| Literature DB >> 30099575 |
Armin Pallaver1, Lukas Zwicky2, Lilianna Bolliger1, Hans Bösebeck3, Isabella Manzoni1, Sabine Schädelin4, Peter E Ochsner1, Martin Clauss1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: In revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), the cancellous bone is normally completely removed out of the femoral canal during stem extraction. This situation is comparable to primary THA following the shape-closed concept, with some authors advocating to remove the metaphyseal cancellous bone to enhance press-fit stability ("French paradox"). The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term outcome, regarding survival and radiological results, of a cemented straight stem when used for revision THA and to compare these results to the results of the same stem in primary THA.Entities:
Keywords: Cemented revision THA; French paradox; Straight stem
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30099575 PMCID: PMC6182687 DOI: 10.1007/s00402-018-3023-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ISSN: 0936-8051 Impact factor: 3.067
Type of explanted stems and preoperative defect sizes
| Stems |
| % | Defect size (type) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | II | IIIa | IIIb | IV | Missing | |||
| Müller-type straight (Ti) | 82 | 46.1 | 14 | 28 | 31 | 2 | – | 7 |
| Müller-type straight (CoCr) | 44 | 24.7 | 14 | 14 | 11 | 1 | – | 4 |
| Other cemented | 31 | 17.4 | 8 | 10 | 8 | 1 | – | 4 |
| Uncemented | 19 | 10.7 | 10 | 5 | 3 | – | – | 1 |
| Uncemented revision | 2 | 1.1 | 1 | 1 | – | – | – | – |
Fig. 1A specially designed curette was used to remove all granulation tissue
Implant specifications of implanted stems
| Revision THA | Primary THA | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % |
| % | |
| Size | ||||
| 5 | 3 | 1.7 | 42 | 14.9 |
| 6 | 4 | 2.2 | 58 | 20.6 |
| 7 | 12 | 6.7 | 81 | 28.7 |
| 8 | 34 | 19.1 | 53 | 18.8 |
| 9 | 52 | 29.2 | 32 | 11.3 |
| 10 | 45 | 25.3 | 12 | 4.3 |
| 11 | 19 | 10.7 | 2 | 0.7 |
| 12 | 9 | 5.1 | 2 | 0.7 |
| Offset | ||||
| Standard | 45 | 25.3 | 72 | 25.5 |
| Lateral | 133 | 74.7 | 210 | 74.5 |
Fig. 3Survival status at the last follow-up and available radiographs for analysis (bold)
Fig. 2Cumulative incidence plot for aseptic loosening of the stem and death for primary THA and revision THA group
Absolute risk ratio (ARR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for aseptic re-revision of the stem
| ARR | 95% CI |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 0.78 | 0.66–0.97 | 0.02 |
| Sex (male vs. female) | 26.93 | 0.52–1405.03 | 0.10 |
| Stem offset (std vs. lat) | 19.00 | 0.76–475.57 | 0.07 |
| Stem size | 7.43 | 2.00–27.65 | < 0.001 |
| Defect size (2 vs. 1) | 3.74 | 1.46–9.55 | 0.01 |
| Defect size (3 vs. 1) | 1.54 | 0.96–2.49 | 0.07 |
Osteolysis
| Revision THA | Primary THA | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| % |
| % | |
| Any | 39 | 48.8 | 19 | 12.1 |
| G1 | 30 | 37.5 | 3 | 1.9 |
| G2 | 22 | 27.5 | 8 | 5.1 |
| G3 | 17 | 21.3 | 4 | 2.5 |
| G4 | 14 | 17.5 | 4 | 2.5 |
| G5 | 17 | 21.3 | 6 | 3.8 |
| G6 | 23 | 28.8 | 11 | 7.0 |
| G7 | 23 | 28.8 | 10 | 6.4 |
| G1–7 | 10 | 12.5 | 0 | 0.0 |
Fig. 4Cemented stem revision (Virtec stem and Burch-Schneider anti protrusion cage) of a 58-year-old woman, revision due to septic loosening. Preoperative defect Paprovsky grad 2. Radiographic follow-up postoperative (a), 10 years (b) and after 13 years (c) postoperative
Fig. 5Cemented primary stem (Virtec stem and cementless SL-II cup) of a 86-year-old man, revision due to aseptic loosening. Radiographic follow-up 1 year (a), 10 years (b) and after 15 years (c) postoperative