Large acetabular bone defects encountered in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) are challenging to restore. Metal constructs for structural support are combined with bone graft materials for restoration. Autograft is restricted due to limited volume, and allogenic grafts have downsides including cost, availability, and operative processing. Bone graft substitutes (BGS) are an attractive alternative if they can demonstrate positive remodelling. One potential product is a biphasic injectable mixture (Cerament) that combines a fast-resorbing material (calcium sulphate) with the highly osteoconductive material hydroxyapatite. This study reviews the application of this biomaterial in large acetabular defects. We performed a retrospective review at a single institution of patients undergoing revision THA by a single surgeon. We identified 49 consecutive patients with large acetabular defects where the biphasic BGS was applied, with no other products added to the BGS. After placement of metallic acetabular implants, the BGS was injected into the remaining bone defects surrounding the new implants. Patients were followed and monitored for functional outcome scores, implant fixation, radiological graft site remodelling, and revision failures.Aims
Methods
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:
