Literature DB >> 28078371

Acetabular defect classification in times of 3D imaging and patient-specific treatment protocols.

K Horas1, J Arnholdt1, A F Steinert1, M Hoberg1, M Rudert1, B M Holzapfel2,3.   

Abstract

Parallel to the rising number of revision hip procedures, an increasing number of complex periprosthetic osseous defects can be expected. Stable long-term fixation of the revision implant remains the ultimate goal of the surgical protocol. Within this context, an elaborate preoperative planning process including anticipation of the periacetabular defect form and size and analysis of the remaining supporting osseous elements are essential. However, detection and evaluation of periacetabular bone defects using an unsystematic analysis of plain anteroposterior radiographs of the pelvis is in many cases difficult. Therefore, periacetabular bone defect classification schemes such as the Paprosky system have been introduced that use standardized radiographic criteria to better anticipate the intraoperative reality. Recent studies were able to demonstrate that larger defects are often underestimated when using the Paprosky classification and that the intra- and interobserver reliability of the system is low. This makes it hard to compare results in terms of defects being studied. Novel software tools that are based on the analysis of CT data may provide an opportunity to overcome the limitations of native radiographic defect analysis. In the following article we discuss potential benefits of these novel instruments against the background of the obvious limitations of the currently used native radiographic defect analysis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D analysis; Acetabular bone defects; Acetabular revision arthroplasty; Computed tomography; Paprosky classification

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28078371     DOI: 10.1007/s00132-016-3378-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthopade        ISSN: 0085-4530            Impact factor:   1.087


  40 in total

1.  Computed tomography in the assessment of periacetabular osteolysis.

Authors:  Serena Leung; Douglas Naudie; Nobuto Kitamura; Tim Walde; Charles A Engh
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  Utility of judet oblique x-rays in preoperative assessment of acetabular periprosthetic osteolysis: a preliminary study.

Authors:  Adrian Thomas; Noah J Epstein; Kathryn Stevens; Stuart B Goodman
Journal:  Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)       Date:  2007-07

3.  [The German Society of Orthopedics and Traumatology classification of bone defects in total hip endoprostheses revision operations].

Authors:  D Bettin; B D Katthagen
Journal:  Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb       Date:  1997 Jul-Aug

4.  Observer variation in the detection of acetabular bone deficiencies.

Authors:  J F Wenz; D L Hauser; W W Scott; D D Robertson; M J Tsapakos; D K Kearney; D A Bluemke; D O Naiman; A F Brooker; E Y Chao
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  1997-05       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  Can the volume of pelvic osteolysis be calculated without using computed tomography?

Authors:  Hiroshi Egawa; Cara C Powers; Sarah E Beykirch; Robert H Hopper; C Anderson Engh; Charles A Engh
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-09-27       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  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

7.  Multislice computed tomography for evaluating acetabular defects in revision THA.

Authors:  Eduardo Garcia-Cimbrelo; Mar Tapia; Carmen Martin-Hervas
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 8.  Bone grafts in hip replacement surgery. The pelvic side.

Authors:  A E Gross; D G Allan; M Catre; D S Garbuz; I Stockley
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 2.472

Review 9.  Aseptic loosening of total joint replacements: mechanisms underlying osteolysis and potential therapies.

Authors:  Yousef Abu-Amer; Isra Darwech; John C Clohisy
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 5.156

10.  Pelvic osteolysis relationship to radiographs and polyethylene wear.

Authors:  Won Yong Shon; Siddhartha Gupta; Sandeep Biswal; Sang Hwan Han; Suk Joo Hong; Jun Gyu Moon
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2008-06-13       Impact factor: 4.757

View more
  12 in total

Review 1.  [Scaffold-based Bone Tissue Engineering].

Authors:  B M Holzapfel; M Rudert; D W Hutmacher
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  Acetabular defect management and revision arthroplasty via the direct anterior approach.

Authors:  Boris Michael Holzapfel; Kristoff Corten; Tyler Goldberg; Maximilian Rudert; Michael Nogler; Joseph Moskal; Martin Thaler
Journal:  Oper Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 1.154

3.  Advanced quantitative 3D imaging improves the reliability of the classification of acetabular defects.

Authors:  Alexander Meynen; Georges Vles; Mark Roussot; Anthony Van Eemeren; Hazem Wafa; Michiel Mulier; Lennart Scheys
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  Reliability and validity test of a novel three-dimensional acetabular bone defect classification system aided with additive manufacturing.

Authors:  Jingwei Zhang; Yi Hu; Hua Ying; Yuanqing Mao; Zhenan Zhu; Huiwu Li
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-05-09       Impact factor: 2.562

5.  Use of 3D modelling and 3D printing for the diagnostic process, decision making and preoperative planning of periprosthetic acetabular fractures.

Authors:  Giuseppe Marongiu; Roberto Prost; Antonio Capone
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2020-01-09

6.  Utility of Radiographs, Computed Tomography, and Three Dimensional Computed Tomography Pelvis Reconstruction for Identification of Acetabular Defects in Residency Training.

Authors:  Johannes F Plate; John S Shields; Maxwell K Langfitt; Michael P Bolognesi; Jason E Lang; Thorsten M Seyler
Journal:  Hip Pelvis       Date:  2017-12-01

7.  Decision/therapeutic algorithm for acetabular revisions.

Authors:  Alessandro Aprato; Matteo Olivero; Paolo Di Benedetto; Alessandro Massè
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2020-12-30

8.  Method for quantitative assessment of acetabular bone defects.

Authors:  Georg Hettich; Ronja A Schierjott; Heiko Ramm; Heiko Graichen; Volkmar Jansson; Maximilian Rudert; Francesco Traina; Thomas M Grupp
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 3.494

9.  Quantitative assessment of acetabular bone defects: A study of 50 computed tomography data sets.

Authors:  Ronja A Schierjott; Georg Hettich; Heiko Graichen; Volkmar Jansson; Maximilian Rudert; Francesco Traina; Patrick Weber; Thomas M Grupp
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-10-17       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A New Diagnostic Approach for Periprosthetic Acetabular Fractures Based on 3D Modeling: A Study Protocol.

Authors:  Giuseppe Marongiu; Roberto Prost; Antonio Capone
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2019-12-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.