Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research: February 2011 - Volume 469 - Issue 2 - p 562–573 doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1618-8 Clinical Research

Revisions of Extensive Acetabular Defects with Impaction Grafting and a Cement Cup

van Egmond, Nienke, MD1; De Kam, Daniel, C. J., MD1; Gardeniers, Jean, W. M., MD, PhD1; Schreurs, Willem, B., MD, PhD1, a
Hip

Background Loosening of acetabular components often leads to bony defects. Management of extensive acetabular bone loss in hip revision arthroplasty can be a tremendous challenge.

 

Questions/purposes We asked whether a reconstruction with impacted bone grafts will provide a durable and pain-free function in extensive acetabular defects. We specifically determined the (1) survival rates with the end point of revision for any reason, aseptic revision, and radiographic loosening; (2) visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, Harris hip score (HHS), and the Oxford Hip Questionnaire score (OHQS); (3) number of repeat revisions; (4) complications; and (5) radiographic loosening, wear, and radiolucencies.

 

Patients and Methods We retrospectively followed 25 patients (27 hips) with extensive acetabular defects. No patient was lost to followup. Two patients died during followup. Minimum followup was 3 years (mean, 8.8 years; range, 3-14.1 years).

 

Results Three patients (three hips) underwent repeat revision surgery and another two patients (two hips) had radiographically loose hips. The 10-year survival rate was 88% (95% confidence interval, 74.2%-100%) with the end point acetabular revision for any reason and 95% (95% confidence interval, 86.0%-100%) with the end point acetabular revision for aseptic loosening. The mean HHSs were 55 points before surgery and 72 points postoperatively.

 

Conclusions Acetabular reconstruction with impaction bone grafting and a cemented cup is a reliable technique with a 10-year survival rate of 88% in patients with extensive acetabular deficiencies.

 

Level of Evidence Level IV, case series. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Link to article