Acta Med. 2014, 57: 105-111

https://doi.org/10.14712/18059694.2014.48

Osteointegration of an Uncemented Modular Revision Stem Implanted during revision Hip Surgery

Pavel Šponera, Tomáš Kučeraa, Karel Urbana, David Zítkoa, Daniel Diaz-Garciab, Michal Grinaca

aDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
bDepartment of Histology and Embryology, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital in Hradec Králové, Czech Republic

Received May 24, 2014
Accepted September 28, 2014

References

1. Aspenberg P, Wagner P, Nilsson KG, Ranstam J. Fixed or loose? Dichotomy in RSA data for cemented cups. Acta Orthop 2008; 79: 467–73. <https://doi.org/10.1080/17453670710015445>
2. Beswick A, Blom AW. Bone graft substitutes in hip revision surgery: a comprehensive overview. Injury 2011; 42: S40–6. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2011.06.009>
3. Blackley HR, Davis AM, Hutchison CR, Gross AE. Proximal femoral allografts for reconstruction of bone stock in revision arthroplasty of the hip. A nine to fifteen-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001; 83-A: 346–54. <https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200103000-00005>
4. Bohm P, Bischel O. Femoral revision with the Wagner SL revision stem: evaluation of one hundred and twenty-nine revisions followed for a mean of 4.8 years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001; 83-A: 1023–31. <https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-200107000-00007>
5. Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Vail TP, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91-A: 128–33. <https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.00155>
6. Brooker AE, Bowerman JW, Robinson RA, Riley LH. Ectopic ossification following total hip replacement. Incidence and a method of classification. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1973; 55-A: 1629–32. <https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-197355080-00006>
7. Charnley J. The long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty of the hip performed as a primary intervention. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1972; 54-B: 61–76. <https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.54B1.61>
8. Della Valle CJ, Paprosky WG. The femur in revision total hip arthroplasty evaluation and classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; 420: 55–62. <https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-200403000-00009>
9. Dohmae Y, Bechtold JE, Sherman RE, Puno RM, Gustilo RB. Reduction in cement-bone interface shear strength between primary and revision arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988; 236: 214–20.
10. Fetzer GB, Callaghan JJ, Templeton JE, Goetz DD, Sullivan PM, Johnston RC. Impaction allografting with cement for extensive femoral bone loss in revision hip surgery: a 4- to 8-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty 2001; 16: 195–202. <https://doi.org/10.1054/arth.2001.29136>
11. Fujishiro T, Nishikawa T, Niikura T, Takikawa S, Saegusa Y, Kurosaka M, Bauer TW. Histologic analysis of allograft mixed with hydroxyapatite-tricalcium phosphate used in revision femoral impaction bone grafting. Orthopedics 2008; 31: 277. <https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20080301-12>
12. Gie GA, Linder L, Ling RS, Simon JP, Slooff TJ, Timperley AJ. Impacted cancellous allografts and cement for revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993; 75-B: 14–21. <https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.75B1.8421012>
13. Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC. “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1979; 141: 17–27.
14. Hartman CW, Garvin KL. Femoral fixation in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011; 93-A: 2311–22.
15. Head WC, Wagner RA, Emerson RH Jr, Malinin TI. Revision total hip arthroplasty in the deficient femur with a proximal load-bearing prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1994; 298: 119–26.
16. Hoshino M, Namikawa T, Kato M, Terai H, Taguchi S, Takaoka K. Repair of bone defects in revision hip arthroplasty by implantation of a new bone-inducing material comprised of recombinant human BMP-2, Beta-TCP powder, and a biodegradable polymer: an experimental study in dogs. J Orthop Res 2007; 25: 1042–51. <https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.20424>
17. Karrholm J, Hultmark P, Carlsson L, Malchau H. Subsidence of a nonpolished stem in revisions of the hip using impaction allograft. Evaluation with radiostereometry and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1999; 81-B: 135–42. <https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.81B1.8922>
18. Kroell A, Beaule P, Krismer M, Behensky H, Stoeckl B, Biedermann R. Aseptic stem loosening in primary THA: migration analysis of cemented and cementless fixation. Int Orthop 2009; 33: 1501–5. <https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0701-1> <PubMed>
19. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007; 89-A: 780–5. <https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00222>
20. Landor I, Vavřík P, Gallo J, Sosna A. Revision operations of total hip replacements. Praha: Maxdorf, 2012.
21. Malkani AL, Settecerri JJ, Sim FH, Chao EY, Wallrichs SL. Long-term results of proximal femoral replacement for non-neoplastic disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995; 77-B: 351–56. <https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.77B3.7744913>
22. Mayle RE, Paprosky WG. Masive bone loss. Allograft-prosthetic composites and beyond. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2012; 94-B: 61–64. <https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.94B11.30791>
23. McInnis DP, Horne G, Devane PA. Femoral revision with a fluted, tapered, modular stem seventy patients followed for a mean of 3.9 years. J Arthroplasty 2006; 21: 372–80. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2005.08.022>
24. Mjoberg B. Fixation and loosening of hip prostheses. A review. Acta Orthop Scand 1991; 62: 500–8. <https://doi.org/10.3109/17453679108996658>
25. Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ, Yew DT, Granberry WM, Tullos HS. The anatomic basis of femoral design. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988; 235: 148–65.
26. Park YS, Moon YW, Lim SJ. Revision total hip arthroplasty using a fluted and tapered modular distal fixation stem with and without extended trochanteric osteotomy. J Arthroplasty 2007; 22: 993–9. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2007.03.017>
27. Pekkarinen J, Alho A, Lepisto J, Ylikoski M, Ylinen P, Paavilainen T. Impaction bone grafting in revision hip surgery. A high incidence of complications. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2000; 82-B: 103–7. <https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.82B1.9802>
28. Rodriguez JA, Fada R, Murphy SB, Rasquinha VJ, Ranawat CS.Two-year to five-year follow-up of femoral defects in femoral revision treated with the link MP modular stem. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24: 751–58. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2008.09.011>
29. Špička J, Radová L, Gallo J. Cementless Plasmacup-Bicontact total hip arthroplasty. Results of a minimum of ten-year follow-up, Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 2012; 79: 317–23.
30. van Biezen FC, ten Have BL, Verhaar JA. Impaction bone-grafting of severely defective femora in revision total hip surgery: 21 hips followed for 41–85 months. Acta Orthop Scand 2000; 71: 135–42. <https://doi.org/10.1080/000164700317413094>
31. Weiss RJ, Beckman MO, Enocson A, Schmalholz A, Stark A. Minimum 5-year follow-up of a cementless, modular, tapered stem in hip revision arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26: 16–23. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2009.11.009>
front cover

ISSN 1211-4286 (Print) ISSN 1805-9694 (Online)

Open access journal

Archive