In revision total hip replacement, bone loss can be managed by impacting porous bone
Femoral revision after cemented total hip replacement
(THR) might include technical difficulties, following essential cement
removal, which might lead to further loss of bone and consequently
inadequate fixation of the subsequent revision stem. . Femoral impaction allografting has been widely used in revision
surgery for the acetabulum, and subsequently for the femur. In combination
with a primary cemented stem, impaction grafting allows for femoral
bone restoration through incorporation and remodelling of the impacted
morsellized bone graft by the host skeleton. Cavitary bone defects
affecting meta-physis and diaphysis leading to a wide femoral shaft,
are ideal indications for this technique. Cancellous allograft bone
chips of 1 mm to 2 mm size are used, and tapered into the canal
with rods of increasing diameters. To impact the bone
We present an update of the clinical and radiological results of 62 consecutive acetabular revisions using impacted morsellised cancellous bone grafts and a cemented acetabular component in 58 patients, at a mean follow-up of 22.2 years (20 to 25). The Kaplan-Meier survivorship for the acetabular component with revision for any reason as the endpoint was 75% at 20 years (95% confidence interval (CI) 62 to 88) when 16 hips were at risk. Excluding two revisions for septic loosening at three and six years, the survivorship at 20 years was 79% (95% CI 67 to 93). With further exclusions of one revision of a well-fixed acetabular component after 12 years during a femoral revision and two after 17 years for wear of the acetabular component, the survivorship for aseptic loosening was 87% at 20 years (95% CI 76 to 97). At the final review 14 of the 16 surviving hips had radiographs available. There was one additional case of radiological loosening and four acetabular reconstructions showed progressive radiolucent lines in one or two zones. Acetabular revision using impacted large morsellised bone
Failure of total hip arthroplasty with acetabular deficiency occurred in 55 patients (60 hips) and was treated with acetabular revision using morsellised allograft and a cemented metal-backed component. A total of 50 patients (55 hips) were available for clinical and radiological evaluation at a mean follow-up of 5.8 years (3 to 9.5). No hip required further revision of the acetabular component because of aseptic loosening. All the hips except one had complete incorporation of the allograft demonstrated on the radiographs. A complete radiolucent line of >
1 mm was noted in two hips post-operatively. A good to excellent result occurred in 50 hips (91%). With radiological evidence of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component as the end-point, the survivorship at a mean of 5.8 years after surgery was 96.4%. The use of impacted allograft
We retrospectively evaluated 42 hips which had undergone acetabular reconstruction using the Kerboull acetabular reinforcement device between September 1994 and December 1998. We used autogenous bone
The aim of this study is to report the long-term outcomes of instrumented femoral revisions with impaction allograft bone grafting (IBG) using the X-change femoral revision system at 30 years after introduction of the technique. We updated the outcomes of our previous study, based on 208 consecutive revisions using IBG and the X-change femoral revision system in combination with a cemented polished stem, performed in our tertiary care institute between 1991 and 2007. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used to determine the survival rate of the revisions with endpoint revision for any reason and aseptic loosening. Secondary outcomes were radiological loosening and patient-reported outcome measures.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to determine the outcome of all primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and their subsequent revision procedures in patients aged under 50 years performed at our institution. All 1,049 primary THAs which were undertaken in 860 patients aged under 50 years between 1988 and 2018 in our tertiary care institution were included. We used cemented implants in both primary and revision surgery. Impaction bone grafting was used in patients with acetabular or femoral bone defects. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to determine the survival of primary and revision THA with the endpoint of revision for any reason, and of revision for aseptic loosening.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of first-generation annealed highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) in cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA). We retrospectively evaluated 29 patients (35 hips) who underwent THA between December 2000 and February 2002. The survival rate was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hip joint function was evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score. Two-dimensional polyethylene wear was estimated using Martell’s Hip Analysis Suite. We calculated the wear rates between years 1 and 5, 5 and 10, 10 and 15, and 15 and final follow-up.Aims
Methods
Bone stock restoration of acetabular bone defects using impaction bone grafting (IBG) in total hip arthroplasty may facilitate future re-revision in the event of failure of the reconstruction. We hypothesized that the acetabular bone defect during re-revision surgery after IBG was smaller than during the previous revision surgery. The clinical and radiological results of re-revisions with repeated use of IBG were also analyzed. In a series of 382 acetabular revisions using IBG and a cemented component, 45 hips (45 patients) that had failed due to aseptic loosening were re-revised between 1992 and 2016. Acetabular bone defects graded according to Paprosky during the first and the re-revision surgery were compared. Clinical and radiological findings were analyzed over time. Survival analysis was performed using a competing risk analysis.Aims
Methods
This study presents the clinical and radiological results of 62 consecutive acetabular revisions in 58 patients, at a mean of 16.5 years follow-up (15 to 20). The Kaplan-Meier survivorship for the cup with end-point revisions for any reason, was 79% at 15 years (95% confidence interval (CI); 67 to 91). Excluding two revisions for septic loosening at three and six years, and one revision of a well-fixed cup after 12 years in the course of a femoral revision, the survivorship was 84% at 15 years (95% CI; 73 to 95). At review there were no additional cases of loosening, although seven acetabular reconstructions showed radiolucent lines in one or two zones. Acetabular revision using impacted large morsellised bone
The aim of this study was to report the medium-term outcomes of impaction bone allograft and fibular grafting for osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH) and to define the optimal indications. A total of 67 patients (77 hips) with ONFH were enrolled in a single centre retrospective review. Success of the procedure was assessed using the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and rate of revision to total hip arthroplasty (THA). Risk factors were studied, including age, aetiology, duration of hip pain, as well as two classification systems (Association Research Circulation Osseous (ARCO) and Japanese Investigation Committee (JIC) systems).Aims
Methods
This single-centre observational study aimed to describe the results of extensive bone impaction grafting of the whole acetabular cavity in combination with an uncemented component in acetabular revisions performed in a standardized manner since 1993. Between 1993 and 2013, 370 patients with a median age of 72 years (interquartile range (IQR) 63 to 79 years) underwent acetabular revision surgery. Of these, 229 were more than ten years following surgery and 137 were more than 15 years. All revisions were performed with extensive use of morcellized allograft firmly impacted into the entire acetabular cavity, followed by insertion of an uncemented component with supplementary screw fixation. All types of reoperation were captured using review of radiographs and medical charts, combined with data from the local surgical register and the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of a lateral rim mesh on the survival of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) in young patients, aged 50 years or younger. We compared a study group of 235 patients (257 hips) who received a primary THA with the use of impaction bone grafting (IBG) with an additional lateral rim mesh with a group of 306 patients (343 hips) who received IBG in the absence of a lateral rim mesh during the same period from 1988 to 2015. In the mesh group, there were 74 male and 183 female patients, with a mean age of 35 years (13 to 50). In the no-mesh group, there were 173 male and 170 female patients, with a mean age of 38 years (12.6 to 50). Cox regression analyses were performed to study the effect of a lateral rim mesh on acetabular component survival. Kaplan–Meier analyses with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed to estimate the survival of the acetabular implant.Aims
Patients and Methods
The management of acetabular defects at the time of revision hip arthroplasty surgery is a challenge. This study presents the results of a long-term follow-up study of the use of irradiated allograft bone in acetabular reconstruction. Between 1990 and 2000, 123 hips in 110 patients underwent acetabular reconstruction for aseptic loosening, using impaction bone grafting with frozen, irradiated, and morsellized femoral heads and a cemented acetabular component. A total of 55 men and 55 women with a mean age of 64.3 years (26 to 97) at the time of revision surgery are included in this study.Aims
Patients and Methods
The aim of this study was to examine the results of the acetabular
distraction technique in achieving implantation of a stable construct,
obtaining biological fixation, and producing healing of chronic
pelvic discontinuity at revision total hip arthroplasty. We identified 32 patients treated between 2006 and 2013 who underwent
acetabular revision for a chronic pelvic discontinuity using acetabular
distraction, and who were radiographically evaluated at a mean of
62 months (25 to 160). Of these patients, 28 (87.5%) were female.
The mean age at the time of revision was 67 years (44 to 86). The patients
represented a continuous series drawn from two institutions that
adhered to an identical operative technique.Aims
Patients and Methods
This review summarises the technique of impaction
grafting with mesh augmentation for the treatment of uncontained
acetabular defects in revision hip arthroplasty. The ideal acetabular revision should restore bone stock, use
a small socket in the near-anatomic position, and provide durable
fixation. Impaction bone grafting, which has been in use for over
40 years, offers the ability to achieve these goals in uncontained
defects. The precepts of modern, revision impaction grafting are
that the segmental or cavitary defects must be supported with a
mesh; the contained cavity is filled with vigorously impacted morselised
fresh-frozen allograft; and finally, acrylic cement is used to stabilise
the graft and provide rigid, long-lasting fixation of the revised
acetabular component. Favourable results have been published with this technique. While
having its limitations, it is a viable option to address large acetabular
defects in revision arthroplasty. Cite this article:
A common situation presenting to the orthopaedic
surgeon today is a worn acetabular liner with substantial acetabular
and pelvic osteolysis. The surgeon has many options for dealing
with osteolytic defects. These include allograft, calcium based
substitutes, demineralised bone matrix, or combinations of these
options with or without addition of platelet rich plasma. To date
there are no clinical studies to determine the efficacy of using
bone-stimulating materials in osteolytic defects at the time of
revision surgery and there are surprisingly few studies demonstrating
the clinical efficacy of these treatment options. Even when radiographs
appear to demonstrate incorporation of graft material CT studies
have shown that incorporation is incomplete. The surgeon, in choosing
a graft material for a surgical procedure must take into account
the efficacy, safety, cost and convenience of that material. Cite this article:
Ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings in total hip arthroplasty (THA)
are commonly used, but concerns exist regarding ceramic fracture.
This study aims to report the risk of revision for fracture of modern
CoC bearings and identify factors that might influence this risk,
using data from the National Joint Registry (NJR) for England, Wales, Northern
Ireland and the Isle of Man. We analysed data on 223 362 bearings from 111 681 primary CoC
THAs and 182 linked revisions for bearing fracture recorded in the
NJR. We used implant codes to identify ceramic bearing composition
and generated Kaplan-Meier estimates for implant survivorship. Logistic
regression analyses were performed for implant size and patient specific
variables to determine any associated risks for revision.Aims
Patients and Methods
We conducted a prospective study of a delta ceramic total hip
arthroplasty (THA) to determine the rate of ceramic fracture, to
characterise post-operative noise, and to evaluate the mid-term
results and survivorship. Between March 2009 and March 2011, 274 patients (310 hips) underwent
cementless THA using a delta ceramic femoral head and liner. At
each follow-up, clinical and radiological outcomes were recorded.
A Kaplan-Meier analysis was undertaken to estimate survival.Aims
Patients and Methods
Impaction bone grafting for the reconstitution
of bone stock in revision hip surgery has been used for nearly 30 years.
Between 1995 and 2001 we used this technique in acetabular reconstruction,
in combination with a cemented component, in 304 hips in 292 patients
revised for aseptic loosening. The only additional supports used
were stainless steel meshes placed against the medial wall or laterally
around the acetabular rim to contain the graft. All Paprosky grades
of defect were included. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were
collected in surviving patients at a minimum of ten years after
the index operation. Mean follow-up was 12.4 years ( Cite this article: