MedElevator
Войти в исследования The Journal of arthroplasty · 2017
Midterm Survivorship After Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty With a Custom Triflange Acetabular Component.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gladnick Brian P, Fehring Keith A, Odum Susan M, Christie Michael J, DeBoer David K, Fehring Thomas K
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Custom triflange acetabular components are being increasingly used for the reconstruction of Paprosky type IIIB acetabular defects. However, midterm survivorship data are lacking.
METHODS: We queried the prospective registries at 2 high-volume revision centers for patients who had undergone revision total hip arthroplasty using a custom triflange component between 2000 and 2011. We identified 73 patients with minimum 5-year follow-up. These patients' records were reviewed to determine incidence of revision or reoperation, clinical performance, and radiographic stability. The mean follow-up was 7.5 years (range 5-12 years).
RESULTS: Fifteen of 73 triflange components (20.5%) were indicated for revision during the follow-up period, including 6 for instability (8%) and 8 for infection (11%). Twelve of 73 patients (16%) underwent reoperation for reasons other than failure of the triflange component. The median hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint replacement score at midterm follow-up was 85 (interquartile range 73-100). Only 1 of 73 implants was determined to be radiographically loose at midterm follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Custom triflange reconstruction for severe acetabular deficiency is a viable option; however, complications are common and significant challenges remain for those that fail.
METHODS: We queried the prospective registries at 2 high-volume revision centers for patients who had undergone revision total hip arthroplasty using a custom triflange component between 2000 and 2011. We identified 73 patients with minimum 5-year follow-up. These patients' records were reviewed to determine incidence of revision or reoperation, clinical performance, and radiographic stability. The mean follow-up was 7.5 years (range 5-12 years).
RESULTS: Fifteen of 73 triflange components (20.5%) were indicated for revision during the follow-up period, including 6 for instability (8%) and 8 for infection (11%). Twelve of 73 patients (16%) underwent reoperation for reasons other than failure of the triflange component. The median hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score for joint replacement score at midterm follow-up was 85 (interquartile range 73-100). Only 1 of 73 implants was determined to be radiographically loose at midterm follow-up.
CONCLUSION: Custom triflange reconstruction for severe acetabular deficiency is a viable option; however, complications are common and significant challenges remain for those that fail.