The Use of a Trabecular Metal Acetabular Component and Trabecular Metal Augment for Severe Acetabular Defects
Section snippets
Materials and Methods
We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records and radiographs of all patients who had an acetabular revision using a trabecular metal acetabular component with a modular acetabular augment (Zimmer, Warsaw, Ind) at Central Dupage Hospital (Winfield, Ill) from January 2001 to December 2003. Patients were identified from operating room database retrieval system using standard current procedural terminology codes for revision THA. We obtained prior institutional review board approval.
Results
A total of 2 patients required the use of a walker, and 6 patients required the use of a cane, and 20 patients walked without support for more than 6 blocks. There were 25 patients who had no pain or mild pain and 3 patients who had moderate pain. The modified Postel Merle d'Aubigne scores improved from an average of 6.8 preoperatively to 10.6 postoperatively.
One patient with a type IIIa defect required acetabular rerevision to a constrained liner for postoperative instability. None of the
Discussion
Acetabular revision with extensive bone loss is challenging and technically demanding. Successful long-term results depend heavily on achieving intraoperative stability of the acetabular shell. Most acetabular revisions are associated with some degree of bone loss. The extent of the bone loss and osteolysis demonstrated on plain radiographs is often underestimated. Therefore, the surgeon must be comfortable with alternative surgical options when unexpected amounts of bone loss are encountered.
References (16)
- et al.
Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation
J Arthroplasty
(1994) - et al.
Revision total hip arthroplasty with shelf bulk allografts. A long-term follow-up study
J Arthroplasty
(1996) - et al.
Complications of ilioischial reconstruction rings in revision total hip arthroplasty
J Arthroplasty
(2004) - et al.
Technical factors for success with metal ring acetabular reconstruction
J Arthroplasty
(2001) - et al.
Evaluation of a porous tantalum uncemented acetabular cup in revision total hip arthroplasty: clinical and radiological results of 60 hips
J Arthroplasty
(2005) Dartmouth atlas of musculoskeletal healthcare
(2001)- et al.
Acetabular defect classification: a detailed radiographic approach
Semin Arthroplasty
(1995) - et al.
Dealing with the deficient acetabulum in revision hip arthroplasty: the importance of implant migration and use of the jumbo cup
Semin Arthroplasty
(1993)
Cited by (154)
Acetabular Distraction Technique: A Multicenter Study With a Minimum 2-Year Radiographic Follow-Up
2024, Journal of ArthroplastyForged to heal: The role of metallic cellular solids in bone tissue engineering
2023, Materials Today BioMetal Augments Used in Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Single-Arm Meta-Analysis
2023, Journal of ArthroplastyCitation Excerpt :After excluding repetition, reading titles and abstracts, 81 articles were read in full text, and 19 articles [12–18,20–31] were included in the study (Fig. 1). Among the 19 articles, 3 groups (6 articles) [13,20,22–24,31] were published in the same center; furthermore, 3 articles with a short follow-up period were excluded in the overall evaluation. However, all the 19 articles were included in the subgroup analyses.
Biomaterials and biocompatibility
2022, Human Orthopaedic Biomechanics: Fundamentals, Devices and ApplicationsTrabecular Metal Augments for Severe Acetabular Defects in Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A Long-Term Follow-Up
2021, Journal of Arthroplasty
No benefits or funds were received in support of the study.