Journal of Orthopedic and Spine Trauma

Published by: Kowsar

The Midterm Results of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in Cases with Acetabular Defects: A Single-Center Case Series

Alireza Manafi Rasi 1 , Farzad Amuzade Amrani 1 , Shobeir Rostami Abousaidi 1 and Mahdi Aghaalikhani 1 , *
Authors Information
1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Imam Hossein Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of MedicaI Sciences, Tehran, Iran
Article information
  • Journal of Orthopedic and Spine Trauma: March 2018, 4 (1); e69876
  • Published Online: November 13, 2018
  • Article Type: Research Article
  • Received: April 25, 2018
  • Revised: August 22, 2018
  • Accepted: November 8, 2018
  • DOI: 10.5812/jost.69876

To Cite: Manafi Rasi A, Amuzade Amrani F, Rostami Abousaidi S, Aghaalikhani M. The Midterm Results of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in Cases with Acetabular Defects: A Single-Center Case Series, J Orthop Spine Trauma. 2018 ; 4(1):e69876. doi: 10.5812/jost.69876.

Abstract
Copyright © 2018, Journal of Orthopedic and Spine Trauma. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Background
2. Methods
3. Results
4. Discussion
References
  • 1. Petis S, Howard JL, Lanting BL, Vasarhelyi EM. Surgical approach in primary total hip arthroplasty: Anatomy, technique and clinical outcomes. Can J Surg. 2015;58(2):128-39. [PubMed: 25799249]. [PubMed Central: PMC4373995].
  • 2. Dreinhofer KE, Dieppe P, Sturmer T, Grober-Gratz D, Floren M, Gunther KP, et al. Indications for total hip replacement: Comparison of assessments of orthopaedic surgeons and referring physicians. Ann Rheum Dis. 2006;65(10):1346-50. doi: 10.1136/ard.2005.047811. [PubMed: 16439438]. [PubMed Central: PMC1798326].
  • 3. Malchau H, Herberts P, Eisler T, Garellick G, Soderman P. The Swedish total hip replacement register. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A Suppl 2:2-20. [PubMed: 12479335].
  • 4. Kim DH, Cho SH, Jeong ST, Park HB, Hwang SC, Park JS. Restoration of the center of rotation in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25(7):1041-6. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2009.07.023. [PubMed: 19775853].
  • 5. Sakai T, Ohzono K, Nishii T, Takao M, Miki H, Nakamura N, et al. Modular acetabular reconstructive cup in acetabular revision total hip arthroplasty at a minimum ten year follow-up. Int Orthop. 2013;37(4):605-10. doi: 10.1007/s00264-013-1818-4. [PubMed: 23423427]. [PubMed Central: PMC3609976].
  • 6. Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM. Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 1994;9(1):33-44. [PubMed: 8163974].
  • 7. Gouin F, Crenn V, Tabutin J, Societe francaise de chirurgie de la hanche et du G. Subperitoneal approach in revision arthroplasty for acetabular component protrusion: Analysis of practices within the French Hip and Knee Society (SFHG). Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2017;103(1):27-31. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2016.10.005. [PubMed: 27876582].
  • 8. Dunlop DG, Brewster NT, Madabhushi SP, Usmani AS, Pankaj P, Howie CR. Techniques to improve the shear strength of impacted bone graft: The effect of particle size and washing of the graft. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A(4):639-46. [PubMed: 12672839].
  • 9. Patil N, Hwang K, Goodman SB. Cancellous impaction bone grafting of acetabular defects in complex primary and revision total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2012;35(3):e306-12. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20120222-24. [PubMed: 22385438].
  • 10. Chen XD, Waddell JP, Morton J, Schemitsch EH. Isolated acetabular revision after total hip arthroplasty: Results at 5-9 years of follow-up. Int Orthop. 2005;29(5):277-80. doi: 10.1007/s00264-005-0674-2. [PubMed: 16094540]. [PubMed Central: PMC3456643].
  • 11. Pulido L, Rachala SR, Cabanela ME. Cementless acetabular revision: Past, present, and future. Revision total hip arthroplasty: The acetabular side using cementless implants. Int Orthop. 2011;35(2):289-98. doi: 10.1007/s00264-010-1198-y. [PubMed: 21234562]. [PubMed Central: PMC3032100].
  • 12. Berry DJ. Acetabular anti-protrusio rings and cages in revision total hip arthroplasty. Semin Arthroplasty. 1995;6(2):68-75. [PubMed: 10155691].
  • 13. Gill TJ, Siebenrock K, Oberholzer R, Ganz R. Acetabular reconstruction in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Arthroplasty. 1999;14(2):131-7. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(99)90115-8.
  • 14. Kosashvili Y, Backstein D, Safir O, Lakstein D, Gross AE. Acetabular revision using an anti-protrusion (ilio-ischial) cage and trabecular metal acetabular component for severe acetabular bone loss associated with pelvic discontinuity. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91(7):870-6. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B7.22181. [PubMed: 19567849].
  • 15. Bohm P, Banzhaf S. Acetabular revision with allograft bone. 103 revisions with 3 reconstruction alternatives, followed for 0.3-13 years. Acta Orthop Scand. 1999;70(3):240-9. [PubMed: 10429598].
  • 16. Gill TJ, Sledge JB, Muller ME. The Burch-Schneider anti-protrusio cage in revision total hip arthroplasty: Indications, principles and long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(6):946-53. [PubMed: 9853483].
  • 17. Ewers A, Spross C, Ebneter L, Kulling F, Giesinger K, Zdravkovic V, et al. 10-year survival of acetabular reinforcement rings/cages for complex hip arthroplasty. Open Orthop J. 2015;9:163-7. doi: 10.2174/1874325001509010163. [PubMed: 26157533]. [PubMed Central: PMC4483540].
  • 18. Jones L, Grammatopoulos G, Singer G. The Burch-Schneider cage: 9-year survival in paprosky type 3 acetabular defects. Clinical and radiological follow-up. HIP Int. 2012;22(1):28-34. doi: 10.5301/HIP.2012.9078.
  • 19. Gaiani L, Bertelli R, Palmonari M, Vicenzi G. Total hip arthroplasty revision in elderly people with cement and Burch-Schneider anti-protrusio cage. Chir Organi Mov. 2009;93(1):15-9. doi: 10.1007/s12306-009-0019-1. [PubMed: 19711157].
  • 20. Regis D, Sandri A, Bonetti I, Bortolami O, Bartolozzi P. A minimum of 10-year follow-up of the Burch-Schneider cage and bulk allografts for the revision of pelvic discontinuity. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(6):1057-63 e1. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.11.019. [PubMed: 22397857].
  • 21. Wachtl SW, Jung M, Jakob RP, Gautier E. The Burch-Schneider antiprotrusio cage in acetabular revision surgery: A mean follow-up of 12 years. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15(8):959-63. [PubMed: 11112187].
  • 22. Riesgo AM, Hochfelder JP, Adler EM, Slover JD, Specht LM, Iorio R. Survivorship and complications of revision total hip arthroplasty with a mid-modular femoral stem. J Arthroplasty. 2015;30(12):2260-3. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.06.037. [PubMed: 26220105].
  • 23. Berry DJ, Muller ME. Revision arthroplasty using an anti-protrusio cage for massive acetabular bone deficiency. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74(5):711-5. [PubMed: 1527119].
  • 24. Regis D, Magnan B, Sandri A, Bartolozzi P. Long-term results of anti-protrusion cage and massive allografts for the management of periprosthetic acetabular bone loss. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23(6):826-32. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.06.017. [PubMed: 18534526].
  • 25. Park KS, Seon JK, Lee KB, Kim SK, Chan CK, Yoon TR. Revision total hip arthroplasty using an acetabular reinforcement ring with a hook: A precise follow-up, at average 11.4 years, of a previous report. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(2):503-9. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.07.010. [PubMed: 27546473].
Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:

Author(s):

Article(s):

Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments