Literature DB >> 25192688

Acetabular revision arthroplasty using trabecular titanium implants.

Boris Steno1, Milan Kokavec, Libor Necas.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate early results of acetabular revisions of total hip replacement using fully cementless trabecular titanium (TT) acetabular modular implants (Delta Trabecular Titanium, Limacorporate, Udine, Italy).
METHODS: Between March 2009 and May 2012 TT was used in 81 revisions. The mean age at the time of revision was 68 years (32-84 years). There were nine patients revised for type 1, 11 for type 2A, 27 for type 2B, six for type 2C, 15 for type 3A and 13 for type 3B acetabular defects according to the Paprosky classification. Frozen morselised bone allografts were used in 53 cases and bulk structural allografts in three cases. Clinical evaluations were made using a modified functional Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score. The mean follow-up period was 38.14 months (24-62 months).
RESULTS: The mean pre-operative Merle d'Aubigné-Postel functional score was 4.7 and 9.8 at the time of last follow-up. There was one revision due to instability of the acetabular component. A cage system-Delta Revision TT-was successfully used in this case. Three cases with Paprosky type 3B defect showed cranial migration of the acetabular component by 6 mm, but stabilised after six months. No dislocations associated with acetabular surgery have occurred in the cohort. There have been no dissociations of the modular component. A fatigue fracture of the hemispherical module occurred in the revised case. No other hardware mechanical failures have been recorded.
CONCLUSIONS: TT cups, hemispherical modules and augments facilitate reliable and reproducible biological fixation in acetabular revision surgery with excellent results. Extended follow-up is necessary to evaluate the long-term performance of TT modular implants.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25192688     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-014-2509-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  28 in total

1.  Porous metal revision shells for management of contained acetabular bone defects at a mean follow-up of six years: a comparison between up to 50% bleeding host bone contact and more than 50% contact.

Authors:  A Sternheim; D Backstein; P R T Kuzyk; G Goshua; Y Berkovich; O Safir; A E Gross
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2012-02

2.  Early results of 827 trabecular metal revision shells in acetabular revision.

Authors:  Eerik T Skyttä; Antti Eskelinen; Pekka O Paavolainen; Ville M Remes
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  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 4.  Cementless acetabular revision: past, present, and future. Revision total hip arthroplasty: the acetabular side using cementless implants.

Authors:  Luis Pulido; Sridhar R Rachala; Miguel E Cabanela
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-01-14       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  Supercharging irradiated allografts with mesenchymal stem cells improves acetabular bone grafting in revision arthroplasty.

Authors:  Philippe Hernigou; Jacques Pariat; Steffen Queinnec; Yasuhiro Homma; Charles Henri Flouzat Lachaniette; Nathalie Chevallier; Helene Rouard
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-02-09       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Clinical and radiological evaluation of modular trabecular metal acetabular cups. Short-term results in 64 hips.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Simon; Johan Bellemans
Journal:  Acta Orthop Belg       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 0.500

7.  Acetabular cup positioning in revision total hip arthroplasty with Paprosky type III acetabular defects: Martell radiographic analysis.

Authors:  Ho-Rim Choi; David Anderson; Scott Foster; Matthew Beal; Jo Ann Lee; Christopher Barr; Henrik Malchau; Joseph McCarthy; Young-Min Kwon
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-07-24       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 8.  Loosening after acetabular revision: comparison of trabecular metal and reinforcement rings. A systematic review.

Authors:  Nicholas A Beckmann; Stefan Weiss; Matthias C M Klotz; Matthias Gondan; Sebastian Jaeger; Rudi G Bitsch
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2013-05-27       Impact factor: 4.757

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.  Combined trabecular metal acetabular shell and augment for acetabular revision with substantial bone loss: a mid-term review.

Authors:  M Abolghasemian; S Tangsataporn; A Sternheim; D Backstein; O Safir; A E Gross
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 5.082

View more
  15 in total

Review 1.  [Importance of revision- and tumor-endoprosthetics in the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the lower extremity].

Authors:  P M Prodinger; N Harrasser; C Suren; F Pohlig; H Mühlhofer; J Schauwecker; R von Eisenhart-Rothe
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 1.000

2.  Segmental acetabular rim defects, bone loss, oversizing, and press fit cup in total hip arthroplasty evaluated with a probabilistic finite element analysis.

Authors:  Farid Amirouche; Giovanni F Solitro; Amit Walia; Mark Gonzalez; Aimee Bobko
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-12-23       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Use of porous tantalum components in Paprosky two and three acetabular revision. A minimum five-year follow-up of fifty one hips.

Authors:  Xavier Flecher; Benjamin Appy; Sébastien Parratte; Matthieu Ollivier; Jean-Noel Argenson
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-10-21       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Use of a new off-the-shelf 3D-printed trabecular titanium acetabular cup in Chinese patients undergoing hip revision surgery: Short- to mid-term clinical and radiological outcomes.

Authors:  Guangqian Shang; Shuai Xiang; Cuicui Guo; Jianjun Guo; Peng Wang; Yingzhen Wang; Hao Xu
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-07-04       Impact factor: 2.562

5.  Trabecular titanium cups in acetabular revision arthroplasty: analysis of 10-year survivorship, restoration of center of rotation and osteointegration.

Authors:  Andrea Cozzi Lepri; Matteo Innocenti; Alberto Galeotti; Christian Carulli; Marco Villano; Roberto Civinini
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-11-15       Impact factor: 2.928

6.  [Use of custom-made acetabular components (CMAC) as part of a two-stage procedure in patients with severe periacetabular bone loss].

Authors:  Frank Sebastian Fröschen; Thomas Martin Randau; Sebastian Gottfried Walter; Franz Dally; Dieter Christian Wirtz; Sascha Gravius
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 1.286

7.  The use of customized cages in revision total hip arthroplasty for Paprosky type III acetabular bone defects.

Authors:  Yuanqing Mao; Chen Xu; Jiawei Xu; Huiwu Li; Fengxiang Liu; Degang Yu; Zhenan Zhu
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-08-19       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  In vivo osseointegration of a randomized trabecular titanium structure obtained by an additive manufacturing technique.

Authors:  Vincenza Ragone; Elena Canciani; Massimo Arosio; Matteo Olimpo; Lisa Adele Piras; Mitzy Mauthe von Degerfeld; Davide Augusti; Riccardo D'Ambrosi; Claudia Dellavia
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 3.896

9.  Tritanium acetabular wedge augments: short-term results.

Authors:  Camilo Restrepo; Snir Heller; Antonia F Chen
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-06

10.  Comparison of the stability of three fixation techniques between porous metal acetabular components and augments.

Authors:  N A Beckmann; R G Bitsch; M Gondan; M Schonhoff; S Jaeger
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 5.853

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.