Reconstruction of bony defect in revision surgery following total hip arthrop lasty
- VernacularTitle:全髋关节翻修术中骨缺损的重建
- Author:
Xisheng WENG
;
Guixing QIU
;
Junwei LI
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Arthroplasty,replacement,hip;
Acetabulum;
Femur;
Wounds and in juries;
Reoperation;
Bone transplantation;
Transplantation, homologous
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics
1998;0(12):-
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Obiective To evaluate the value of allograft bone for acetab ular and femoral reconstruction in THA revision surgery. Methods A total of 19 p atients underwent reconstruction of acetabular and proximal femoral bone defects from June 1996 to December 2000 were reviewed. Eleven of the patients were men and 8 women with a mean age of 66.5 years and 63.2 years respectively at the t ime of resision surgery. According to AAOS system, the acetabular bone defects w ere classified into type I in 2 hips, type II 10 hips and type III 4 hips, and o n the femoral side, there were type I in 3 hips, type II 11 hips and type III 2 hips respectively. The reconstruction of bone defect of acetabulum included stru ctural allograft in 3 hips, impacted morselized allograft in 3 hips, and metal w ire mesh with morselized allograft in 3 hips. In all 3 of femoral segemental def ects, the reconstructions of the proximal femoral bone defects were done with st ructural allografts. Metalwire mesh with morselized allograft for femoral bone d efects were performed in 2 cases and morselized allogratts alone for femoral bon e defects in 4 cases; both acetabular and femoral bone defects were reconstruct ed with impacted morselized allografts in 6 cases (7 hips), and 4 patients with no bone grafts; Harris score system and radiograph were used for the final eva luation. Results Ninteen patients were followed up for an average period of 46 m onths (ranges, 6 to 68 months), Harris score improved from 42.7 points pre rev ision to 82.7 points at final follow up, the incorporation of allografts bone in 15 patients (16 hips) were noticed radiographically in all but one hip was fo und reabsorption of the structural allograft and radiolucents were found in the other 3 patients. No infection was encountered in this series. Conclusion If th e different types of bone defects were properly identified and suitable allogrft s adopted, reconstruction of bone defects with allografts during the THA revisi on surgery is a useful and reliable method. [
