Risk factors for implant failure of custom-made acetabular implants in patients with Paprosky III acetabular bone loss and combined pelvic discontinuity

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Frank S. Fröschen ◽  
Thomas M. Randau ◽  
Nadine Gravius ◽  
Dieter C. Wirtz ◽  
Sascha Gravius ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND: Severe acetabular bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty (RTHA), both with or without pelvic discontinuity, remains a great challenge in orthopaedic surgery. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate risk factors for failure of custom-made acetabular implants in RTHA. METHODS: Seventy patients with severe acetabular bone loss (Paprosky Type III) and pelvic discontinuity, who required RTHA, were included in our study. All prostheses were constructed based on a thin-layer computed-tomography (CT) scan of the pelvis. The treatment was considered unsuccessful in the event of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) or aseptic loosening (AL) with need for explantation of the custom-made acetabular implant. RESULTS: The average follow-up was 41.9 ± 34.8 months (range 1.5–120). Implant survival at last follow-up was 75.7% (53 of 70). Explantation was necessary in 17 cases (15 PJI; 2 AL). Previous PJI as reason for RTHA (p= 0.025; OR 3.56 (95% CI: 1.14; 11.21)), additional revision of femoral components (p= 0.003; OR 8.4 (95% CI: 1.75; 40.42)), rheumatoid disease (p= 0.039; OR 3.43 (95% CI: 1.01; 11.40)), elevated preoperative CRP > 15.2 mg/l (p= 0.015; AUC: 0.7) and preoperative haemoglobin < 10.05 (p= 0.022; AUC: 0.69) were statistically significant risk factors associated with treatment failure. Age and BMI were not statistically significant contributing to implant failure. CONCLUSION: Risk factors for treatment failure were a previous PJI, additional revision of femoral component, rheumatoid disease, elevated preoperative CRP and low preoperative haemoglobin. Awareness of these risk factors will help to improve future treatment standards.

2018 ◽  
Vol 100-B (11) ◽  
pp. 1442-1448 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Hipfl ◽  
V. Janz ◽  
J. Löchel ◽  
C. Perka ◽  
G. I. Wassilew

AimsSevere acetabular bone loss and pelvic discontinuity (PD) present particular challenges in revision total hip arthroplasty. To deal with such complex situations, cup-cage reconstruction has emerged as an option for treating this situation. We aimed to examine our success in using this technique for these anatomical problems.Patients and MethodsWe undertook a retrospective, single-centre series of 35 hips in 34 patients (seven male, 27 female) treated with a cup-cage construct using a trabecular metal shell in conjunction with a titanium cage, for severe acetabular bone loss between 2011 and 2015. The mean age at the time of surgery was 70 years (42 to 85) and all patients had an acetabular defect graded as Paprosky Type 2C through to 3B, with 24 hips (69%) having PD. The mean follow-up was 47 months (25 to 84).ResultsThe cumulative five-year survivorship of the implant with revision for any cause was 89% (95% confidence interval (CI) 72 to 96) with eight hips at risk. No revision was required for aseptic loosening; however, one patient with one hip (3%) required removal of the ischial flange of the cage due to sciatic nerve irritation. Two patients (6%; two hips) suffered from hip dislocation, whereas one patient (one hip) required revision surgery with cement fixation of a dual-mobility acetababular component into a well-fixed cup-cage construct. Two patients (6%; two hips) developed periprosthetic infection. One patient was successfully controlled with a two-stage revision surgery, while the other patient underwent excision arthroplasty due to severe medical comorbidities. For the whole series, the Harris Hip Score significantly improved from a mean of 30 (15 to 51) preoperatively to 71 (40 to 89) at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001).ConclusionOur findings suggest that cup-cage reconstruction is a viable option for major segmental bone defects involving the posterior column and PD. It allows adequate restoration of the acetabulum centre with generally good stability and satisfactory postoperative function. Instability and infection remain drawbacks in these challenging revision cases. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1442–48.


2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 64-71
Author(s):  
Frank S Fröschen ◽  
Thomas M Randau ◽  
Gunnar T R Hischebeth ◽  
Nadine Gravius ◽  
Dieter C Wirtz ◽  
...  

Background: Failed reconstruction in cases of severe acetabular bone loss, with or without pelvic discontinuity, in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) remains a great challenge in orthopaedic surgery. The aim of this study was to describe the outcome of a “second” rTHA with “custom-made acetabular components (CMACs)” after a previously failed reconstruction with CMACs. Methods: 4 patients with severe acetabular bone loss (Paprosky Type IIIB), who required a second rTHA after a previously failed reconstruction with CMAC, due to prosthetic joint infection (PJI), were included in our retrospective study. All prostheses had been constructed on the basis of thin-layer computed-tomography scans of the pelvis. The second rTHA was considered unsuccessful in the event of PJI or aseptic loosening (AL) with need for renewed CMAC explantation. Results: The treatment success rate after second rTHA with a CMAC was 50% (2 of 4). In the successful cases, the visual analogue scale (VAS) score and Harris Hip Score (HHS) after the second rTHA (VAS range 2–4; HHS range 45–58 points) did not differ from those after the first rTHA, before onset of symptoms (VAS: range 2–4; HHS: range 47–55 points). In the failed cases, the second CMACs needed to be explanted due to PJI, with renewed detection of previous pathogens. Patients with treatment failure of the second CMAC had required a higher number of revision surgeries after explantation of the first CMAC than patients with a successful outcome. Conclusions: In patients with severe acetabular bone loss and previously failed rTHA with CMACs, repeat rTHA with a CMAC may be a solid treatment option for patients with an “uncomplicated” multi-stage procedure, i.e., without persisting infection after explantation of the original CMAC. While the outcome in terms of clinical function does not appear negatively affected by such a “second attempt,” the complication rate and risk of reinfection, nonetheless, is high.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dario Regis ◽  
Andrea Sandri ◽  
Ingrid Bonetti

Reconstruction of severe pelvic bone loss is a challenging problem in hip revision surgery. Between January 1992 and December 2000, 97 hips with periprosthetic osteolysis underwent acetabular revision using bulk allografts and the Burch-Schneider antiprotrusio cage (APC). Twenty-nine patients (32 implants) died for unrelated causes without additional surgery. Sixty-five hips were available for clinical and radiographic assessment at an average follow-up of 14.6 years (range, 10.0 to 18.9 years). There were 16 male and 49 female patients, aged from 29 to 83 (median, 60 years), with Paprosky IIIA (27 cases) and IIIB (38 cases) acetabular bone defects. Nine cages required rerevision because of infection (3), aseptic loosening (5), and flange breakage (1). The average Harris hip score improved from 33.1 points preoperatively to 75.6 points at follow-up (P<0.001). Radiographically, graft incorporation and cage stability were detected in 48 and 52 hips, respectively. The cumulative survival rates at 18.9 years with removal for any reason or X-ray migration of the cage and aseptic or radiographic loosening as the end points were 80.0% and 84.6%, respectively. The use of the Burch-Schneider APC and massive allografts is an effective technique for the reconstructive treatment of extensive acetabular bone loss with long-lasting survival.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document