Literature DB >> 9726318

Effect of acetabular component orientation on recurrent dislocation, pelvic osteolysis, polyethylene wear, and component migration.

J G Kennedy1, W B Rogers, K E Soffe, R J Sullivan, D G Griffen, L J Sheehan.   

Abstract

We retrospectively reviewed 75 total hip arthroplasties to examine the effect of acetabular component position. In group A, 38 of the components were implanted according to manufacture's instructions with all peripheral fins in contact with acetabular bone; as such, the acetabular components were in a relatively vertical position with a mean angle of inclination of 61.9 degrees. Three of these patients developed recurrent dislocations necessitating revision of the acetabular component. In group B, 37 hips, a more horizontal orientation was used despite the fact that all of the peripheral fins of the acetabular component did not engage acetabular bone; in this group the mean angle of inclination was 49.7 degrees. Only one of these hips recurrently dislocated and required revision. There were no problems in this group associated with provisional component stability caused by inadequate peripheral fixation. Radiographs of all patients were obtained at 4 years after surgery (range, 4.0-4.3 years). Pelvic osteolysis had occurred in 24% of hips in group A and 13% of group B. Asymmetric polyethylene wear was observed in 5.1% of the hips in group A; no hip in group B showed wear asymmetry. Acetabular component migration developed in 19% of group A hips and 5% of group B hips. The Mayo clinical hip score was excellent in both groups: group A 71/80, group B 73/80. At an intermediate follow-up it is clear that significant problems can be encountered when this component is positioned in a relatively vertical position to facilitate engaging all four peripheral fins in bone. We have addressed this problem by placing the cup in a more anatomic position of inclination while maintaining provisional rim fixation. This has resulted in a decreased incidence of pelvic osteolysis and fewer complications overall.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9726318     DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(98)90052-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  127 in total

1.  Hip-spine relationship: a radio-anatomical study for optimization in acetabular cup positioning.

Authors:  J-Y Lazennec; N Charlot; M Gorin; B Roger; N Arafati; A Bissery; G Saillant
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2003-11-07       Impact factor: 1.246

2.  Differences between the wear couples metal-on-polyethylene and ceramic-on-ceramic in the stability against dislocation of total hip replacement.

Authors:  Rainer Bader; Erwin Steinhauser; Susanne Zimmermann; Wolfram Mittelmeier; Roger Scholz; Raymonde Busch
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.896

3.  [Principles and new concepts in computer-navigated total hip arthroplasty].

Authors:  T Renkawitz; M Wörner; E Sendtner; M Weber; P Lechler; J Grifka
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Measuring acetabular component version after THA: CT or plain radiograph?

Authors:  Benjamin McArthur; Michael Cross; Christina Geatrakas; David Mayman; Bernard Ghelman
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-03-01       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Deformation of metal-backed acetabular components and the impact of liner thickness in a cadaveric model.

Authors:  David Markel; Judd Day; Ryan Siskey; Imants Liepins; Steven Kurtz; Kevin Ong
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-07-13       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  How does pelvic rotation or tilt affect radiographic measurement of acetabular component inclination angle during THA?

Authors:  Chris R Mellano; Andrew I Spitzer
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2015-06-23

7.  Predicting long-term wear performance of hard-on-hard bearing couples: effect of cup orientation.

Authors:  S Shankar; K Gowthaman; M S Uddin
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-12-30       Impact factor: 2.602

8.  Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional acetabular cup placement in THA: a matched-pair controlled study.

Authors:  Benjamin G Domb; Youssef F El Bitar; Adam Y Sadik; Christine E Stake; Itamar B Botser
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-08-29       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  [Comparison of total hip replacements cup orientation and position. Navigation vs. conventional manual implantation of hip prostheses].

Authors:  M Honl; K Schwieger; C H Gauck; F Lampe; M M Morlock; M A Wimmer; E Hille
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 1.087

10.  Greater accuracy in positioning of the acetabular cup by using an image-free navigation system.

Authors:  T Kalteis; M Handel; T Herold; L Perlick; H Baethis; J Grifka
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2005-08-05       Impact factor: 3.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.