Advances in revision surgery after primary total hip arthroplasty for Crowe type Ⅳ developmental dysplasia of the hip.
10.7507/1002-1892.202309016
- Author:
Yi LIU
1
;
Shuqiang LI
1
;
Qisheng CHENG
1
;
Jie MU
1
Author Information
1. Department of Orthopedic Center, Bethune First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun Jilin, 130012, P. R. China.
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Crowe typing;
Developmental dysplasia of the hip;
bone defect;
revision surgery;
total hip arthroplasty
- MeSH:
Humans;
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/methods*;
Hip Prosthesis;
Hip Dislocation, Congenital/surgery*;
Reoperation;
Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip/surgery*;
Acetabulum/surgery*;
Retrospective Studies;
Treatment Outcome
- From:
Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery
2023;37(12):1548-1555
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVE:To review research advances of revision surgery after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with Crowe type Ⅳ developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).
METHODS:The recent literature on revision surgery after primary THA in patients with Crowe type Ⅳ DDH was reviewed. The reasons for revision surgery were analyzed and the difficulties of revision surgery, the management methods, and the related prosthesis choices were summarized.
RESULTS:Patients with Crowe type Ⅳ DDH have small anteroposterior diameter of the acetabulum, large variation in acetabular and femoral anteversion angles, severe soft tissue contractures, which make both THA and revision surgery more difficult. There are many reasons for patients undergoing revision surgery after primary THA, mainly due to aseptic loosening of the prosthesis. Therefore, it is necessary to restore anatomical structures in primary THA, as much as possible and reduce the generation of wear particles to avoid postoperative loosening of the prosthesis. Due to the anatomical characteristics of Crowe type Ⅳ DDH, the patients have acetabular and femoral bone defects, and the repair and reconstruction of bone defects become the key to revision surgery. The acetabular side is usually reconstructed with the appropriate acetabular cup or combined metal block, Cage, or custom component depending on the extent of the bone defect, while the femoral side is preferred to the S-ROM prosthesis. In addition, the prosthetic interface should be ceramic-ceramic or ceramic-highly cross-linked polyethylene wherever possible.
CONCLUSION:The reasons leading to revision surgery after primary THA in patients with Crowe type Ⅳ DDH and the surgical difficulties have been clarified, and a large number of clinical studies have proposed corresponding revision modalities based on which good early- and mid-term outcomes have been obtained, but further follow-up is needed to clarify the long-term outcomes. With technological advances and the development of new materials, personalized prostheses for these patients are expected to become a reality.
