Survivorship and functional outcome of a cemented acetabular component with bulk roof autograft for severe acetabular dysplasia: 12- to 23-year follow-up
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online May, 2023
Survivorship and functional outcome of a cemented acetabular component with bulk roof autograft for severe acetabular dysplasia: 12- to 23-year follow-up
Primary aim was to determine survival of a cemented acetabular component with bulk roof autograft with a minimum of 12 years follow-up. The secondary aim was to determine the clinical outcome.
Methods:
A cohort of 62 consecutive patients (74 hips) undergoing cemented total hip arthroplasty with acetabular bulk roof autograft for acetabular dysplasia were retrospectively identified. The group consisted of 57 female patients (67 hips) and 5 male patients (7 hips) with a mean age at operation of 45 years. No patient was lost to follow-up, however 9 patients died had during the study period. The Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), EuroQol 5-Dimensional Score (EQ-5D), Short Form (SF-12) physical score and patient satisfaction were used to assess clinical outcome for patients with a surviving prosthesis.
Results:
The median follow-up was 16.6 (13.4–19.1) years. 6 revisions were performed during the follow-up period, all of which were due to aseptic loosening of the acetabular component. The all-cause Kaplan Meier survival rate for the acetabular component was 99% at 10 years, 95% at 15 years and 83% at 20 years. Neither age, gender, femoral osteotomy or polyethylene (UHMW vs. cross-linked) were significant predictors of aseptic revision of the acetabular component. There were no case of graft resorption and all grafts were radiologically incorporated. 45 patients were available for functional assessment at a mean follow-up of 18.2 years. The mean OHS was 37.8, FJS was 55.7, EQ5D was 0.73, and SF-12 physical component was 43.2. No patient was dissatisfied, with 2 patients reporting a neutral satisfaction, 7 stating they were satisfied and the remaining 36 were very satisfied.
Conclusions:
A cemented acetabular component with bulk roof autograft for dysplasia offers excellent survival with good to excellent functional outcome with high patient satisfaction in the medium- to long-term.
HarrisWH.Etiology of osteoarthritis of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res1986; 213: 20–33.
2.
BuschVJClementNDMayerPF, et al. High survivorship of cemented sockets with roof graft for severe acetabular dysplasia. Clin Orthop Relat Res2012; 470: 3032–3040.
3.
KobayashiSSaitoNNawataM, et al. Total hip arthroplasty with bulk femoral head autograft for acetabular reconstruction in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Am2003; 85: 615–621.
4.
FaldiniCMiscioneMTChehrassanM, et al. Congenital hip dysplasia treated by total hip arthroplasty using cementless tapered stem in patients younger than 50 years old: results after 12-years follow-up. J Orthop Traumatol2011; 12: 213–218.
5.
IidaHMatsusueAYKawanabeLK, et al. Cemented total hip arthroplasty with acetabular bone graft for developmental dysplasia, long term results and survivorship analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br2000; 82: 176–184.
6.
SternheimAAbolghasemianMSafirOA, et al. A long-term survivorship comparison between cemented and uncemented cups with shelf grafts in revision total hip arthroplasty after dysplasia. J Arthroplasty2013; 28: 303–308.
7.
ZaharAPapikKLakatosJ, et al. Total hip arthroplasty with acetabular reconstruction using a bulk autograft for patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip results in high loosening rates at mid-term follow-up. Int Orthop2014; 38: 947–951.
8.
DelimarDAljinovicABicanicG.Failure of bulk bone grafts after total hip arthroplasty for hip dysplasia. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2014; 134: 1167–1173.
9.
KamadaTMashimaNNakashimaY, et al. Mid-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of porous tantalum modular acetabular components for hip dysplasia. J Arthroplasty2015; 30: 607–610.
10.
SochartDHPorterML.The long-term results of Charnley low-friction arthroplasty in young patients who have congenital dislocation, degenerative osteoarthrosis, or rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am1997; 79: 1599–1617.
11.
HasegawaYIwaseTKanohT, et al. Total hip arthroplasty for Crowe type developmental dysplasia. J Arthroplasty2012; 27: 1629–1635.
12.
GaleaVPLaaksonenIDonahueGS, et al. Developmental dysplasia treated with cementless total hip arthroplasty utilizing high hip center reconstruction: a minimum 13-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 2899–2905.
13.
DeLeeJGCharnleyJ.Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res1976; 121: 20–32.
14.
GruenTAMcNeiceGMAmstutzHC.“Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res1979; 141: 17–27.
15.
DawsonJFitzpatrickRMurrayD, et al. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am2003; 80: 63–69.
16.
BehrendHGiesingerKGiesingerJM, et al. The “Forgotten Joint” as the ultimate goal in joint arthroplasty: validation of a new patient-reported outcome measure. J Arthroplasty2012; 27: 430–436.e1.
17.
BrooksR.EuroQol: the current state of play. Health Policy1996; 37: 53–72.
18.
WareJEKosinskiMKellerSD.A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care1996; 34: 220–233.
19.
ClementNDMacDonaldDHowieCR, et al. The outcome of primary total hip and knee arthroplasty in patients aged 80 years or more. J Bone Joint Surg Br2011; 93: 1265–1270.
20.
KaplanELMeierP.Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc1958; 53: 457–481.
21.
MurrayDWCarrAJBulstrodeC.Survival analysis of joint replacements. J Bone Joint Surg Br1993; 75: 697–704.
22.
RubashHENavalgundYASchwendemanLJ, et al. Effect of superior and superolateral relocations of the hip center on hip joint forces. J Arthroplasty2005; 11: 693–703.
23.
LiuRWenXTongZ, et al. Changes of gluteus medius muscle in the adult patients with unilateral developmental dysplasia of the hip. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2012; 13: 101.
24.
WattsCDMartinJRFehringKA, et al. Inferomedial hip center decreases failure rates in cementless total hip arthroplasty for Crowe II and III hip dysplasia. J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 2177–2181.
25.
LeeBPCabanelaMEWallrichsSL, et al. Bone-graft augmentation for acetabular deficiencies in total hip arthroplasty: results of long-term follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty1997; 12: 503–510.
26.
MulroyRDHarrisW.Failure of acetabular autogenous grafts in total hip arthroplasty: a follow-up note. J Bone Joint Surg Am1990; 72: 1536–1540.
27.
OzdenVEDikmenGBeksacB, et al. Long-term retrospective study on the placement of the cementless acetabular cup and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing femoral head autografting for hip dysplasia and total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Sci2018; 23: 525–531.
28.
RodriguezJAHukOLPellicciPM, et al. Autogenous bone grafts from the femoral head for the treatment of acetabular deficiency in primary total hip arthroplasty with cement. Long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Am1995; 77: 1227–1233.
29.
SchoferMDPresselTSchmittJ, et al. Reconstruction of the acetabulum in THA using femoral head autografts in developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Orthop Surg Res2011; 6: 32.
30.
ShettyAASharmaPSinghS, et al. Bulk femoral-head autografting in uncemented total hip arthroplasty for acetabular dysplasia: results at 8 to 11 years follow-up. J Arthroplasty2004; 19: 706–713.
31.
StringaGPittoRPMuriaGV, et al. Total hip replacement with bone grafting using the removed femoral head in severe acetabular dysplasia. Int Orthop1995; 19: 72–76.
32.
ShinarAAHarrisWH.Bulk structural autogenous grafts and allografts for reconstruction of the acetabulum in total hip arthroplasty. Sixteen-year-average follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am1997; 79: 159–168.
33.
OeKIidaHKawamuraH, et al. Long-term results of acetabular reconstruction using three bulk bone graft techniques in cemented total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia. Int Orthop2016; 40: 1949–1954.
34.
AbdelMPStrykerLSTrousdaleRT, et al. Uncemented acetabular components with femoral head autograft for acetabular reconstruction in developmental dysplasia of the hip: a concise follow-up report at a mean of twenty years. J Bone Joint Surg Am2014; 96: 1878–1882.
35.
AkiyamaHKawanabeKIidaH, et al. Long-term results of cemented total hip arthroplasty in developmental dysplasia with acetabular bulk bone grafts after improving operative techniques. J Arthroplasty2010; 25: 716–720.
36.
BobakPWroblewskiBMSineyPD, et al. Charnley low-friction arthroplasty with an autograft of the femoral head for developmental dysplasia of the hip: the 10- to 15-year results. J Bone Joint Surg Br2000; 82: 508–511.
37.
HamrayevAJBuyukkuscuMOMisirA, et al. The fate of femoral head autograft in acetabular reconstruction in dysplastic hips at midterm. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong)2020; 28: 2309499020957109.
38.
HendrichCEngelmaierFMehlingI, et al. Cementless acetabular reconstruction and structural bone-grafting in dysplastic hips. Surgical technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am2007; 89(Suppl. 2 Pt 1): 54–67.
39.
HintermannBMorscherEW.Total hip replacement with solid autologous femoral head graft for hip dysplasia. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg1995; 114: 137–144.
40.
KimMKadowakiT.High long-term survival of bulk femoral head autograft for acetabular reconstruction in cementless THA for developmental hip dysplasia. Clin Orthop Relat Res2010; 468: 1611–1620.
41.
HarrisWHCrothersOOhI.Total hip replacement and femoral haed bone grafting for severe acetabular deficiency in adults. J Bone Joint Surg Am1977; 59: 752–759.
42.
DevanePAHorneJGAshmoreA, et al. Highly cross-linked polyethylene reduces wear and revision rates in total hip arthroplasty: a 10-year double-blinded randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am2017; 99: 1703–1714.
43.
VanWinterswijkPJWhitehouseSLTimperleyAJ, et al. The Rim Cutter does not show an advantage over modern cementing techniques: a five-year radiological and clinical follow-up of the rim cutter used with flanged acetabular components. Bone Joint J2017; 99-B: 1450–1457.
44.
DavisETPagkalosJKopjarB.A higher degree of polyethylene irradiation is associated with a reduced risk of revision for aseptic loosening in total hip arthroplasties using cemented acetabular components. Bone Joint Res2020; 9: 563–571.
45.
AbolghasemianMDrexlerMAbdelbaryH, et al. Revision of the acetabular component in dysplastic hips previously reconstructed with a shelf autograft: study of the outcome with special assessment of bone-stock changes. Bone Joint J2013; 95-B: 777–781.
46.
ClementNDPatrick-PatelSMacDonaldR, et al. Total hip replacement: increasing femoral offset improves functional outcome. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2016; 136: 1317–1323.
47.
MacherasGALepetsosPLeonidouAO, et al. Survivorship of a porous tantalum monoblock acetabular component in primary hip arthroplasty with a mean follow-up of 18 years. J Arthroplasty2017; 32: 3680–3684.
48.
KalairajahYAzurzaKHulmeC, et al. Health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip arthroplasties—a comparison between the Harris hip score and the Oxford hip score. J Arthroplasty2005; 20: 1037–1041.
49.
BeardDJHarrisKDawsonJ, et al. Meaningful changes for the Oxford hip and knee scores after joint replacement surgery. J Clin Epidemiol2015; 68: 73–79.
50.
ClementNDGastonPBellA, et al. Robotic arm-assisted versus manual total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint Res2021; 10: 22–30.
