A cetabular reconstruction in revision total HIP arthroplasty using a bone graft substitute

The incidence of revision total hip arthroplasty is increasing dramatically and the associated demand for allograft bone is likely to exceed the available supply. In addition, allograft presents potential problems with regard to infection, antigenicity, availability, reproducibility and cost. It is therefore desirable to develop an alternative to allograft. This study investigated BoneSave, a porous tricalcium phosphate-hydroxyapatite ceramic for use in impaction grafting of the femur at revision total hip arthroplasty. The findings of an in vitro mechanical study comparing the initial stability of pure allograft, a volume mixture of 50 per cent allograft and 50 per cent BoneSave, and a volume mixture of 10 per cent allograft and 90 per cent BoneSave are reported. The BoneSave-allograft mixtures exhibit both much greater mechanical stability and reproducibility than the pure allograft (p < 0.05) at all tested loads (200-800 N). At high peak loads the high volume (90% v/v) BoneSave mix also provided higher mechanical stability than the medium volume (50 per cent BoneSave-50 per cent allograft) mix (p < 0.05). These results demonstrate that from a mechanical standpoint the tested ceramic provides adequate initial stability to be used as a bone graft extender with allograft in impaction grafting of the femur.

Download Full-text

Treatment of type III acetabular deficiencies in revision total hip arthroplasty without structural bone—graft

The Journal of Arthroplasty ◽

10.1016/s0883-5403(96)80166-5 ◽

1996 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. 91-98 ◽

Cited By ~ 42

Author(s):

Charles J. Sutherland

Keyword(s):

Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Bone Graft ◽

Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Total Hip ◽

Type Iii ◽

Structural Bone Graft

Download Full-text

Revision total hip arthroplasty using acetabular reconstruction cage

10.26226/morressier.579f68edd462b80290b4cd95 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Afshin Taheriazam

Keyword(s):

Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Acetabular Reconstruction ◽

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Total Hip

Download Full-text

Clinical, functional and radiographic outcomes after revision total hip arthroplasty with tapered fluted modular or non-modular stems: a systematic review

Hip International ◽

10.1177/11207000211004383 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 112070002110043

Author(s):

Antonios A Koutalos ◽

Sokratis Varitimidis ◽

Konstantinos N Malizos ◽

Theofilos Karachalios

Keyword(s):

Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Revision Rate ◽

Clinical Results ◽

Fracture Rate ◽

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽

Term Survival ◽

Total Hip ◽

Radiographic Outcomes

Purpose: The aim of the study was to systematically evaluate clinical outcomes of tapered fluted stems, either monoblock or modular, in revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science and Cochrane databases were systematically searched by 2 researchers. Clinical studies reporting primarily on survival and re-revision rates, and secondarily on subsidence, dislocation, intraoperative fractures, periprosthetic fractures and infection were included. 2 investigators assessed the quality of the studies. Results: 46 studies were included in this review, reporting on 4601 stem revisions. The pooled re-revision rate was 5.1% and long-term survival ranged from 75% to 98.5%. No differences were observed between monoblock and modular stems regarding re-revision rate, dislocation rate, periprosthetic fracture rate or infection rates. Monoblock stems exhibited more subsidence and modular stems displayed more intraoperative fractures. Conclusions: Satisfactory results can be obtained with the use of tapered fluted end-bearing stems. Monoblock stems offer the same clinical results as modular stems.

Download Full-text