RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The integrity of the femoral bone is crucial when considering reconstructive options for the first-time revision of a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Aseptic loosening of primary stems, whether cemented or uncemented, significantly affects the volume and quality of resultant femoral bone loss. This study evaluates the impact of the initial fixation method on femoral bone defect patterns by comparing the extent of bone loss. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 215 patients with either cemented or uncemented stems, indicated for aseptic stem loosening, and undergoing first-time stem revision from 2010 to 2022 at our institution was analyzed. Femoral bone loss extent at first-time revision was preoperatively gauged using radiographs and categorized by the Paprosky classification. Survival probabilities pre-first-time revision for both stem types were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Hazard ratios were applied to compare the risk of initial revision for uncemented versus cemented stems within the first and subsequent 2nd to 10th years post-primary implantation. RESULTS: Cemented stems were associated with a higher occurrence of significant bone defects of type 3a (23.53% vs. 14.02%, p = .108), 3b (39.22% vs. 1.22%, p < .001), and 4 (3.92% vs. 0.00%) compared to uncemented stems. Conversely, smaller defects of type 1 and 2 were more prevalent in uncemented stem loosening (84.76% vs. 33.33%, p < .001). Notably, cemented stems exhibited a significantly prolonged revision-free period over the complete decade following primary insertion (p < .001). The unadjusted risk of first-time revision due to stem loosening showed a tendency to an increase in uncemented stems within the initial postoperative year (HR 5.55, 95% CI 0.74; 41.67, p = .096), and an adjusted risk of 2.1 (95% CI 0.26; 16.53, p = .488). However, these differences did not reach statistical significance. In the subsequent 2nd-10th years, the risk was lower compared to cemented stems (HR 2.35, 95% CI 1.39; 3.99, p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Uncemented primary stems necessitating first-time revision due to aseptic loosening demonstrated notably smaller femoral bone defects in comparison to primary cemented stems.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Implant loosening represent the most common indication for stem revision in hip revision arthroplasty. This study compares femoral bone loss and the risk of initial revisions between cemented and uncemented loosened primary stems, investigating the impact of fixation method at primary implantation on femoral bone defects. METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed 255 patients who underwent their first revision for stem loosening from 2010 to 2022, receiving either cemented or uncemented stem implants. Femoral bone loss was preoperatively measured using the Paprosky classification through radiographic evaluations. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated the survival probability of the original stem, and the hazard ratio assessed the relative risk of revision for uncemented versus cemented stems in the first postoperative year and the following two to ten years. RESULTS: Cemented stems showed a higher prevalence of significant bone loss (type 3b and 4 defects: 32.39% vs. 2.72%, p < .001) compared to uncemented stems, which more commonly had type 1 and 2 defects (82.07% vs. 47.89%, p < .001). In our analysis of revision cases, primary uncemented stems demonstrated a 20% lower incidence of stem loosening in the first year post-implantation compared to cemented stems (HR 0.8; 95%-CI 0.3-2.0). However, the incidence in uncemented stems increased by 20% during the subsequent years two to ten (HR 1.2; 95%-CI 0.7-1.8). Septic loosening was more common in cemented stems (28.17% vs. 10.87% in uncemented stems, p = .001). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated a modestly longer revision-free period for cemented stems within the first ten years post-implantation (p < .022). CONCLUSION: During first-time revision, cemented stems show significantly larger femoral bone defects than uncemented stems. Septic stem loosening occurred 17.30% more in cemented stems.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Several studies have reported good to excellent outcomes of revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) using allografts for treating severe acetabular bone defects. However, precise information on the impact of allograft type and reconstruction method is not available. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Systematic literature search was performed in Medline and Web of Science including patients with acetabular bone loss classified according to the Paprosky classification who underwent rTHA involving the use of allografts. Studies with a minimum follow-up of 2 years published between 1990 and 2021 were included. Kendall correlation was applied to determine the relationship between Paprosky grade and allograft type use. Proportion meta-analyses with 95% confidence interval (CI) were performed to summarize the success of various reconstruction options, including allograft type, fixation method, and reconstruction system. RESULTS: Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria encompassing 1561 cases from 1491 patients with an average age of 64 years (range 22-95). The average follow-up period was 7.9 years (range 2-22). Structural bulk and morselized grafts were used in equal proportions for all Paprosky acetabular defect types. Their use increased significantly with the type of acetabular defect (r = 0.69, p = 0.049). The overall success rate ranged from 61.3 to 98.3% with a random effect pooled estimate of 90% [95% CI 87-93]. Trabecular metal augments (93% [76-98]) and shells (97% [84-99]) provided the highest success rates. However, no significant differences between reconstruction systems, allograft types and fixation methods were observed (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight the use of bulk or morselized allograft for massive bone loss independent of Paprosky classification type and indicate similar good mid- to long-term outcomes of the different acetabular reconstruction options using allografts. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42020223093.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Recurrent hip dislocation after multiple revision total hip arthroplasty is a severe complication. Therefore, constrained acetabular liners (CL) have been used during salvage procedures. We report our experience of constrained liners in a re-revision setting with focus on re-dislocation. We also evaluated acetabular and femoral bone loss as potential risk factor. METHODS: Between January 2013 and December 2016, 65 patients were treated in a single institution for revision and re-revision hip arthroplasty using CL. The indication for using a CL was a high risk of re-redislocation after multiple recurrent hip dislocation including failed Dual Mobility Cups (DMC). Compromising soft tissue defects as well as severe bone defect were therefore regarded as high risks. Thirty-eight patients (77.6%) underwent a minimum of three surgical procedures before the index revision procedure. Sixteen patients (24.6%) were excluded as they were lost to follow-up, expired before minimum follow-up or refused study participation, leaving 49 patients in the analysis (75.4%). The mean follow-up was 62 months (44-74; SD = 7.7). We assessed the following potential risk factors for revision or dislocation: type of surgical setting (septic/aseptic), BMI, cup inclination angle, size of liner used and acetabular and femoral bone loss according to Paprosky classification. The primary endpoints were dislocation or repeat revision for any reason. RESULTS: Of the 49 patients, we found an overall re-revision rate of 40.8% (20/49) and a dislocation rate of 30.6% (15/49). There were no significant differences among the surgical re-revision rate or dislocation rate as a factor of patient characteristics. In terms of bone loss, there was a trend towards higher revision rates for increasing acetabular and femoral bone loss, but without statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: We found the use of a constrained liner in a re-revision setting still bears a high risk of re-revision and re-dislocation. Therefore we restrained from using constrained liners in favour of Dual mobility cups. In this study there was no significant higher dislocation rate in the subgroup of periprosthetic infection. Furthermore the rigid design of a constrained liner bears the known risk of structural failure of acetabular reconstruction implants. Severe acetabular or femoral bone defects seem to have an impact on the revision rate, but not on the dislocation rate with regards to the restored offset and center of the hip. Results have to be taken into context such that the study population inherently has a predisposition for poorer outcomes. Indications should be strongly filtered for patients at high risk for recurrent hip joint dislocation including failed DMCs with only limited bone loss and moderate soft tissue defects. Our modification to the existing classification with a high inter and intraobserver reliability will make future studies more comparable regarding revisions and bone stock loss. Still further research using objective and reproducible parameters is needed to better analyze data especially in the background of complex revision hip arthroplasty.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background: Within a timeframe of 8 years (2008-2016), 38 patients have undergone total hip replacement surgery for coxarthrosis or aseptic necrosis secondary to acetabulum fractures. Materials and Methods: The study included 27 males and 11 females between 42 and 70 years of age, all of whom came from other institutions. The follow-up period ranged between a minimum of 4.6 and a maximum of 9.7 years. Results: At the final follow-up, all patients were evaluated using the Merle D'Aubigne and Pastel model. Optimal results were found in all the cases. Three patients benefited from surgical revisitation with implant exchange following infection and one/two state reimplatation at seven, fourtheen et twenty-seven months respectively. Two patients benefited from cotyle revision due to chronic instability of the implant. Conclusions: The scope of the study was to present all the possible surgical difficulties that can come up with prosthetic implants. More particularly, hip implants after acetabulum fractures qualifies as a "difficult primary implant".

RESUMEN

Background: Owing to an increase in the number of hip arthroplasty surgeries, the number of implant replacement surgeries is increasing rapidly as well. This necessitates the study of hip joint conditions. Therefore, Paprosky defined a classification system to indicate the degree of damage to the hip joint. In this study, a customised hip implant suitable for Paprosky classification Type ⅡC and over was designed. The shape, suitability, and mechanical safety of the worst-case model for the implant were evaluated. Materials and methods: To identify the implant size depending on states over Type ⅡC acetabulum bone loss, a size range was selected and a customised implant was designed according to the computed tomography data within the size range. The implant was designed for the flange, hook, and flattened model types. The worst-case selection test was conducted using finite element analysis. The von Mises stresses of the flange, hook, and flattened models were found as 76.223, 136.99, and 80.791 MPa, respectively. Therefore, the hook-type model was selected as the worst case for the mechanical performance test. Results: A bending test was conducted on the hook-type model without fracture and failure at 5344.56 N. The proposed customised implant was found suitable for Type ⅢA acetabulum bone loss, whereas the shape suitability and mechanical safety were verified for the worst case. Conclusion: The shape of a customised implant suitable for Paprosky ⅢA type was designed. The shape suitability and mechanical safety were evaluated using finite element method analysis and bending tests. Clinical validation is required through subsequent clinical evaluation.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Current femoral bone loss classification systems in revision total hip arthroplasty were created at a time when the predominant reconstructive methods used cylindrical porous-coated cobalt-chrome stems. As these stems have largely been replaced by fluted-tapered titanium stems, the ability of these classification systems to help guide implant selection is limited. The purpose of this study was to describe a novel classification system based on contemporary reconstructive techniques. METHODS: We reviewed the charts of all patients who underwent femoral component revision at our institution from 2007 through 2019. Preoperative images were reviewed, and FBL was rated according to the Paprosky classification and compared to ratings using our institution's NCS. Rates of reoperation at the time of most recent follow-up were determined and compared. RESULTS: Four-hundred and forty-two femoral revisions in 330 patients with a mean follow-up duration of 2.7 years were identified. Femoral type according to Paprosky and NCS were Paprosky I (36, 8.1%), II (61, 13.8%), IIIA (180, 40.7%), IIIB (116, 26.2%), and IV (49 11.1%) and NCS 1 (35, 7.9%), 2 (364, 82.4%), 3 (8, 1.8%), 4 (27, 6.1%), and 5 (8, 1.8%). Of the 353 nonstaged rTHAs, there were 42 cases requiring unplanned reoperation (11.9%), including infection (18, 5.1%), instability (10, 2.8%), femoral loosening (5, 1.4%), and various other causes (9, 2.5%). The NCS was more predictive of reoperation than the Paprosky classification (Fisher's exact test, P = .008 vs P = ns, respectively). CONCLUSION: We present a novel femoral classification system that can help guide contemporary implant selection.

RESUMEN

AIMS: We report our early experience in acetabular reconstruction for significant bone loss and pelvic discontinuity using custom triflange acetabular components. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective consecutive review of all patients treated at our specialist tertiary unit with significant acetabular defects (Paprosky 3A/3B) and pelvic discontinuity who were reconstructed with custom triflange implants. The primary outcomes were radiographic failure and complications. RESULTS: 17 patients (17 hips) were included; 3 males/14 females with a mean age of 72 years (range 61-83). The average follow-up was 3.6 years (2-7 years). Bony defects were Paprosky 3B in 13/17 hips (76%) with pelvic discontinuity encountered in the majority of cases 15/17 hips (88%) and intra-pelvic failed components in 11/17 (64%). At final follow up, no radiographic failures were observed although three patients developed complications (17.6%); haematoma requiring washout out; intra-operative ilium fracture; and recurrent dislocation in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Our experience suggest that acceptable outcomes can be achieved with custom implants for this group of challenging patients, although longer follow up is needed to monitor future implants' failure.

RESUMEN

The treatment of severe acetabular defects in revision total hip arthroplasty (Paprosky type IIIa and IIIb) is demanding and choosing the appropriate surgical technique remains controversial. The introduction of trabecular metal augments has led to a variety of new treatment options. The authors present a case of a Paprosky Type IIIb acetabular defect due to eight subsequent revisions of the left hip. The patient was treated with an alternative treatment option using multiple tantalum wedges. Anatomical reconstruction was achieved and at 12 months follow-up, the patient was pain free and was able to walk without walking aids.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The management of acetabular bone loss is a challenging problem in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). The aim of this systematic review is to summarize and critically analyze indications, complications, clinical and radiological outcomes of custom-made acetabular components in rTHA. METHODS: A systematic review of English literature was performed on Medline. Retrospective or prospective studies with minimum 2 years of follow-up (FU) were included. The PRISMA 2009 flowchart and checklist were considered to edit the review. Rates of intra- or post-operative complications, aseptic loosening (AL), periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), reoperations and re-revisions rates were extrapolated. RESULTS: 18 articles with a level of evidence of IV were included. Six hundred and thirty-four acetabular custom components (627 patients) with a mean FU of 58.6 ± 29.8 months were analyzed. The studies showed good clinical and functional outcomes. Custom-made acetabular components allowed a stable fixation with 94.0 ± 5.0% survival rate. The estimated rate of re-operations and re-revisions were 19.3 ± 17.3% and 5.2 ± 4.7%, respectively. The incidence of PJI was 4.0 ± 3.9%. CONCLUSIONS: The acetabular custom-made implants represent a reliable solution for pelvic discontinuity and particular cases of bone loss classified as Paprosky Type IIIA-B or type III-IV according to American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons system where the feature of the defect cannot be handled with standard implants. This strategy allows to fit the implant to the residual host bone, bypassing the bony deficiency and restoring hip biomechanics. Satisfactory clinical and radiological outcomes at mid-term follow-up are reported in literature.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Acetabular revision especially in the presence of severe bone loss is challenging. There is a paucity of literature critiquing contemporary techniques of revision acetabular reconstruction and their outcomes. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature and to report clinical outcomes and survival of contemporary acetabular revision arthroplasty techniques (tantalum metal shells, uncemented revision jumbo shells, reinforced cages and rings, oblong shells and custom-made triflange constructs). Full-text papers and those with an abstract in English published from January 2001 to January 2016 were identified through international databases. A total of 50 papers of level IV scientific evidence, comprising 2811 hips in total, fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included. Overall, patients had improved outcomes irrespective of the technique of reconstruction as documented by postoperative hip scores. Our pooled analysis suggests that oblong cups components had a lower failure rate compared with other different materials considered in this review. Custom-made triflange cups had one of highest failure rates. However, this may reflect the complexity of revisions and severity of bone loss. The most common postoperative complication reported in all groups was dislocation. This review confirms successful acetabular reconstructions using diverse techniques depending on the type of bone loss and highlights key features and outcomes of different techniques. In particular, oblong cups and tantalum shells have successful survivorship.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to analyze the survival of the Echelon® femoral stems in revision hip surgeries in patients with Paprosky I-IIIA femoral defects. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-six patients (70 hips) who underwent revision hip surgery with at least 3 years of follow-up data were included in the study between 2000 and 2013. The mean patient age was 64.5 (32-83) years, and the mean follow-up period was 93 (45-206) months. The reasons for revision were aseptic loosening in 55 (78.6%) patients, periprosthetic joint infection in 9 (12.9%) patients, periprosthetic fracture in 4 (5.7%) patients, and stem fracture in 2 (2.9%) patients. The preoperative and postoperative follow-up X-rays and functional scores were evaluated. RESULTS: Five patients died in an average of 70 (45-86) months after surgery due to non-related diseases. We encountered sciatic nerve palsy in two patients and early hip dislocation in two patients, whereas 54 patients were able to walk without any assistive device. The remaining 12 patients required an assistive device to walk. The mean Harris hip score significantly increased from 34 (7-63) preoperatively to 72 (43-96) postoperatively. Aseptic loosening was observed in one patient. The survival of the porous-coated anatomical uncemented femoral stem was 98.4% over 10 years. CONCLUSION: This study showed that good clinical outcomes and survival can be obtained when using porous-coated anatomical uncemented femoral stems.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of extensive bone loss and massive acetabular defects can be compounded by several challenges and pitfalls. The survivorship following acetabular revision with extensive bone loss is still unsatisfactory. The goal of the present study was to analyse the outcomes of 3D-printed patient-specific acetabular components in the management of extensive acetabular defects and combined pelvic discontinuity (PD). METHODS: 9 patients underwent revision THA using 3D-printed custom acetabular components to reconstruct extensive acetabular defects. The Paprosky classifications were determined in all patients. The primary outcome measure was the implant-associated failure rate. RESULTS: 1 out of 9 patients suffered an implant-associated complication (11%). The overall implant-associated survival rate was 89%. The overall complication rate was 56%. CONCLUSIONS: The patient-specific acetabular component technique shows promise for the treatment of patients with severe acetabular defects in revision THA. Further research aimed at reducing costs and improving the complication rate are warranted.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to review the results of the use of a cemented, standard length, taper-slip femoral component at second stage following an extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO). METHODS: We reviewed prospectively collected data from the hospital arthroplasty database, identifying and reviewing all patients who had undergone an ETO at first-stage revision for infection, who had subsequently undergone second-stage reimplantation. RESULTS: Over 17 years, 99 patients underwent 102 2-stage procedures with ETO at first stage, with a mean follow-up of 5.5 years; 70 of 102 patients received a standard prosthesis following ETO union and 32 of 102 patients received a long-stem prosthesis at second stage because of deficiencies in proximal femoral bone stock. There was a significant difference in the Paprosky classification between the 2 groups (P < .0001); 77% of the standard group and 52% of the long-stem group had no complications. A significant complication (infection, fracture, or dislocation) was observed in 12% patients in the standard group and 16% patients in the long-stem group. A number of radiographs were independently reviewed to assess for ETO union and complications and an intraclass correlation of 0.84 (P < .0001) was observed. CONCLUSION: A standard femoral prosthesis can be implanted at second stage following ETO union for Paprosky type I and some type II femora. There is no greater risk of complications, and distal bone stock is preserved for potential revision surgery in the future.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The results after acetabular component revision are very heterogeneous, irrespective of the use of established or new components. This could be due to a lack of treatment standards for new revision components. The Trabecular Metal™ (TM) revision system, through its modularity, allows for an individual intraoperative reconstruction of the acetabular defect with a single implant system. It was the aim of this study to investigate the results of acetabular revision with the TMT system taking into consideration the utilized components and the acetabular defect. METHODS: A total of 200 consecutive isolated revisions of the acetabular component from 2010 until 2012 were retrospectively analyzed from our institutional database. Of the 200 cases, 114 revisions were performed with a combination of different TMT components (wedge and cup, cup and cage). Aseptic cup failure and revision for any reason were the defined endpoints of this study. The acetabular defects were graded according to the Paprosky classification. RESULTS: The average patient age was 63.6 ± 14.8 years (range 32-85 years) and the average follow-up was 5.3 ± 0.7 years. The overall revision rate, independent of the utilized components, was 4.4% and the revision rate for aseptic failure of the acetabular component was 2.6%. The revision rate for aseptic loosening for Paprosky type I and II defects was 0% and Paprosky type III and IV defects was 12%. CONCLUSIONS: The modular TMT system shows low revision rates. The modularity of the system allows for a safe and intraoperative adaptation to the individual acetabular defect without the need for extensive preoperative imaging or custom-made implants.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Parallel to the rising number of revision hip procedures, an increasing number of complex periprosthetic osseous defects can be expected. Stable long-term fixation of the revision implant remains the ultimate goal of the surgical protocol. Within this context, an elaborate preoperative planning process including anticipation of the periacetabular defect form and size and analysis of the remaining supporting osseous elements are essential. However, detection and evaluation of periacetabular bone defects using an unsystematic analysis of plain anteroposterior radiographs of the pelvis is in many cases difficult. Therefore, periacetabular bone defect classification schemes such as the Paprosky system have been introduced that use standardized radiographic criteria to better anticipate the intraoperative reality. Recent studies were able to demonstrate that larger defects are often underestimated when using the Paprosky classification and that the intra- and interobserver reliability of the system is low. This makes it hard to compare results in terms of defects being studied. Novel software tools that are based on the analysis of CT data may provide an opportunity to overcome the limitations of native radiographic defect analysis. In the following article we discuss potential benefits of these novel instruments against the background of the obvious limitations of the currently used native radiographic defect analysis.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The purpose of this paper is to review the clinical indications for acetabular reconstruction in patients with underlying peri-prosthetic segmental and cavitary defects, evaluate steps in pre-operative planning, and present the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) and Paprosky classification systems to categorize acetabular defects. We also present a review of the current surgical techniques to reconstruct the acetabular socket which includes a cementless acetabular component with morselized bone, structural allograft, jumbo and oblong cups, reinforcement rings, bone cages, custom triflange acetabular constructs, and trabecular metal components.