Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 1 of 1
Results per page:
Applied filters
Content I can access

Include Proceedings
Dates
Year From

Year To
Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 88-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 67 - 67
1 Mar 2006
Cyril P Gouin F Perrier C Waast D Delecrin J Passuti N
Full Access

Purpose of the study: Revision acetabular surgery with bone stock deficiency is a difficult problem. The use of cementless component and bioactive ceramics seemed to be a promising alternative.

Since 1996, we have been filling bone defect at the time of revision with macroporous calcium phosphate ceramic. We reported our first experience between 1996 and 1999.

Material and methods: The procedure was carried out in 35 hip reconstructions ( 35 patients ) at a mean follow-up of 6 years ( range 5 to 7,4). The average age of the patients was 56 years( range 28 to 83).

2 patients died of a cause unrelated to the procedure and 2 patients were lost of follow-up. Bone defect were classified into type I ( 4 hips), type IIA ( 8 hips ), type IIB ( 5 hips), type IIC ( 9 hips), IIIA ( 4 hips ), type IV ( 5 hips ) according to Paprosky classification.

The functional status of the patients was evaluated according to the Merle d’Aubign ip rating.. The interfaces bioactive ceramics/bone base and bioactive ceramics/cementless component, as well as the homogeneity and the density of the graft were examined radiologically.

Results: Functionally, the Merle d’Aubigné hip rating improved, increasing from11,3 to 15,9. Failure of fixation of the acetabular component occurred in 11,4 % of the acetabular reconstructions ( 4 hips in 35 patients). One was diagnosed as loose on the basis of radiographic criteria alone and the other three hips had a loose acetabular component at reoperation. We observed no failed reconstruction when the acetabular component is in direct contact with host bone on 50 % or more of its surface area.

We saw no radiolucent lines or spaces at the interface between bioactive ceramics and the host bone. Morphological changes or a decreased in graft volume were not seen, except for the patient with the loose cup.

Discussion-Conclusion: The findings of the present study support the use of bioactive ceramics and cement-less acetabular component in the presence of loss bone in order to achieve the goals of a revision hip replacement, provided that at least 50 % support of the cup can be obtained with host-bone.