| Literature DB >> 20405346 |
Vincent Busch1, Rik Klarenbeek, Tom Slooff, B Willem Schreurs, Jean Gardeniers.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Young patients with degenerative cartilage disease of the hip remain a challenge for the orthopaedic surgeon. Different treatment options are available of which uncemented hips are the most popular owing to long-term concerns about cemented implants. As an alternative, we have used a cemented hip design in combination with bone impaction grafting in patients with acetabular defects. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore determined the survival rates and radiological failures of cemented THA in patients younger than 30 years and reported clinical scores, complications and current state of the revised THAs.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20405346 PMCID: PMC2974862 DOI: 10.1007/s11999-010-1355-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res ISSN: 0009-921X Impact factor: 4.176
Indications for THA
| Indication | Number of hips |
|---|---|
| Juvenile rheumatoid arthritis | 18 |
| Osteonecrosis of femoral head | 21 |
| Systemic lupus erythematosus | 7 |
| Acute lymphatic leukemia | 3 |
| Crohn’s disease | 3 |
| Nephropathy, kidney transplantation | 2 |
| Hypothalamic disorder | 1 |
| Aplastic anemia | 1 |
| Wegener’s disease | 1 |
| Unknown origin | 3 |
| Developmental dysplasia of the hip | 7 |
| Multiple epiphyseal dysplasia | 2 |
| Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease | 6 |
| Ankylosing spondylitis | 5 |
| Morquio’s disease | 2 |
| Ankylosis of unknown origin | 2 |
| Polycystic disease of the femoral head of unknown origin | 2 |
| Arthritis and osteomyelitis | 2 |
| Posttraumatic osteoarthritis | 1 |
| Psoriatic arthritis | 1 |
Types of implant
| Type of acetabular implant | No. of hips | Type of femoral implant | No. of hips |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stryker Exeter™ | 29 | Stryker Exeter™ | 45 |
| Depuy Elite™ Plus LPW | 26 | Depuy Elite™ | 13 |
| Zimmer Müller®/Allopro® | 14 | M.E. Müller® straight | 11 |
Fig. 1A Kaplan-Meier curve shows survivorship for the total group with revision for aseptic loosening as the end point. Dotted lines indicate 95% confidence intervals.
Survivorship for different categories of patients
| Category of patients | 10-year survivorship in % (95% CI) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| End point revision for aseptic loosening | End point revision for any reason | End point radiographic failure | |
| Primary cemented hips | 87 (68–95)% | 80 (59–90)% | 87 (67–95)% |
| Acetabular bone impaction grafting | 95 (72–99)% | 89 (62–97)% | 95 (72–99)% |
| All patients | 90 (77–96)% | 83 (69–92)%. | 89 (77–95)% |
Fig. 2A Kaplan-Meier curve shows survivorship for the bone impaction group (solid line) and the primary cemented group (dotted line) with revision for aseptic loosening as the end point.
Fig. 3A–C(A) A preoperative radiograph shows the hips of a 29-year-old woman with bilateral secondary osteoarthritis due to Bechterew’s disease who had the longest followup in our series. (B) A postoperative radiograph shows the hips after bilateral reconstruction of the acetabulum with bone impaction grafting for a cavitary defect and a cemented prosthesis. (C) A radiograph at 17 and 18 years after the reconstruction shows incorporation of the bone graft and no signs of loosening except for an acetabular radiolucent line at the right hip in zone III.
Literature# of THA in patients 30 years or younger at the time of operation
| Study | No. hips | No. patients | Mean age in years (range) | Mean followup in years (range) | Survivorship/revised hips for all reasons (% of total) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cemented | |||||
| Cage et al. [ | 22 | 17* | 18.4 (15–21) | 10.6 (8–15) | 1 (4.5%) |
| Chandler et al. [ | 33 | 29 | 28 (19–35) | 5.6 (4.8–7) | 7 (21%) |
| Chmell et al. [ | 66 | 39 | 19.9 (11–29) | 15.1 (11–22) | 70% at 15 yrs (acetabular revision) |
| Halley and Charnley [ | 68 | 39 | 25.9 | 3.3 (0.5–8) | NR** |
| Sochart and Porter [ | 83 | 55 | 24.9 (17–29) | 20 (5–30) | 89% at 10 yrs; 65% at 25 yrs |
| Torchia et al. [ | 63 | 50 | 17 (11–19) | 12.6 (1.6–18.6) | 73% at 10 yrs; 55% at 15 yrs |
| Witt et al. [ | 96 | 54 | 16.7 (11–27) | 11.5 (5–18) | 24 (25%) |
| Busch et al. [current study] | 69 | 48 | 24.6 (16–29) | 8.4 (2–18) | 83% at 10 yrs |
| Uncemented | |||||
| Kumar and Swann [ | 25 | 16 | 24.9 (15–39) | 4.5 (1–19) | 3 (12%) |
| Odent et al. [ | 62 | 34 | 18.3 (12–31) | 6 (3–13) | 90.1% at 13 yrs |
| Wangen et al. [ | 49 | 44 | 25 (15–30) | 13 (10–16) | 24 (49.0%) |
| McCullough et al. [ | 42 | 25 | 21 (11–35) | 11.2 (8–13) | 71% at 13 yrs |
| Combined techniques | |||||
| Kitsoulis et al. [ | 20 | 10 | 15.8 (13–24) | 9.2 (2–20) | 2 (10%) |
| Maric and Haynes [ | 17 | 17 | 18 (14–20) | 9.3 (4.5–17) | 2 (12%) |
| Dudkiewicz et al. [ | 69 | 56 | 23.2 (14–29) | 7.4 (2–23) | 14 (20%) |
#Literature reported until July 2009.
* mixed group of patients with total hip and total knee prosthesis.
** not reported.