The purpose of our study was to find out the midterm results of the Müller acetabular roof
We wanted to evaluate the clinical and radiological results of acetabular revision using the acetabular
Introduction.
The study reviews 24 patients with 27 total hip arthroplasties in which an acetabular
The study reviews 24 patients with 27 total hip arthroplasties in which an acetabular
In severe hip dysplasia the fixation of the cup becomes a technical hazard, and the augmentation of the acetabulum with an autologous bone graft is helpful when the bone stock is deficient. Twenty-four patients (25 hips) were operated on between 1993 and 1994; the mean age at operation was 49 years (range, 28 to 71 years). The mean Sharp acetabular angle was 55degrees (range, 45 to 63degrees). The dislocation of the femoral head was graded Crowe 1 in 4 hips, grade II in 5 hips, Grade III in 10 hips, and grade IV in 6 hips. Autologus bone was harvested from the femoral head and from the proximal metaphysis of the femur. The fixation of the graft to the anterior wall and to the roof of the acetabulum was achieved using impaction using the
Management of severe acetabular bone loss at the time of revision total hip replacements (THR) remains has been one of the greater challenges for hip surgeon. Recently, many methods of acetabular reconstruction have been described and various materials are used for supplement of the bone stock deficiency in acetabular revision THR. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the midterm results of the using support ring with bone allografts in acetabular revision THR. From 1990 to 2005, forty-six acetabular revisions using supporting ring with bone allografts were performed at our institution. All patients were followed up for a minimum of three years with a mean follow-up of 7.5 years. Pre-operative radiological acetabular bone defects were assessed and classified by author’s classification (Itoman’s classification). Radiological analysis involved a general qualitative evaluation. The position of the acetabular
Introduction: Treatment of acetabular defects can be difficult, especially in case of roof destruction. Since 9 years, we use a variant of Paprosky’s technique which consists in rebuilding the roof by structural allograft and acetabular
Introduction: The Acetabular
Introduction. To report the short to medium term results of acetabular reconstruction using
Total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) remains a difficult and challenging problem. How to reconstruct acetabular deficiencies has become increasingly important. One of the major causes inducing loosening of acetabular
We reviewed 64 patients in whom 66 acetabula had been reconstructed with either the Muller ring (46) or the Burch-Schneider anti-protrusio cage (20) at a mean follow-up of five years. Five hips had been revised a second time for loosening, all after a Muller ring had been used for a medial segmental defect (2), ungrafted cavitary defects (2) or after resorption of a block graft (1). The use of bone grafts with the implants reduced the incidence of failure from 13% to 6% and of circumferential radiolucent lines at the bone-implant interface from 39% to 2%. The Muller ring is indicated for acetabula with isolated peripheral segmental defects or cavitary defects confined to one or two sectors. The Burch-Schneider cage should be used for medial segmental defects, extensive cavitary defects and combined deficiencies. Defects should be reconstituted with bone graft rather than cement.
We retrospectively reviewed 44 consecutive patients
(50 hips) who underwent acetabular re-revision after a failed previous
revision that had been performed using structural or morcellised
allograft bone, with a cage or ring for uncontained defects. Of
the 50 previous revisions, 41 cages and nine rings were used with
allografts for 14 minor-column and 36 major-column defects. We routinely
assessed the size of the acetabular bone defect at the time of revision
and re-revision surgery. This allowed us to assess whether host
bone stock was restored. We also assessed the outcome of re-revision
surgery in these circumstances by means of radiological characteristics,
rates of failure and modes of failure. We subsequently investigated
the factors that may affect the potential for the restoration of bone
stock and the durability of the re-revision reconstruction using
multivariate analysis. At the time of re-revision, there were ten host acetabula with
no significant defects, 14 with contained defects, nine with minor-column,
seven with major-column defects and ten with pelvic discontinuity.
When bone defects at re-revision were compared with those at the
previous revision, there was restoration of bone stock in 31 hips, deterioration
of bone stock in nine and remained unchanged in ten. This was a
significant improvement (p <
0.001). Morselised allografting
at the index revision was not associated with the restoration of
bone stock. In 17 hips (34%), re-revision was possible using a simple acetabular
component without allograft, augments, rings or cages. There were
47 patients with a mean follow-up of 70 months (6 to 146) available
for survival analysis. Within this group, the successful cases had
a minimum follow-up of two years after re-revision. There were 22 clinical
or radiological failures (46.7%), 18 of which were due to aseptic
loosening. The five and ten year Kaplan–Meier survival rate was
75% (95% CI, 60 to 86) and 56% (95% CI, 40 to 70) respectively with
aseptic loosening as the endpoint. The rate of aseptic loosening
was higher for hips with pelvic discontinuity (p = 0.049) and less
when the allograft had been in place for longer periods (p = 0.040). The use of a cage or ring over structural allograft bone for
massive uncontained defects in acetabular revision can restore host
bone stock and facilitate subsequent re-revision surgery to a certain
extent. Cite this article:
Deficiencies of acetabular bone stock at revision hip replacement were reconstructed with two different types of allograft using impaction bone grafting and a Burch-Schneider
We present our experience from use of acetabular
Instability and aseptic loosening are the two main complications after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Dual-mobility (DM) cups were shown to counteract implant instability during rTHA. To our knowledge, no study evaluated the 10-year outcomes of rTHA using DM cups, cemented into a metal
Aims: Acetabular
Roof reinforcement and reconstruction rings have facilitated bone restoration in revision arthroplasty of the acetabulum. These rings are used when there is not enough bone to support a conventional cemented or a standard sized or jumbo uncemented cup. Both rings may be used with morselised or structural allograft bone. Roof
Introduction and Objective. The surgical strategy for acetabular component revision is determined by available host bone stock. Acetabular bone deficiencies vary from cavitary or segmental defects to complete discontinuity. For segmental acetabular defects with more than 50% of the graft supporting the cup it is recommended the application of
Background. There are many difficulties during performing total hip replacement in high riding DDH. These difficulties include:. In Acetabular part: bony defect in antero lateral acetabular wall/finding true centre of rotation/shallowness of true acetabulum/hypertrophied and thick capsular obstacle between true and false acetabulum. In Femoral part: small diameter femoral shaft/excessive ante version/posterior placement of greater trochanter. anatomic changes in soft tissue & neurovascular around the hip including: adductor muscle contracture/shortening of abductor muscles/risk of sciatic nerve injury following lengthening of the limb after reduction in true acetabulum/vascular injury. The purpose of this lecture is how to manage above problems with using