REVISION TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY IN PATIENTS WITH ASEPTIC LOOSENING OF FEMORAL STEM (REVIEW)

Cover Page


Cite item

Abstract

The paper presents literature data with regard to the classification of femoral bone loss defects. It also describes the contemporary techniques of revision total hip arthroplasty in patients with aseptic loosening of the femoral component and provides the evaluation of the treatment outcomes of the described approaches.

About the authors

A. V. Sementkovsky

ФГУ «Российский научно-исследовательский институт травматологии и ортопедии им Р.Р. Вредена» Минздравсоцразвития России

Author for correspondence.
Email: orthop@mail.ru
врач травматолог-ортопед отделения № 13 Russian Federation

References

  1. Воронцова, Т.Н. Социально-биологическая и клинико-диагностическая характеристика пациентов, перенесших ревизионное эндопротезирование тазобедренного сустава (по материалам Федерального регистра эндопротезирования крупных суставов конечностей) / Т.Н. Воронцова // Эндопротезирование в России : всерос. сб. науч. статей. – Казань ; СПб., 2005. – Вып. 1. – С. 253–258
  2. Корнилов, Н.В. Состояние эндопротезирования крупных суставов в Российской Федерации / Н.В. Корнилов // Эндопротезирование крупных суставов : матер. симп. – М., 2000. – С. 49–52.
  3. Неверов, В.А. Ревизионное эндопротезирование тазобедренного сустава. / В.А. Неверов, С.М. Закари. – СПб. : Образование, 1997. – 112с.
  4. Николаев, А.П. Оценка результатов эндопротезирования тазобедренного сустава / А.П. Николаев, А.Ф. Лазарев, А.О. Рагозин // Эндопротезирование крупных суставов : матер. симп. – М., 2000. – С. 78–79.
  5. Нуждин, В.И. Ревизионное эндопротезирование тазобедренного сустава / В.И. Нуждин, В.В. Троценко, Т.П. Попова, С.В. Каграманов // Вестн. травматологии и ортопедии им. Н.Н. Приорова. – 2001. – № 2. – С. 66–71.
  6. Тихилов, Р.М. Руководство по эндопротезированию тазобедренного сустава / Р.М. Тихилов. В.М. Шаповалов. – СПб. : РНИИТО им. Р.Р.Вредена, 2008. – 301 с.
  7. Amstutz, H.C. Revision of aseptic loose total hip arthroplasties / H.C. Amstutz [et al.] // Clin. Orthop. – 1982. – N 170. – P. 21–33.
  8. Bardou-Jacquet, J. Primary aseptic revision of the femoral component of a cemented total hip arthroplasty using a cemented technique without bone graft / J. Bardou-Jacquet // Orthop. Traumatol. Surg. Res. – 2009. – Vol. 95, N 4. – P. 243–248.
  9. Bircher, H.P. The value of the Wagner SL revision prosthesis for bridging large femoral defects / H.P. Bircher [et al.] // Orthopade. – 2001. – Vol. 30. – P. 294.
  10. BÖhm, P. Femoral revision with the Wagner SL revision stem: evaluation of one hundred and twenty-nine revisions followed for a mean of 4.8 years / P. B hm, O. Bischel // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2001. – Vol. 83-A. – P. 1023–1031.
  11. Busch, C.A. Fractures of distally-fixed femoral stems after revision arthroplasty / C.A. Busch [et al.] // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2005. – Vol. 87-B. – P. 10.
  12. Buttaro, M.A. Impacted bone allografts and a cemented stem after failure of an uncemented stem: preliminary results / M.A. Buttaro [et al.] // Hip Int. – 2009. – Vol. 19, N 3. – P. 221–226.
  13. Cameron, H.U. Orthopaedic crossfire – stem modularity is unnecessary in revision total hip arthroplasty: in opposition / H.U. Cameron // J. Arthroplasty. – 2003. – Vol. 18, N 3. – P. 101–103.
  14. D'Antonio, J.D. Classification of femoral abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty / J.D. D'Antonio [et al.] // Clin. Orthop. – 1993. – N 133. – P. 133–139.
  15. de Thomasson E. Modified Exeter technique in revision hip surgery: does distal fixation of the stem affect allograft transformation? / E. de Thomasson [et al.] // Arthroplasty. – 2005. – Vol. 20, N 4. – P.473–480.
  16. Della Valle, C.J. Classification and an algorithmic approach to the reconstruction of femoral deficiency in revision total hip arthroplasty / C.J. Della Valle, W.G. Paprosky // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2003. – Vol. 85-A, Suppl. 4. – P. 1-6.
  17. Della Valle, C.J. The femur in revision total hip arthroplasty evaluation and classification / C.J. Della Valle, W.G. Paprosky // Clin. Orthop. – 2004. – N 420. – P. 55–62.
  18. Dohmae, Y. Reduction in cement-bone interface shear strength between primary and revision arthroplasty / Y. Dohmae [et al.] // Clin. Orthop. – 1988. – N 236. – P. 214–220.
  19. Eldridge, J.D. Massive early subsidence following femoral impaction grafting / J.D. Eldridge [et al.] // J. Arthroplasty. – 1997. – Vol. 12. – P. 535–540.
  20. Fevang, B.T. Improved results of primary total hip replacement / B.T. Fevang [et al.] // Acta Orthop. – 2010. – Vol. 81, N 6. – P. 649–659.
  21. Fink, B. Distal interlocking screws with a modular revision stem for revision total hip arthroplasty in severe bone defects / B. Fink, A. Grossmann, M. Fuerst // J. Arthroplasty. – 2010. – Vol. 25, N 5. – P. 759–765.
  22. Flugsrud, G.B. Risk factors for total hip replacement due to primary osteoarthritis: a cohort study in 50,034 persons / G.B. Flugsrud [et al.] // Arthritis Rheum. – 2002. – Vol. 46, N 3. – P. 675–682.
  23. Grünig, R. Three- to 7-year results with the uncemented SL femoral revision prosthesis / R. Gr nig, E. Morscher, P.E. Ochsner // Arch. Orthop. Trauma Surg. – 1997. – Vol. 116, N 4. – P. 187–197.
  24. Hamilton, W.G. Extensively porous-coated stems for femoral revision: a choice for all seasons / W.G. Hamilton [et al.] // J. Arthroplasty. – 2007. – Vol. 22, N 4. – P. 106–110.
  25. Havelin, L.I. The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association: a unique collaboration between 3 national hip arthroplasty registries with 280,201 THRs / L.I. Havelin [et al.] // Acta Orthop. – 2009. – Vol. 80, N 4. – P. 393–401.
  26. Haydon, C.M. Revision total hip arthroplasty with use of a cemented femoral component. Results at a mean of ten years / C.M. Haydon [et al.] // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2004. – Vol. 86-A, N 6. – P. 1179–1185.
  27. Iorio, R. Orthopaedic surgeon workforce and volume assessment for total hip and knee replacement in the United States: preparing for an epidemic / R. Iorio [et al.] // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2008. – Vol. 90-A, N 7. – P. 1598–605.
  28. Jafari, S.M. Revision hip arthroplasty: infection is the most common cause of failure / S.M. Jafari [et al.] // Clin. Orthop. – 2010. – N 468. – P. 2046–2051.
  29. Kelly, S.J. The use of a hydroxyapatite-coated primary stem in revision total hip arthroplasty / D.J. Kelly, S.J. Incavo, B. Beynnon // J. Arthroplasty. – 2006, – Vol. 21. – P. 64–71.
  30. Korovessis, P. High medium-term survival of Zweymuller SLR- Plus stem used in femoral revision / P. Korovessisk, T. Repantis // Clin. Orthop. – 2009. – N 467. – P. 2032–2040.
  31. Mahoney, C.R. Femoral revision with impaction grafting and a collarless, polished, tapered stem / C.R. Mahoney [et al.] // Clin. Orthop. – 2005. – N 432. – P. 181–187.
  32. Malkani, A.L. Histological and mechanical evaluation of impaction grafting for femoral component revision in a goat model / A.L. Malkani [et al.] // Orthopedics. – 2005. – Vol. 28. – P. 49.
  33. Mallory, T.H. Preparation of the proximal femur in cementless total hip revision / T.H. Mallory // Clin. Orthop. – 1988. – N 235. – P. 47–60.
  34. Marmorat, J.L. Femoral revision using cemented stem and compacted bone graft: femoral migration analysis / J.L. Marmorat [et al.] // Rev. Chir. Orthop. – 2006. – Vol. 92. – P 125–132.
  35. Maurer, S.G. Reconstruction of the failed femoral component and proximal femoral bone loss in revision hip surgery / S.G. Maurer, A.C. Baitner, P.E. Di Cesare // J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg. – 2000. – Vol. 8. – P. 354–363.
  36. Meek, R.M. Intraoperative fracture of the femur in revision total hip arthroplasty with a diaphyseal fitting stem / R.M. Meek [et al.] // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2004. – Vol. 86-A, N 3. – P. 480–485.
  37. Moon, K.H. Revision total hip arthroplasty using an extensively porous coated femoral stem / K.H. Moon [et al.] // Clin. Orthop. – 2009. – N 1. – P. 105–109.
  38. Moreland, J.R. Femoral revision hip arthroplasty with uncemented, porous-coated stems / J.R. Moreland, M.L. Bernstein // Clin. Orthop. – 1995. – N 319. – P. 141–150.
  39. Moreland, J.R. Cementless femoral arthroplasty of the hip: minimum 5 year follow-up / J.R. Moreland, M.A. Moreno // Clin. Orthop. – 2001. – N 393. – P. 194–201.
  40. Morrey, B.F. Complications with revision of the femoral component of total hip arthroplasty / B.F. Morrey, B.F. Kavanagh // J. Arthroplasty. – 1992. – Vol. 7. – P. 71–79.
  41. Nadaud, M.C. Cementless revision total hip arthroplasty without allograft in severe proximal femoral defects / M.C. Nadaud [et al.] // J. Arthroplasty. – 2005. – Vol. 20. – P. 738–744.
  42. Oetgen, M.E. Revision total hip arthroplasty using the Zweymuller femoral stem / M.E. Oetgen, M.H. Huo, K.J. Keggi // J. Orthop. Traumatol. – 2008. – Vol. 9, N 2. – P. 57–62.
  43. Paprosky, W.G. Minimum 10-year results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty / W.G. Paprosky, N.V. Greidanus, J. Antoniou // Clin. Orthop. – 1999. – N 369. – P. 230–342.
  44. Park, M.S. A distal fluted, proximal modular femoral prosthesis in revision hip arthroplasty / M.S. Park [et al.] // J. Arthroplasty. – 2010. – Vol. 25, N 6. – P. 932–938.
  45. Pekkarinen, J. Impaction bone grafting in revision hip surgery: a high incidence of complications / J. Pekkarinen [et al.] // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2000. – Vol. 82-B. – P. 103.
  46. Pellicci, P.M. Long-term results of revision total hip replacement: a follow-up report / P.M. Pellicci [et al.] // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 1985. – Vol. 67-A. – P. 513–516.
  47. Pinaroli, A. Conservative femoral stem revision: avoiding therapeutic escalation / A. Pinaroli [et al.] // J. Arthroplasty. – 2009. – Vol. 24, N 3. – P. 365–373.
  48. Raman, R. Revision of cemented hip arthroplasty using a hydroxyapatite-ceramic-coated femoral component / R. Raman [et al.] // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2005. – Vol. 87-B. – P. 1061–1067.
  49. Sinha, R.K. Long-stem cemented calcar replacement arthroplasty for proximal femoral bone loss / R.K. Sinha, S.Y. Kim, H.E. Rubash // J. Arthroplasty. – 2004. – Vol. 19. – P. 141-150.
  50. Sotereanos, N. Revision total hip arthroplasty with a custom cementless stem with distal cross-locking screws: early results in femora with large proximal segmental deficiencies / N. Sotereanos [et al.] // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2006. – Vol. 88-A. – P. 1079–1084.
  51. Stromberg, C.N. A multicentre 10-year study of cemented revision total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 55 years old- a follow-up report / C.N. Stromberg, P. Herberts // J. Arthroplasty. – 1994. – Vol. 9. – P. 595–601.
  52. Suominen, S. Revision total hip arthroplasty in deficient proximal femur using a distal load-bearing prosthesis / S. Suominen, S. Santavirta // Ann. Chir. Gynaecol. – 1996. – Vol. 85, N 3. – P. 253–262.
  53. Van der Donk, S. Rinsing morselized allografts improves bone and tissue ingrowth / S. Van der Donk [et al.] // Clin. Orthop. – 2003. – N 408. – P. 302–310.
  54. Volkmann, R. Revision arthroplasty – femoral aspect: the concept to solve high grade defects / R. Volkmann [et al.] // Int. Orthop. – 2003. – Vol. 27. – P. 24–28.
  55. Weber, M. Femoral revision using the Wagner stem: results at 2–9 years / M. Weber [et al.] // Int. Orthop. – 2002. – Vol. 26. – P. 36–39.
  56. Weeden, S.H. Minimal 11-year follow-up of extensively porous-coated stems in femoral revision total hip arthroplasty / S.H. Weeden [et al.] // J. Arthroplasty. – 2002. – Vol. 17, Suppl. 3 – P. 134–137.
  57. Weiss, R.J. Minimum 5-year follow-up of a cementless, modular, tapered stem in hip revision arthroplasty / R.J. Weiss [et al.] // J. Arthroplasty. – 2011. – Vol. 26, N 1. – P. 16–23.
  58. Whiteside, L.A. Major femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty treated with tapered, porouscoated stems / L.A. Whiteside // Clin. Orthop. – 2004. – N 429. – P. 222–226
  59. Williams, H.D.W. The Exeter universal cemented femoral component at 8 to 12 years: a study of the first 325 hips / H.D.W. Williams // J. Bone Joint Surg. – 2002. – Vol. 84-B. – P. 324–334.

Copyright (c)



This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies