Literature DB >> 9759814

Total hip arthroplasty after operative treatment of an acetabular fracture.

M Weber1, D J Berry, W S Harmsen.   

Abstract

Sixty-six primary total hip arthroplasties were performed to treat post-traumatic osteoarthrosis that had developed following an acetabular fracture and subsequent open reduction and internal fixation. The mean age of the patients at the time of the total hip arthroplasty was fifty-two years (range, nineteen to eighty years). The arthroplasty was performed with cement in forty-four hips and without cement in twenty hips; in the remaining two hips, the acetabular component was inserted without cement and the femoral component was inserted with cement (a so-called hybrid procedure). Scarring from a previous procedure, retained hardware, heterotopic bone, and residual osseous deformity and deficiency made the procedure more complex than routine total hip arthroplasty in most patients. However, only one of the sixty-six procedures was associated with an operative complication. Three patients were lost to follow-up. The remaining sixty-three patients were followed for a mean of 9.6 years (range, two to twenty years). The mean duration of follow-up was 14.9 years for the acetabular components inserted with cement, 11.6 years for the femoral components inserted with cement, 4.6 years for the femoral components inserted without cement, and 3.9 years for the acetabular components inserted without cement. The mean Harris hip score improved from 49 points preoperatively to 93 points at the latest follow-up evaluation for the forty-six patients who did not have a revision procedure after the index arthroplasty. Seventeen patients had a revision; sixteen revisions were performed because of aseptic loosening of one or both components (nine acetabular and eleven femoral components). Mechanical failure (radiographic loosening or revision due to aseptic loosening) occurred in twenty-five hips. As determined with use of the Kaplan-Meier method, the ten-year survival rate, with revision due to aseptic loosening as the end point, was 78 per cent (95 per cent confidence interval, 66 to 92 per cent) for the prosthesis as a whole (that is, no revision of either component), 87 per cent (95 per cent confidence interval, 76 to 99 per cent) for the acetabular component, and 84 per cent (95 per cent confidence interval, 72 to 97 per cent) for the femoral component. An age of less than fifty years (p = 0.02), a weight of eighty kilograms or more (p = 0.047), and large residual combined segmental and cavitary deficiencies in the acetabular bone (p < 0.0001) were significant risk factors for revision because of aseptic loosening. At the ten-year follow-up, none of the twenty-two acetabular components that had been inserted without cement had been revised or demonstrated radiographic loosening. The ten-year rate of failure due to aseptic loosening was higher than that in many reported series of total hip arthroplasties performed for other indications; this was probably partly because of the young mean age of the patients, the high number of patients who had Charnley class-A involvement, and the predominantly male cohort.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9759814     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-199809000-00008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  31 in total

Review 1.  Treatment algorithm of acetabular periprosthetic fractures.

Authors:  Paul Simon; Philipp von Roth; Carsten Perka
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-08-30       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  [The chronic central fracture dislocation of the hip].

Authors:  M Galla; L Herold; H Lill
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 1.000

3.  Managing acetabular fractures in the elderly with fixation and primary arthroplasty: aiming for early weightbearing.

Authors:  Mark Rickman; James Young; Alex Trompeter; Rachel Pearce; Mark Hamilton
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  Is there evidence for a superior method of socket fixation in hip arthroplasty? A systematic review.

Authors:  Dean Pakvis; Gijs van Hellemondt; Enrico de Visser; Wilco Jacobs; Maarten Spruit
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  [Acetabular fractures in the elderly. Outcome of open reduction and internal fixation].

Authors:  G Tosounidis; U Culemann; M Bauer; J H Holstein; P Garcia; R Kurowski; A Pizanis; E Aghayev; T Pohlemann
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2011-08       Impact factor: 1.000

6.  [Treatment of acetabular fractures in the elderly with primary total hip arthroplasty and modified cerclage. Early results].

Authors:  O Borens; M Wettstein; R Garofalo; C H Blanc; C Kombot; P-F Leyvraz; E Mouhsine
Journal:  Unfallchirurg       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 1.000

7.  Impaction bone grafting and a cemented cup after acetabular fracture.

Authors:  Eelco Bronsema; Martijn A J te Stroet; Maartje Zengerink; Albert van Kampen; B Willem Schreurs
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-06-26       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Management of periprosthetic acetabular fractures in elderly patients--a minimally invasive approach.

Authors:  Ralph Zettl; Daphne Eschbach; Steffen Ruchholtz
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-28       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Total Hip Arthroplasty After Acetabular Fracture Is Associated With Lower Survivorship and More Complications.

Authors:  Zachary Morison; Dirk Jan F Moojen; Aaron Nauth; Jeremy Hall; Michael D McKee; James P Waddell; Emil H Schemitsch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-02       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Acetabular transverse nonunion treated by a hemispherical press-fit cup and structural autologous bone graft.

Authors:  Francesco Traina; Ideal Frakulli; Emanuela Castiello
Journal:  Chir Organi Mov       Date:  2009-10-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.