 12 failures (19%) required further surgery, four (6.3%) for aseptic loosening of the acetabular construct, six (9.5%) for recurrent infection and two (3.2%) for recurrent dislocation requiring captive components. Complications, seen in 11 patients (18.3%), included six femoral or sciatic neuropraxias which all resolved, one grade III heterotopic ossification, one on-table acetabular revision for instability, and three early post-operative dislocations managed by manipulation under anaesthesia, with no further instability. We recommend support rings and morcellised bone graft for significant acetabular bone deficiency that cannot be reconstructed using mesh.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18450621     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B5.19789

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br        ISSN: 0301-620X


  8 in total

Review 1.  [Allogeneic bone transplantation in hip revision surgery : Indications and potential for reconstruction].

Authors:  G A Ahmed; B Ishaque; M Rickert; C Fölsch
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Management of periprosthetic acetabular fractures in elderly patients--a minimally invasive approach.

Authors:  Ralph Zettl; Daphne Eschbach; Steffen Ruchholtz
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  [Acetabular reinforcement rings in revision total hip arthroplasty: midterm results in 298 cases].

Authors:  U J Schlegel; R G Bitsch; M Pritsch; P R Aldinger; H Mau; S J Breusch
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Importance of preoperative imaging in acetabular revision surgery - a case report.

Authors:  Hc Schmitz; Cc Egidy; H Al-Khateeb; G Cárdenas; T Gehrke; D Kendoff
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2012-05-30

5.  Cup-Cage Construct Using Porous Cup with Burch-Schneider Cage in the Management of Complex Acetabular Fractures.

Authors:  Rajesh Malhotra; Deepak Gautam
Journal:  Hip Pelvis       Date:  2019-05-30

6.  Dislocation rates with combinations of anti-protrusio cages and dual mobility cups in revision cases: Are we safe?

Authors:  Tom Schmidt-Braekling; Dorothee Sieber; Georg Gosheger; Jan C Theil; Burkhard Moellenbeck; Dimosthenis Andreou; Ralf Dieckmann
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-02-07       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Multiple Acetabular Revisions in THA - Poor Outcome Despite Maximum Effort.

Authors:  O Bischel; J B Seeger; Jb Seeger; M Krüger; M Krüge; R G Bitsch; Bg Bitsch
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2012-11-16

8.  Acetabular reconstruction with the Burch-Schneider antiprotrusio cage and bulk allografts: minimum 10-year follow-up results.

Authors:  Dario Regis; Andrea Sandri; Ingrid Bonetti
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-05-21       Impact factor: 3.411

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.