4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Reconstruction options and outcomes for acetabular bone loss in revision hip arthroplasty

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Revision total hip arthroplasty in the setting of acetabular bone loss is a challenging procedure and requires a solid understanding of current acetabular reconstruction options. Despite major developments in the field of revision hip surgery in recent decades, reconstruction of acetabular defects remains a major problem in order to achieve primary stability and durable fixation without sacrificing additional bone stock. Although there are several ways to classify acetabular bone defects, the Paprosky classification system is the most commonly used to describe the defects and guide treatment strategy. An understanding of the bone defects associated with detailed pre-operative assessment and planning are essential elements in order to achieve satisfactory outcomes. Multiple acetabular reconstructive options are currently available including impaction bone grafting with metal mesh, reinforcement rings and antiprotrusio cage, structural allografts, cementless hemispherical cups, extra-large “jumbo cups”, oblong cups, modular porous metal augments, cup-cage constructs, custom- made triflange cups, and acetabular distraction. To date, debate continues as to which technique is most effective due to the lack of long-term studies of modern reconstruction systems. Further long-term studies are necessary to assess the longevity of the different implants. The purpose of this study was to review the current literature and provide a comprehensive understanding of the available reconstruction options with their clinical outcomes.

          Related collections

          Most cited references74

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Characteristics of bone ingrowth and interface mechanics of a new porous tantalum biomaterial.

          We have studied the characteristics of bone ingrowth of a new porous tantalum biomaterial in a simple transcortical canine model using cylindrical implants 5 x 10 mm in size. The material was 75% to 80% porous by volume and had a repeating arrangement of slender interconnecting struts which formed a regular array of dodecahedron-shaped pores. We performed histological studies on two types of material, one with a smaller pore size averaging 430 microm at 4, 16 and 52 weeks and the other with a larger pore size averaging 650 microm at 2, 3, 4, 16 and 52 weeks. Mechanical push-out tests at 4 and 16 weeks were used to assess the shear strength of the bone-implant interface on implants of the smaller pore size. The extent of filling of the pores of the tantalum material with new bone increased from 13% at two weeks to between 42% and 53% at four weeks. By 16 and 52 weeks the average extent of bone ingrowth ranged from 63% to 80%. The tissue response to the small and large pore sizes was similar, with regions of contact between bone and implant increasing with time and with evidence of Haversian remodelling within the pores at later periods. Mechanical tests at four weeks indicated a minimum shear fixation strength of 18.5 MPa, substantially higher than has been obtained with other porous materials with less volumetric porosity. This porous tantalum biomaterial has desirable characteristics for bone ingrowth; further studies are warranted to ascertain its potential for clinical reconstructive orthopaedics.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation.

            From 1982 to 1988, 147 cemented acetabular components were revised with cementless hemispheric press-fit components, with an average follow-up period of 5.7 years (range, 3-9 years). Acetabular defects were typed from 1 to 3 and reconstructed with a bulk or support allograft. Type 1 defects had bone lysis around cement anchor sites and required particulate graft. Type 2A and B defects displayed progressive bone loss superiorly and required particulate graft, femoral head bulk graft, or cup superiorization. Type 2C defects required medial wall repair with wafer femoral head graft. Type 3A and B defects demonstrated progressive amounts of superior rim deficiencies and were treated with structural distal femur or proximal tibia allograft. Six of the 147 components (4.0%), all type 3B, were considered radiographically and clinically unstable, warranting revision. Three of the six were revised. Moderate lateral allograft resorption was noted on radiographs, but host-graft union was confirmed at revision. Size, orientation, and method of fixation of the allografts play an important role in the integrity of structural allografts, while adequate remaining host-bone must be present to ensure bone ingrowth.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Classification and management of acetabular abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty.

              Total hip arthroplasty, for both primary and revision operations, frequently involves bony abnormalities of the acetabulum. No standard nomenclature currently exists for the definition of acetabular deficiencies. A classification system is presented to assist in the preoperative evaluation and to provide a treatment protocol for these defects.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Orthop Rev (Pavia)
                OR
                Orthopedic Reviews
                PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy
                2035-8237
                2035-8164
                25 June 2020
                29 June 2020
                : 12
                : Suppl 1
                : 8655
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Aging, Neurological, Orthopaedic and Head- Neck Studies, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS , Rome, Italy
                [2 ]Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore , Rome, Italy
                [3 ]GIOMI Istituto Ortopedico del Mezzogiorno d’Italia Franco Scalabrino , Ganzirri, Messina, Italy
                [4 ]Stavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center, Hospital for Special Surgery , New York NY, USA
                Author notes
                Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Unit, Division of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Aging, Neurological, Orthopaedic and Head-Neck studies, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Largo Agostino Gemelli 8, 00168, Rome, Italy. Tel. +39 3512412491. ivan.demartino@ 123456policlinicogemelli.it

                Contributions: FM, IDM: designing the work. FM, DDM, GC, MMA and VDM: acquisition and analysis of the data. FM: drafting the work. CP, AG, GM, PKS, and IDM: revised it critically for important intellectual content. IDM: final approval of the version to be published.

                Conflict of interests: the authors declare no potential conflict of interests.

                Availability of data and materials: The dataset used and analyzed is available from the corresponding author.

                Ethics approval and consent to participate: Not applicable.

                Informed consent: Not applicable.

                Article
                10.4081/or.2020.8655
                7459368
                32913591
                21efbe3e-2987-4912-b667-9dc0ae85ebf9
                ©Copyright: the Author(s)

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial 4.0 License (CC BY-NC 4.0).

                History
                : 10 June 2020
                : 17 June 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 1, Equations: 0, References: 77, Pages: 7
                Funding
                Funding: None.
                Categories
                Review

                Orthopedics
                spinopelvic alignment,total hip arthroplasty,hip-spine,pelvic tilt,dislocation
                Orthopedics
                spinopelvic alignment, total hip arthroplasty, hip-spine, pelvic tilt, dislocation

                Comments

                Comment on this article