It may not be possible to undertake revision total hip arthroplasty
(THA) in the presence of massive loss of acetabular bone stock using
standard cementless hemispherical acetabular components and metal
augments, as satisfactory stability cannot always be achieved. We
aimed to study the outcome using a reconstruction cage and a porous
metal augment in these patients. A total of 22 acetabular revisions in 19 patients were performed
using a combination of a reconstruction cage and porous metal augments.
The augments were used in place of structural allografts. The mean
age of the patients at the time of surgery was 70 years (27 to 85)
and the mean follow-up was 39 months (27 to 58). The mean number
of previous THAs was 1.9 (1 to 3). All patients had segmental defects
involving more than 50% of the acetabulum and seven hips had an
associated pelvic discontinuity. Aims
Patients and Methods
An uncemented hemispherical acetabular component
is the mainstay of acetabular revision and gives excellent long-term
results. Occasionally, the degree of acetabular bone loss means that a
hemispherical component will be unstable when sited in the correct
anatomical location or there is minimal bleeding host bone left
for biological fixation. On these occasions an alternative method
of reconstruction has to be used. A major column structural allograft has been shown to restore
the deficient bone stock to some degree, but it needs to be off-loaded
with a reconstruction cage to prevent collapse of the graft. The
use of porous metal augments is a promising method of overcoming
some of the problems associated with structural allograft. If the defect
is large, the augment needs to be protected by a cage to allow ingrowth
to occur. Cup-cage reconstruction is an effective method of treating
chronic pelvic discontinuity and large contained or uncontained
bone defects. This paper presents the indications, surgical techniques and
outcomes of various methods which use acetabular reconstruction
cages for revision total hip arthroplasty. Cite this article:
Cartilage defects of the hip cause significant
pain and may lead to arthritic changes that necessitate hip replacement.
We propose the use of fresh osteochondral allografts as an option
for the treatment of such defects in young patients. Here we present
the results of fresh osteochondral allografts for cartilage defects
in 17 patients in a prospective study. The underlying diagnoses
for the cartilage defects were osteochondritis dissecans in eight
and avascular necrosis in six. Two had Legg-Calve-Perthes and one
a femoral head fracture. Pre-operatively, an MRI was used to determine
the size of the cartilage defect and the femoral head diameter.
All patients underwent surgical hip dislocation with a trochanteric
slide osteotomy for placement of the allograft. The mean age at
surgery was 25.9 years (17 to 44) and mean follow-up was 41.6 months
(3 to 74). The mean Harris hip score was significantly better after
surgery (p <
0.01) and 13 patients had fair to good outcomes.
One patient required a repeat allograft, one patient underwent hip
replacement and two patients are awaiting hip replacement. Fresh
osteochondral allograft is a reasonable treatment option for hip
cartilage defects in young patients. Cite this article:
The conventional method for reconstructing acetabular
bone loss at revision surgery includes using structural bone allograft.
The disadvantages of this technique promoted the advent of metallic
but biocompatible porous implants to fill bone defects enhancing
initial and long-term stability of the acetabular component. This
paper presents the indications, surgical technique and the outcome
of using porous metal acetabular augments for reconstructing acetabular
defects. Cite this article:
The treatment of substantial proximal femoral
bone loss in young patients with developmental dysplasia of the
hip (DDH) is challenging. We retrospectively analysed the outcome
of 28 patients (30 hips) with DDH who underwent revision total hip
replacement (THR) in the presence of a deficient proximal femur,
which was reconstructed with an allograft prosthetic composite.
The mean follow-up was 15 years (8.5 to 25.5). The mean number of
previous THRs was three (1 to 8). The mean age at primary THR and
at the index reconstruction was 41 years (18 to 61) and 58.1 years
(32 to 72), respectively. The indication for revision included mechanical
loosening in 24 hips, infection in three and peri-prosthetic fracture
in three. Six patients required removal and replacement of the allograft
prosthetic composite, five for mechanical loosening and one for
infection. The survivorship at ten, 15 and 20 years was 93% (95%
confidence interval (CI) 91 to 100), 75.5% (95% CI 60 to 95) and
75.5% (95% CI 60 to 95), respectively, with 25, eight, and four
patients at risk, respectively. Additionally, two junctional nonunions
between the allograft and host femur required bone grafting and
plating. An allograft prosthetic composite affords a good long-term outcome
in the management of proximal femoral bone loss in revision THR
in patients with DDH, while preserving distal host bone.
