Literature DB >> 18923882

Modular tantalum augments for acetabular defects in revision hip arthroplasty.

Alexander Siegmeth1, Clive P Duncan, Bassam A Masri, Winston Y Kim, Donald S Garbuz.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Large acetabular defects can be reconstructed with various methods depending on size and location of the defect. We prospectively followed our first 37 patients in whom we reconstructed the acetabulum with a trabecular metal augment combined with a trabecular metal shell. Three patients died before completing the minimum 24 months followup while the remaining 34 were followed a minimum of 24 months (mean, 34 months; range, 24-55 months). All defects were classified according to Paprosky. Radiographic signs of osseointegration were classified according to Moore. Quality of life was measured with the SF-12, WOMAC, and Oxford Hip Score. There were 15 men and 19 women with an average age of 64 years. At a minimum of two years followup 32 of the 34 patients required no further surgery for aseptic loosening, while two had rerevision. Of the 32 patients who had not been revised, all had stable cups radiographically. All quality-of-life parameters improved. The early results with tantalum augments are promising but longer followup is required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18923882      PMCID: PMC2600994          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-008-0549-0

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


  23 in total

Review 1.  Biological performance of tantalum.

Authors:  J Black
Journal:  Clin Mater       Date:  1994

2.  High placement of an acetabular component inserted without cement in a revision total hip arthroplasty. Results after a mean of ten years.

Authors:  J T Dearborn; W H Harris
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  Modular porous metal augments for treatment of severe acetabular bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Alexandre Nehme; David G Lewallen; Arlen D Hanssen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  The current role of structural grafts and cages in revision arthroplasty of the hip.

Authors:  Allan E Gross; Stuart Goodman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection.

Authors:  J E Ware; C D Sherbourne
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement.

Authors:  J Dawson; R Fitzpatrick; A Carr; D Murray
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1996-03

7.  Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee.

Authors:  N Bellamy; W W Buchanan; C H Goldsmith; J Campbell; L W Stitt
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  1988-12       Impact factor: 4.666

8.  Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation.

Authors:  W G Paprosky; P G Perona; J M Lawrence
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 4.757

9.  Bulk structural autogenous grafts and allografts for reconstruction of the acetabulum in total hip arthroplasty. Sixteen-year-average follow-up.

Authors:  A A Shinar; W H Harris
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1997-02       Impact factor: 5.284

10.  The use of a trabecular metal acetabular component and trabecular metal augment for severe acetabular defects.

Authors:  Scott M Sporer; Wayne G Paprosky
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 4.757

View more
  44 in total

1.  Long-term results for minor column allografts in revision hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Paul T H Lee; Guy Raz; Oleg A Safir; David J Backstein; Allan E Gross
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Revision hip arthroplasty using impacted cancellous bone and cement: a long-term follow-up study.

Authors:  Gowthaman Arumugam; Shashi Kumar Nanjayan; Conal Quah; Philip Wraighte; Peter Howard
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2015-09-23

3.  Uncemented Porous Tantalum Acetabular Components: Early Follow-Up and Failures in 599 Revision Total Hip Arthroplasties.

Authors:  William J Long; Nicolas O Noiseux; Tad M Mabry; Arlen D Hanssen; David G Lewallen
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2015

4.  Metropolitan and micropolitan statistical area estimates of depression and anxiety using the Patient Health Questionnaire-8 in the 2006 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System.

Authors:  Tara W Strine; Satvinder S Dhingra; Kurt Kroenke; Mohamed Qayad; James L Ribble; Catherine A Okoro; Lina S Balluz; Shanta R Dube; James Lando; Ali H Mokdad
Journal:  Int J Public Health       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 3.380

5.  Trabecular Metal cups for acetabular defects with 50% or less host bone contact.

Authors:  Dror Lakstein; David Backstein; Oleg Safir; Yona Kosashvili; Allan E Gross
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-03-10       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 6.  Systematic review on outcomes of acetabular revisions with highly-porous metals.

Authors:  Samik Banerjee; Kimona Issa; Bhaveen H Kapadia; Robert Pivec; Harpal S Khanuja; Michael A Mont
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Tantalum components in difficult acetabular revisions.

Authors:  Paul F Lachiewicz; Elizabeth S Soileau
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-07-07       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Do tantalum and titanium cups show similar results in revision hip arthroplasty?

Authors:  S Mehdi Jafari; Benjamin Bender; Catelyn Coyle; Javad Parvizi; Peter F Sharkey; William J Hozack
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 9.  [Acetabular defect reconstruction in revision surgery of the hip. Autologous, homologous or metal?].

Authors:  S Gravius; G Pagenstert; O Weber; N Kraska; H Röhrig; D C Wirtz
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 1.087

10.  Evaluation of the effect of custom burr holes on a surgeon's sense of screw fixation in revision porous metal cups.

Authors:  Mark A Nyland; Brent A Lanting; Hristo N Nikolov; Lyndsay E Somerville; Matthew G Teeter; James L Howard
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2015-10-19
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.