Literature DB >> 19711157

Total hip arthroplasty revision in elderly people with cement and Burch-Schneider anti-protrusio cage.

L Gaiani1, R Bertelli, Massimo Palmonari, G Vicenzi.   

Abstract

Total hip arthroplasty revision is increasingly becoming a common procedure, but the acetabular bone loss and the advanced age of the patients make revision procedures extremely complex and technically demanding. The aim of the present work is to examine the clinical and radiological results of the Burch-Schneider anti-protrusio cage (APC) implanted in revision hip arthroplasty with severe acetabular bone deficiency in elderly people. Between February 1994 and November 2005, a total of 60 revision operations of acetabular components were performed in 60 select patients (42 females and 18 males), using the Burch-Schneider APC. The indication for the Burch-Schneider APC use was massive pelvic bone loss with migration of the prosthesis cup and high-grade acetabular defects (type III or IV AAOS). The mean age at the time of surgery was 82 years (range 78-85 years). Polymethylmetacrylate cement (PMMA) was used to fill bony deficiencies in all the procedures. No graft was used. The average Harris Hip Score had improved from 28.2 preoperatively to 82.5 points at the time of follow-up. According to the classification of Gill et al., we have seen no Burch-Schneider cages definitely loose or probably. Only one acetabular component has been revised (for recurrent dislocation). Acetabular reconstruction with the use of cement and an acetabular support ring appears to have a useful role in the treatment of severe acetabular bony deficiency in elderly patients and may provide a definitive reconstruction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19711157     DOI: 10.1007/s12306-009-0019-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Chir Organi Mov        ISSN: 0009-4749


  47 in total

1.  The use of reinforcement rings to reconstruct deficient acetabula.

Authors:  J Rosson; J Schatzker
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1992-09

2.  Use of bipolar endoprosthesis and bone grafting for acetabular reconstruction.

Authors:  E G McFarland; D G Lewallen; M E Cabanela
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1991-07       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Early experience with eccentric acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  C J Sutherland
Journal:  Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)       Date:  1996-04

4.  [Repair of the acetabulum using a bone homograft preserved at the time of revision of total hip prostheses].

Authors:  C Hedde; M Postel; M Kerboul; J P Courpied
Journal:  Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot       Date:  1986

5.  Long-term results of revision total hip arthroplasty with improved cementing technique.

Authors:  R P Katz; J J Callaghan; P M Sullivan; R C Johnston
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1997-03

6.  An oblong revision cup for large acetabular defects: design rationale and two- to seven-year follow-up.

Authors:  G Köster; H G Willert; H P Köhler; K Döpkens
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.757

7.  Revision arthroplasty using an anti-protrusio cage for massive acetabular bone deficiency.

Authors:  D J Berry; M E Müller
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1992-09

8.  Classification and management of acetabular abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  J A D'Antonio; W N Capello; L S Borden; W L Bargar; B F Bierbaum; W G Boettcher; M E Steinberg; S D Stulberg; J H Wedge
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  The Bürch-Schneider anti-protrusio cage in revision total hip arthroplasty: indications, principles and long-term results.

Authors:  T J Gill; J B Sledge; M E Müller
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1998-11

10.  Revision of the acetabulum without cement with use of the Harris-Galante porous-coated implant. Two to eight-year results.

Authors:  P F Lachiewicz; O D Hussamy
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1994-12       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  6 in total

1.  Outcome of cages in revision arthroplasty of the acetabulum: a systematic review.

Authors:  Alessandro Aprato; Matteo Olivero; Luigi Branca Vergano; Alessandro Massè
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2019-01-10

2.  The Burch-Schneider antiprotrusio cage: medium follow-up results.

Authors:  J Lamo-Espinosa; J Duart Clemente; P Díaz-Rada; J Pons-Villanueva; J R Valentí-Nín
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2012-12-20

3.  10-Year Survival of Acetabular Reinforcement Rings/Cages for Complex Hip Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Alexander Ewers; Christian Spross; Lukas Ebneter; Fabrice Külling; Karlmeinrad Giesinger; Vilijam Zdravkovic; Johannes Erhardt
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2015-05-15

4.  Release characteristics of enoxaparin sodium-loaded polymethylmethacrylate bone cement.

Authors:  Hui Sun; Xinzhe Ma; Zhiyong Li; Jianning Liu; Wei Wang; Xiangbei Qi
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2021-02-04       Impact factor: 2.359

5.  Primary or revision arthroplasty with an integrated acetabular cup-MUTARS® RS cup system.

Authors:  Maren Janko; René Verboket; Maria Genari; Johannes Frank; Ingo Marzi
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2022-03-31       Impact factor: 2.374

6.  The use of a non-biological, bridging, antiprotrusio cage in complex revision hip arthroplasty and periacetabular reconstructive oncologic surgery. Is still today a valid option?: A mid/long-term survival and complications' analysis.

Authors:  Matteo Innocenti; Francesco Muratori; Giacomo Mazzei; Davide Guido; Filippo Frenos; Ersilia Lucenteforte; Rodolfo Capanna; Domenico Andrea Campanacci
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 3.067

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.