Literature DB >> 24691908

[Biological acetabular defect reconstruction in revision hip arthroplasty using impaction bone grafting and an acetabular reconstruction ring].

M J Friedrich1, S Gravius, J Schmolders, M D Wimmer, D C Wirtz.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Management of acetabular bone defects Paprosky types IIa and IIb in revision hip arthroplasty by rebuilding the bone stock using impaction bone grafting, primary stable reconstruction with an acetabular reconstruction ring, and restoring the hip center of rotation to its anatomical position. INDICATIONS: Acetabular segmental or combined structural defects in the superior acetabular dome with superior/lateral hip center migration with intact anterior and posterior columns (Paprosky types IIa, IIb). CONTRAINDICATIONS: Acute or chronic infections, severe acetabular bone defects preventing adequate anchorage of the prosthesis-particularly destruction of the posterior column. SURGICAL TECHNIQUE: Modified transgluteal, lateral approach to the hip joint. Removal of the loose acetabular component. Complete circumferential exposure of the acetabular rim, while maintaining mechanical stability of the remaining bone. Preparation of the homologous spongiosa chips and reconstruction of the acetabular defect in impaction grafting technique. Implantation of the acetabular reconstruction ring and primary stable fixation with cancellous screws in the acetabular dome. Cemented fixation of a polyethylene inlay. POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT: Mobilization on 2 underarm crutches from postoperative day 1. Partial weight bearing with 20 kg for 6 weeks postoperatively. If plain radiographs show unchanged seating of the prosthesis after 6 weeks, loading can be increased by 10 kg/week until full weight bearing is achieved; thrombosis prophylaxis is continued throughout. Limitation of hip flexion to 90° during the first 6 weeks, and no adduction and forced external rotation to avoid dislocation. Avoidance of sports involving jumping and axial impact loading for 12 months. Radiologic checkups after 3, 6, and 12 months and, thereafter, every 2 years.
RESULTS: Analysis between 2008 and 2011 involved 22 consecutive patients with a total of 23 prostheses; the mean follow-up was 38 ± 11 months. Compared to the preoperative evaluation, follow-up yielded a significant improvement in the average Harris Hip Score (82.2 ± 8.7 vs. 44.7 ± 10.7) and the Merle d'Aubigné Score (14.6 ± 1.9 vs. 7.5 ± 1.3). Radiological solid osseointegration of the cup was observed in 21 cases; partial radiolucent lines were seen in 2 cases (9 %) in the zones I-III delineated by DeLee and Charnley. In 21 cases (91 %) radiographs confirmed no measurable migration or displacement of the acetabular component and the bone graft was determined to be incorporated on the basis of osseous consolidation within the grafted area in 20 cases (87 %). During follow-up 3 prosthesis (13 %) required revision.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24691908     DOI: 10.1007/s00064-013-0270-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol        ISSN: 0934-6694            Impact factor:   1.154


  22 in total

1.  Techniques to improve the shear strength of impacted bone graft: the effect of particle size and washing of the graft.

Authors:  Douglas G Dunlop; Nigel T Brewster; S P Gopal Madabhushi; Asif S Usmani; P Pankaj; Colin R Howie
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  The Swedish Total Hip Replacement Register.

Authors:  Henrik Malchau; Peter Herberts; Thomas Eisler; Göran Garellick; Peter Söderman
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 3.  [What can be done when hip prostheses fail? : New trends in revision endoprosthetics].

Authors:  S Gravius; T Randau; D C Wirtz
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Addressing severe bone deficiency: what a cage will not do.

Authors:  Wayne G Paprosky; Scott S Sporer; Brian P Murphy
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 4.757

Review 5.  [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

6.  Cancellous impaction bone grafting of acetabular defects in complex primary and revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Nilesh Patil; Katherine Hwang; Stuart B Goodman
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2012-03-07       Impact factor: 1.390

7.  The transgluteal approach to the hip joint.

Authors:  R Bauer; F Kerschbaumer; S Poisel; W Oberthaler
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  1979-10

8.  Ectopic ossification following total hip replacement. Incidence and a method of classification.

Authors:  A F Brooker; J W Bowerman; R A Robinson; L H Riley
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1973-12       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Incorporation of morselized bone grafts: a study of 24 acetabular biopsy specimens.

Authors:  Sanne van der Donk; Pieter Buma; Tom J J H Slooff; Jean W M Gardeniers; B Willem Schreurs
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Acetabular revision with the Burch-Schnieder antiprotrusio cage and cancellous allograft bone.

Authors:  C L Peters; M Curtain; K M Samuelson
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 4.757

View more
  5 in total

1.  Validation of the Charlson comorbidity index in patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jan Schmolders; Max J Friedrich; Robert Michel; Andreas C Strauss; Matthias D Wimmer; Thomas M Randau; Peter H Pennekamp; Dieter C Wirtz; Sascha Gravius
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Management of severe periacetabular bone loss combined with pelvic discontinuity in revision hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Max J Friedrich; Jan Schmolders; Robert D Michel; Thomas M Randau; Matthias D Wimmer; Hendrik Kohlhof; Dieter C Wirtz; Sascha Gravius
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-07-16       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Acetabular defect reconstruction in revision hip arthroplasty with a modular revision system and biological defect augmentation.

Authors:  Jan Schmolders; Max J Friedrich; Robert D Michel; Thomas M Randau; Matthias D Wimmer; Andreas C Strauss; Hendrik Kohlhof; Dieter C Wirtz; Sascha Gravius
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-10-04       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 4.  [Biological downsizing : Acetabular defect reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty].

Authors:  S Koob; S Scheidt; T M Randau; M Gathen; M D Wimmer; D C Wirtz; S Gravius
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 1.087

5.  Acetabular defects in revision hip arthroplasty: a therapy-oriented classification.

Authors:  Dieter Christian Wirtz; Max Jaenisch; Thiemo Antonius Osterhaus; Martin Gathen; Matthias Wimmer; Thomas Martin Randau; Frank Alexander Schildberg; Philip Peter Rössler
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2020-02-25       Impact factor: 3.067

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.