Jeffrey R McLaughlin1, Kyla R Lee2. 1. Orthopaedic Surgeon, Kennedy Center for the Hip and Knee, Oshkosh, Wisconsin. 2. Internal Medicine, Gundersen Healthcare, LaCrosse, Wisconsin.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcome of revision total hip arthroplasty using an uncemented deep profile jumbo acetabular component in patients who had been followed for a minimum of 10 years postoperatively. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2001, 61 revision total hip arthroplasties were performed in 58 patients, with use of the +5 Deep Profile acetabular shell. The outcome with regard to retention vs re-revision of the acetabular component was determined for every hip. At a mean of 13 years (range 10-16) postoperatively, 30 patients (32 hips) were living. The Harris hip score, radiographic results, complications, and Kaplan-Meier survivorship were evaluated. RESULTS: In the entire cohort of 61 hips, 4 acetabular components have been re-revised. Two shells were re-revised for sepsis: 1 shell was re-revised for aseptic loosening and 1 for recurrent dislocation. In the 32 hips followed for a minimum of 10 years postoperatively, 2 cups have been re-revised: 1 for aseptic loosening and 1 for recurrent dislocation. One additional shell was loose by radiographic criteria. With failure defined as re-revision for any reason, implant survival (95% confidence interval) was 92.6% (81.0-97.2) at 16 years. With failure defined as re-revision for aseptic loosening, implant survival was 97.4% (82.8-99.6) at 16 years. CONCLUSION: Revision total hip arthroplasty with the +5 Deep Profile acetabular component was associated with a good rate of survival at 16 years.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcome of revision total hip arthroplasty using an uncemented deep profile jumbo acetabular component in patients who had been followed for a minimum of 10 years postoperatively. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2001, 61 revision total hip arthroplasties were performed in 58 patients, with use of the +5 Deep Profile acetabular shell. The outcome with regard to retention vs re-revision of the acetabular component was determined for every hip. At a mean of 13 years (range 10-16) postoperatively, 30 patients (32 hips) were living. The Harris hip score, radiographic results, complications, and Kaplan-Meier survivorship were evaluated. RESULTS: In the entire cohort of 61 hips, 4 acetabular components have been re-revised. Two shells were re-revised for sepsis: 1 shell was re-revised for aseptic loosening and 1 for recurrent dislocation. In the 32 hips followed for a minimum of 10 years postoperatively, 2 cups have been re-revised: 1 for aseptic loosening and 1 for recurrent dislocation. One additional shell was loose by radiographic criteria. With failure defined as re-revision for any reason, implant survival (95% confidence interval) was 92.6% (81.0-97.2) at 16 years. With failure defined as re-revision for aseptic loosening, implant survival was 97.4% (82.8-99.6) at 16 years. CONCLUSION: Revision total hip arthroplasty with the +5 Deep Profile acetabular component was associated with a good rate of survival at 16 years.
Authors: Peter K Sculco; Timothy Wright; Michael-Alexander Malahias; Alexander Gu; Mathias Bostrom; Fares Haddad; Seth Jerabek; Michael Bolognesi; Thomas Fehring; Alejandro Gonzalez DellaValle; William Jiranek; William Walter; Wayne Paprosky; Donald Garbuz; Thomas Sculco Journal: HSS J Date: 2021-09-28