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.
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.
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.
Two types of cups coated with hydroxyapatite were used depending on the acetabular potential for retaining the implant: 26 ATLAS press-fit cups (four screwed) and 22 Cerafit cups with Surfix anchor screws. Bony defects were filled with grains of macroporous calcium phosphate ceramic, alone or in combination with an autol-ogous bone graft (five patients) and/or an iliac bone marrow graft (24 patients). The Harris and modified PMA clinical scores were used for assessment. According to the Antonio classification, preoperative bone loss was grade II in 18, grade III in 27, grade IV in 3. We attempted to determine the percent of bone support under the cup before reconstruction. The centre of the prosthesis rotation and the interfaces with the biomate-rials were checked regularly.
All patient were followed for at least four years. Therapeutic efficacy was assessed on the basis of clinical and laboratory findings and radiographic results. We searched for biological or bacteriological factors predictive of good outcome. The chi-square test and Fisher exact tet were used to compare population distributions and Student’s t test and Mann Whitney test to compare means.