We examined whether the use of trabecular metal wedges to fill segmental defects is an effective method of socket reconstruction when used in combination with impaction grafting and implantation of a cemented socket.
Fifteen hips in 14 patients underwent impaction grafting in combination with a TM wedge with a minimum of two years follow-up. All patients had their defects assessed using the Paprosky classification. Patients were reviewed with x-rays and migration of the implant was measured. Outcome scores were also collected.
Mean follow-up was 39 months (25-83). The mean age at surgery was 67.8 (49-85) years. Seven of the patients had previously undergone impaction grafting with the use of a stainless steel rim mesh to constrain the graft. None of the patients had failed either clinically or radiologically.
SchreursBWBolderSBGardeniersJWVerdonschotNSlooffTJVethRPAcetabular revision with impacted morsellised cancellous bone grafting and a cemented cup. A 15- to 20-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br2004;86(4):492–7
2.
CombaFButtaroMPussoRPiccalugaFAcetabular reconstruction with impacted bone allografts and cemented acetabular components: a 2- to 13-year follow-up study of 142 aseptic revisions. J Bone Joint Surg Br2006;88(7): 865–9
3.
GieGALinderLLingRSSimonJPSlooffTJTimperleyAJImpacted cancellous allografts and cement for revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br1993;75(1): 14–21
4.
LingRSLeeAJGieGA eds. The Exeter hip – 40 years of innovation in total hip Arthroplasty. ExeterExeter Hip Publishing2010
5.
SlooffTJHuiskesRvan HornJLemmensAJBone grafting in total hip replacement for acetabular protrusion. Acta Orthop Scand1984;55(6):593–6
6.
van der DonkSBumaPSlooffTJGardeniersJWSchreursBWIncorporation of morselized bone grafts: a study of 24 acetabular biopsy specimens. Clin Orthop Relat Res2002;(396):131–41
7.
WilsonMJWhitehouseSLHowellJRHubbleMJTimperleyAJGieGAThe results of acetabular impaction grafting in 129 primary cemented total hip replacements. J Arthroplasty2013 [Epub ahead of print].
8.
OrnsteinEFranzenHJohnssonRSandquistPStefansdottirASundbergMMigration of the acetabular component after revision with impacted morselized allografts: a radiostereometric 2-year follow-up analysis of 21 cases. Acta Orthop Scand1999;70(4):338–42
9.
SporerSMPaproskyWGAcetabular revision using a trabecular metal acetabular component for severe acetabular bone loss associated with a pelvic discontinuity. J Arthroplasty2006;216 Suppl 287–90
10.
AbolghasemianMTangsatapornSSternheimABacksteinDSafirOGrossAECombined trabecular metal acetabular shell and augment for acetabular revision with substantial bone loss. Bone Joint J2013;95(2):166–72
11.
SlooffTJBumaPSchreursBWSchimmelJWHuiskesRGardeniersJAcetabular and femoral reconstruction with impacted graft and cement. Clin Orthop Relat Res1996;(324):108–15
12.
PaproskyWGPeronaPGLawrenceJMAcetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty1994;933–44
13.
DuncanWWHubbleMJHowellJRWhitehouseSLTimperleyAJGieGARevision of the cemented femoral stem using a cement-in-cement technique: a five- to 15-year review. J Bone Joint Surg Br2009;91(5):577–82
14.
ArtsJJVerdonschotNBumaPSchreursBWLarger bone graft size and washing of bone grafts prior to impaction enhances the initial stability of cemented cups: experiments using a synthetic acetabular model. Acta Orthop2006;77(2):227–33
15.
MurrayDWFitzpatrickRRogersKThe use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg Br2007;89(8): 1010–4
16.
HarrisWHTraumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation.J Bone Joint Surg Am1969;51(4):737–55
17.
DeLeeJGCharnleyJRadiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res1976;(121):20–32
18.
LingarajKTeoYHBergmanNThe management of severe acetabular bone defects in revision hip arthroplasty using modular porous metal components. J Bone Joint Surg Br2009;91(12):1555–60
19.
BolderSBSchreursBWVerdonschotNvan UnenJMGardeniersJWSlooffTJParticle size of bone graft and method of impaction affect initial stability of cemented cups: human cadaveric and synthetic pelvic specimen studies. Acta Orthop Scand2003;74(6):652–7
20.
KrismerMStocklBFischerMBauerRMayrhoferPOgonMEarly migration predicts late aseptic failure of hip sockets. J Bone Joint Surg Br1996;78(3):422–6
21.
ButtaroMACombaFPussoRPiccalugaFAcetabular revision with metal mesh, impaction bone grafting, and a cemented cup. Clin Orthop Relat Res2008;466(10):2482–90
22.
van HaarenEHHeyligersICAlexanderFGWuismanPIHigh rate of failure of impaction grafting in large acetabular defects. J Bone Joint Surg Br2007;89(3):296–300
23.
NehmeALewallenDGHanssenADModular porous metal augments for treatment of severe acetabular bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res2004;(429):201–8
24.
SiegmethADuncanCPMasriBAKimWYGarbuzDSModular tantalum augments for acetabular defects in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res2009;467(1):199–205
25.
Van KleunenJPLeeGCLementowskiPWNelsonCLGarinoJPAcetabular revisions using trabecular metal cups and augments. J Arthroplasty2009;246 Suppl64–8
26.
WeedenSHSchmidtRHThe use of tantalum porous metal implants for Paprosky 3A and 3B defects. J Arthroplasty2007;226 Suppl 2151–5
