股骨大转子延长截骨在假体稳定股骨柄翻修中的应用

目的 评估大转子延长截骨在股骨假体固定稳定型全髋关节翻修术中应用的中期临床效果.方法 1998年1月至2005年6月对27例患者(27髋)采用大转子延长截骨对股骨柄和(或)骨水泥壳固定稳定的全髋关节翻修.临床随访评估包括Harris评分和WOMAC评分,术前Harris评分平均42.7分,WOMAC评分平均55.6分;影像学评估包括术后拍摄X线片,对比观察截骨块愈合时间、是否存在截骨延迟愈合或不愈合,截骨块是否发生移位以及假体是否下沉等.结果 共19例患者(19髋)获得随访,平均随访时间5.3年.无一例发生术中或术后骨折.术后Harris评分平均87.3分,WOMAC评分平均46.3分.所有患者大转子截骨块均于术后6个月内愈合.无股骨大转子截骨块向近端移位,3例发生股骨柄下沉,平均下沉3.4 mm,无钢丝断裂.结论 对于假体固定稳定型股骨柄翻修,采用股骨大转子延长截骨有利于手术操作和翻修假体的植入和固定,有利于截骨块的愈合,降低术中、术后并发症发生率,中期疗效显著.     

扩展型转子截骨技术在骨水泥型股骨柄翻修中的临床应用

目的探讨扩展型转子截骨技术在较困难的骨水泥型股骨柄翻修手术中的作用和临床效果。方法2002年2月至2006年5月采用扩展型转子截骨翻修股骨侧假体12例，应用扩展型转子截骨技术取出所有骨水泥和假体柄，重新植入翻修用假体柄，以多道金属线缆环扎固定。其中1例选择的是骨水泥股骨假体，11例是非骨水泥股骨假体。结果所有患者均获得随访，时间16～24个月，术后6个月所有截骨处均愈合，无大转子移位。Harris评分由术前平均（48．4±7．5）分上升至术后平均（89．3±8．1）分（为术后1年的评分），假体无松动、下沉、假体周围未见骨吸收、骨溶解。结论扩展型转子截骨对骨水泥取出困难的股骨侧翻修术具有骨水泥取除彻底，安全可靠，手术时间短，并发症少的优点。     

大转子延长截骨在全髋关节翻修术中应用的临床评价

目的 回顾性研究采用大转子延长截骨(extended troehanteric osteotomy,ETO)行全髋关节翻修术后股骨柄的位置变化,评价ETO在股骨假体稳定件髋关节翻修术中的作用.方法 1998年1月至2007年6月,采用ETO对股骨柄或骨水泥壳固定稳定性全髋关节33例33髋进行翻修.翻修术后采用Harris评分和MOMAC评分评估髋关节功能,摄动态X线片观察截骨块愈合、假体位置改变及股骨柄与股骨髓腔匹配等情况.结果 25例随访12～103个月,平均63个月.Harris评分由术前平均38.4分,提高到末次随访时88.7分;WOMAC评分由术前平均56.2分,降至末次随访时42.8分.大转子截骨块均在术后4～10个月骨性愈合.3例发生股骨柄下沉.平均3.4mm.股骨柄假体出现外翻、内翻各1例.无术中或术后骨折、钢丝断裂、感染、假体周围骨溶解以及异位骨化发生.术后关节脱位1例.结论 对假体固定稳定性股骨柄进行翻修,采用ETO有利于假体的安全取出,术后截骨块愈合率高,延长截骨不影响假体稳定性.股骨柄下沉、位置改变、截骨块骨折等并发症发生率低.     

应用S-ROM全髋关节置换术治疗Crowe Ⅳ型髋臼发育不良

目的总结采用粗隆下截骨和生物固定型带股骨柄模块的人工关节假体治疗CroweⅣ型髋臼发育不良伴骨关节炎的效果及经验。方法回顾从2004年2月到2009年4月对12例21髋CroweⅣ型髋臼发育不良伴骨关节炎患者治疗的详细过程及疗效,记录所有的并发症。全部采用粗隆下截骨和S-ROM生物固定型人工关节假体置换术进行治疗。髋臼杯假体均植入真臼位置,7例13髋采用自体股骨头于髋臼外上方作结构性植骨,均作了粗隆下缩短截骨术,平均截骨长度为39.4 mm(35~50 mm)。结果平均随访30.8个月(6~62个月)。髋关节Harris评分明显改善(t=24.862,P0.01),从术前的平均(38.2±6.4)分(28~48分)到术后平均(82.1±8.6)分(62~94分)。术后肢体均得到不同程度的延长(t=12.099,P0.01),平均(33.5±12.7)mm(11~65 mm)。术前所有患者均有明显跛行,术后4例有轻度跛行,2例仍需扶双拐行走。19髋股骨截骨处愈合良好,2髋截骨处延迟愈合。在最后一次回访时显示髋臼假体和股骨柄假体位置均良好,无松动、下沉、断钉、骨溶解及异位骨化出现。髋关节中心平均下移了73.0 mm(46~105 mm)。结论利用S-ROM带股骨柄模块的生物固定型人工关节假体的高度适配性,加上在真臼位置加深髋臼,适当植骨,以及精确的粗隆下截骨,是治疗CroweⅣ型髋臼发育不良伴骨关节炎的良好选择。     

股骨皮质骨开窗技术在髋关节翻修术中的应用

目的 探讨股骨前外侧皮质骨开窗技术在髋关节翻修术中取出股骨远端稳定固定骨水泥的价值.方法 2005年5月至2009年6月,共14例(14髋)因各种原因致髋关节置换术后失败患者接受全髋关节翻修手术.其中男性10例,女性4例,年龄54～75岁,平均66岁.翻修原因为股骨头置换术后髋臼磨损5例、全髋关节置换术后假体周围骨溶解并松动6例、骨水泥柄股骨近端骨溶解柄断裂1例、髋臼骨溶解假体松动翻修同时行股骨柄翻修1例,感染后二期翻修时远端骨水泥取出困难1例.14例(14髋)股骨柄均为骨水泥同定.术中按术前计划开窗部位、开窗范围于股骨皮质骨开一长方形骨窗.通过骨窗直视下彻底清除髓腔内稳定固定的骨水泥,修整股骨髓腔.植入翻修柄后将皮质骨开窗骨瓣原位回植,双股钢丝捆绑固定.术后定期随访拍摄x线片.观察皮质骨开窗骨瓣与周围骨愈合情况、骨瓣有无移位、股骨柄有无下沉以及有无捆绑钢丝断裂等.结果 10例患者术后获得随访,平均随访时间24.6个月.股骨皮质骨开窗长度2.5～6.0 cm,平均3.4 cm,宽度0.8～1.4 cm,平均1.2 cm.股骨开窗远端以远部分发生纵形劈裂骨折1例.无术中皮质骨穿孔及股骨干骨折.向远段扩大开窗1例,扩大长度1.5 cm.开窗部位皮质骨骨瓣原位回植选择2～3道双股钢丝固定,平均2.3道.随访期间2例发牛假体柄下沉(平均2.5 mm),无皮质骨瓣移位以及捆绑钢丝断裂,术后3～5个月皮质骨瓣已于周围骨纤维愈合.随访期间无一例因各种原因致再次翻修.结论 股骨皮质骨开窗技术在髋关节翻修术中有助于直视下彻底取出股骨髓腔远端稳定固定的骨水泥,同时不会造成股骨骨丢失、不影响翻修柄植入后的稳定固定.     

人工全髋关节置换翻修术术前假体松动的回顾性研究

目的通过对48例人工全髋关节置换翻修术术前资料的系统回顾性研究,评价采取不同固定方法的假体的临床疗效。方法笔者对行髋关节置换的48例实行了全髋翻修术,并对全部病例进行了术前X线评价及术中假体松动情况调查,并做χ2检验,判断不同假体固定方式对假体寿命的影响。结果早、中期假体松动主要为非骨水泥型假体。骨水泥固定的假体与非骨水泥固定的假体远期均存在很高的松动下沉率,以骨水泥臼的松动为多数。髋臼侧骨溶解发生率以Ⅰ区为高,股骨柄侧骨溶解发生率以股骨近端为最高。结论人工全髋关节置换术中生物性固定初期并不十分牢固。人工全髋关节置换术中骨水泥固定假体松动主要发生在远期,并且以髋臼侧骨水泥松动为主。     

人工全髋关节置换术后翻修的假体选择

目的探讨人工全髋关节置换术后翻修的假体选择. 方法 1995年1月～2002年6月进行全髋关节翻修术33例(33髋),其中男7髋,女26髋.翻修原因:无菌性松动22例,感染后松动8例(其中2例合并窦道形成);股骨头置换术后髋臼磨损3例,不伴有假体中心性脱位.对无菌性松动和股骨头磨损患者采用骨水泥固定型假体13例,生物固定型假体12例,股骨侧翻修假体均选择骨水泥固定型广泛涂层假体,8例感染患者均行一期骨水泥固定型全髋置换. 结果随访6个月～7年6个月,平均3年11个月.2例出现X线透亮带,但无临床不稳;4例遗留持续性疼痛,无假体脱位、断裂.本组Harris评分由术前的24～47分(平均38.6分),上升为术后的68～88分(平均82.4分),满意率87.9%. 结论无菌性松动是全髋关节置换术后翻修的主要原因.髋臼侧翻修假体可选择骨水泥型假体、也可选择生物型假体,股骨侧翻修假体均选择骨水泥固定型广泛涂层假体,感染后的翻修选择骨水泥假体较好.     

大转子延长截骨术在人工全髋关节翻修术中的临床应用进展

在人工全髋关节翻修术中,怎样取出固定牢固的生物型或骨水泥型股骨假体,以及完整取出股骨远端的残留骨水泥直接影响到股骨端的翻修效果。大转子延长截骨术具有较高的截骨处骨愈合率,极佳的术中暴露效果,以及外展肌张力调整等优点,已被国外学者广泛运用到全髋关节翻修及复杂的初次人工全髋关节置换中。本文对该技术的适应证、禁忌证、并发症以及其优势作一综述,以期待更深入的临床及实验研究。     

延伸的转子截骨在一期复杂全髋置换术中的应用

延伸的转子截骨在全髋翻修术中广泛应用 ,而且非常有效。然而在一期复杂全髋置换术中的应用尚未得到广泛研究。这种方法在全髋翻修术中的优点包括 :广泛暴露以利于取出内植物和骨水泥 ;矫正畸形 ;直视下置入股骨干内假体 ;而且此较大的截骨面比标准的转子截骨更有利于骨愈合。因此我们认为 ,这种截骨术的指征为严重的股骨畸形及需取出股骨内植物。本组 6例复杂一期全髋置换术采用了这种截骨术。包括 2例因股骨畸形而导致假体柄插入困难 ,2例需取出股骨内植物 ,2例股骨畸形且需取出内植物及 1例髋关节发育不良。全部采用表面有孔股骨假体重建…     

S-ROM假体全髋关节置换治疗Crowe Ⅳ型髋关节发育不良

目的:探讨S-ROM假体全髋关节置换术治疗CroweⅣ型髋关节发育不良的方法并评价其疗效。方法:2000年10月至2011年10月,应用全髋关节置换术治疗CroweⅣ型髋关节发育不良患者30例36髋,其中6例双侧,24例单侧。采用S-ROM假体结合股骨转子下横断截骨短缩行人工关节置换术,髋臼侧均采用生物型假体,假体在真臼水平或接近于真臼水平植入。对临床结果采用改良Harris评分进行评价,术前及术后随访时均拍X线片进行观察。结果:30例中早期死亡l例(双髋),失访2例(2髋),余27例32髋获得随访,时间7～84个月,平均48个月。2髋分别于术后12、18个月随访时仍可见骨折线,下肢行走无异常,术后未发生感染或神经损伤等严重并发症。改良Harris评分由术前平均41.7±3.7改善至术后89.1±2.9。无假体松动或位置不当需要翻修的病例。影像学复查显示关节假体在位,金属臼杯、股骨假体与宿主骨嵌合良好,无明显松动。所有施行臼侧植骨及股骨截骨的患者植骨及截骨处均骨性愈合,无假体松动,活动度无明显受限,患髋无痛,Trendelenburg征阴性,均无须使用行走辅助工具。结论:对CroweⅣ型髋关节发育不良患者行全髋关节置换术时,良好的真臼暴露、加深髋臼、股骨短缩、斜行截骨及使用S-ROM组配式股骨柄假体假体能提高全髋关节置换术的治疗效果。     

Extended slide trochanteric osteotomy for revision total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the rate of union, time to union, and complications associated with the extended slide trochanteric osteotomy. We also evaluated how outcomes were influenced by the preoperative cortical-bone thickness, the preoperative cancellous-bone quality of the greater trochanter, the number of cables used to reattach the trochanteric osteotomy fragment, and the use of cortical strut augmentation. METHODS: We reviewed the results for forty-six hips in forty-five patients who underwent a revision total hip arthroplasty with an extended slide trochanteric osteotomy between December 1991 and December 1996. Twenty-three patients were men, and twenty-two were women; the mean age at the time of the operation was 66.3 years. Two hips had an isolated acetabular revision, fifteen had an isolated femoral revision, and twenty-nine had acetabular and femoral revisions. One patient (one hip) was lost to follow-up. RESULTS: At a mean of forty-four months after the operation, the rate of union of the distal osteotomy site was 98 percent (forty-four of forty-five hips), with no change in the femoral component position. The time to union was not significantly correlated with the number of cables, the preoperative cortical-bone thickness, or the preoperative cancellous-bone quality of the greater trochanter. Interestingly, the time to bridging-callus union was significantly longer in the hips with a strut allograft than in the hips without a strut allograft (p = 0.04, t test for independent samples). Two fractures of the osteotomy fragment occurred, but neither necessitated another revision. CONCLUSIONS: The extended slide trochanteric osteotomy allows extensive acetabular and femoral exposure, facilitates removal of distal cement or a well fixed porous-coated stem, and allows reliable reattachment and healing of the trochanteric fragment.     

Combined vertical and horizontal cable fixation of an extended trochanteric osteotomy site

BACKGROUND: The use of an extended trochanteric osteotomy facilitates exposure and aids in the removal of a well-fixed femoral implant and cement during revision total hip arthroplasty. Occasionally, nonunion, fracture, and trochanteric migration have been reported following osteotomy. We evaluated the rate of healing of the osteotomy site and of implant stability when fixation was accomplished with use of vertical trochanteric and horizontal metaphyseal cable fixation (combined cable fixation). METHODS: The clinical and radiographic results of revision total hip arthroplasty with use of an extended trochanteric osteotomy followed by implantation of a distally porous-coated component and combined cable fixation of the osteotomy site in forty-two consecutive patients (forty-three hips) were reviewed. Intraoperative fracture at the osteotomy site occurred in five hips (12%). RESULTS: All osteotomy sites healed by six months, with an average time to union of fifteen weeks. One implant subsided 5 mm in a patient in whom a fracture had occurred at the time of the osteotomy. No trochanteric migration occurred. Two patients required a reoperation: one because of instability, and another because of recurrent infection. CONCLUSIONS: The extended trochanteric osteotomy facilitates revision of a well-fixed femoral component. Despite occasional intraoperative fracture at the osteotomy site, combined vertical trochanteric and horizontal metaphyseal cable fixation resulted in an excellent rate of healing and implant stability.     

Exposure for revision: total hip replacement

The author uses four basic approaches for the majority of revision total hip replacements (THRS). The posterior approach is used for most simple revisions of loose endoprostheses, short, loose, cemented stems, and straightforward cup revisions. The key technical maneuvers are the soft tissue releases necessary to adequately displace the proximal femur anteriorly. The sliding trochanteric osteotomy is used when greater exposure of the femoral shaft is necessary to remove implant materials, to treat deformities or fractures, when abductor tension must be adjusted, or when enhanced acetabular exposure is required. Proper orientation of the osteotomy and excision of anterior pseudocapsule are necessary to mobilize the muscular osseous sleeve created by this approach. The extended trochanteric osteotomy is recommended for the most difficult femoral revisions, including the removal of well-fixed cementless and cemented components. The lateral 1/3 of the femoral shaft is removed as far distally as necessary. Careful attention to the creation, elevation, mobilization, and fixation of the osteotomized fragment is important in avoiding fracture or nonunion. The combined AP extensile approach is used for the most difficult acetabular reconstructions, including total acetabular allografting. Cadaveric training and possibly general, vascular, or urologic surgical assistance is recommended for this difficult approach.     

Extended trochanteric osteotomy via the direct lateral approach in revision hip arthroplasty

A review of the results of the extended trochanteric osteotomy through a modified direct lateral approach in revision total hip arthroplasty was done. We reviewed 44 patients (45 procedures) at a minimum of 2 years followup (mean, 3.8 years; range, 2.1-7.2 years). There were 26 men and 18 women with a mean age at the time of surgery of 70.8 years (range, 36.9-90.4 years). Indications for use of the trochanteric osteotomy included facilitation of cement removal (25 procedures), proximal femoral varus deformity (14 procedures), trochanteric malposition (five procedures), and previous trochanteric osteotomies with significant bony overgrowth (three procedures). The mean length of the osteotomy was 133.9 mm. The mean migration of the osteotomized fragment was 2.1 mm (range, 0-20 mm) with significantly more proximal migration seen with the use of cerclage wires when compared with cables. There were two cases of trochanteric escape, for which the patients required repeat open reduction internal fixation. There were two late fractures of the greater trochanter. One femoral component had early subsidence for which the patient required re-revision with a further extended trochanteric osteotomy. The mean time to union of the remaining 40 hips was 10.3 months (range, 6-24 months). There only was one dislocation postoperatively. The extended trochanteric osteotomy through the modified direct lateral approach in revision total hip arthroplasty is a reproducible and reliable technique with a lower dislocation rate but a higher incidence of trochanteric fracture and escape than previously described with its use in the posterior approach.     

Extended trochanteric osteotomy in complex primary total hip arthroplasty. A brief note

BACKGROUND: The extended trochanteric osteotomy has been a useful approach for patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty; however, it has not been well described as an approach for those undergoing complex primary total hip arthroplasty. The purpose of the present report is to describe our experience with the use of an extended trochanteric osteotomy for patients undergoing complex primary total hip arthroplasty. METHODS: Six patients underwent primary total hip arthroplasty with use of an extended trochanteric osteotomy. The reasons for the use of this technique included severe femoral deformity, removal of intraosseous hardware, and high-riding developmental hip dysplasia. A fully porous-coated femoral component with diaphyseal fixation was used for all reconstructions. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was fifty-six years. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed at a minimum of two years. RESULTS: After a mean duration of follow-up of fifty months, all patients had an osseointegrated, stable femoral component. The site of the extended trochanteric osteotomy healed in five of the six patients. One patient had nonunion at the osteotomy site and a fracture at the base of the greater trochanter, with a subsequent fracture of the femoral component. The mean Merle D'Aubigné and Postel pain and walking scores improved from 2.2 and 2.3 preoperatively to 5.3 and 4.7 at the time of the final follow-up (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The extended trochanteric osteotomy is useful for the correction of femoral deformity and facilitates the removal of intraosseous hardware in carefully selected patients undergoing complex primary total hip arthroplasty.     

Revision total hip replacement without trochanteric osteotomy

Revision total hip replacement has traditionally required a trochanteric osteotomy for successful cement removal and component reinsertion. In this study the authors have concluded that in most instances the revision total hip replacement procedure can be successfully performed without trochanteric osteotomy. The advantages are underscored by the high percentage of trochanteric complications with trochanteric osteotomy for revision total hip replacement and the ease of rehabilitation without trochanteric osteotomy. Also, improved functional results without trochanteric osteotomy were noted. The specific indications for the procedure included revision total hip replacement with ununited prior trochanteric osteotomy, revision total hip replacement with femoral shaft fractures, and revision total hip replacement with stem fractures requiring only acetabular revision. The contraindications to the procedure are fibrous union or ununited trochanteric osteotomy from prior total hip replacement, severe acetabular protrusion of the acetabular component, advanced myositis ossificans, ankylosis of the hip, and advanced proximal femoral osteoporosis. The operating room records, x-rays, and outpatient records of 63 total hip revisions in 52 patients were reviewed. There was a minimum 2-year follow up with a range from two years to seven years. The patients were divided into two groups, comparing 21 trochanteric osteotomized revisions to 44 with trochanteric sparing techniques. Both groups were analyzed for age, type of implant, intraoperative perforation of femur, intraoperative femoral shaft fractures, intraoperative cortical window, component malpositioning extraneous cement, intraoperative blood loss, operating time, postoperative leg length inequality, persistent abductor weakness, average first day of ambulation, wound infection, dislocation, nonunion of the trochanter, and postoperative pain. In the nonosteotomized group, there was a 21% decreased blood loss, a 14% decrease in persistent abductor weakness, a 14% decrease in subluxation and dislocation, a 30% decrease operating time and a 50% reduction in intraoperative femoral perforation. In the osteotomized group there were six cases of fibrous union of the greater trochanter, two cases requiring removal of broken wires for trochanteric bursitis. A detailed surgical technique and representative cases are presented. In carefully selected cases, revision total hip replacement is optimally performed without trochanteric osteotomy. Postoperative trochanteric problems of nonunion, broken wires, bursitis, and abductor weakness can effectively be eliminated by avoiding trochanteric osteotomy.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

Extended trochanteric osteotomy for the treatment of vancouver B2/B3 periprosthetic fractures of the femur

Periprosthetic femur fractures after total hip arthroplasty are a growing concern as their prevalence is expected to rise. A retrospective review was performed of all patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty with an extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO) for treatment of a Vancouver B2/B3 fracture at our institution. Fourteen patients were identified having a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Clinical and radiographic evaluation was performed for all patients. At a mean 44.5 months of follow-up, mean modified D'Aubigne and Postel scores were 8.6. In all cases the ETO and fracture healed with radiographic evidence of osseointegration of the femoral component. Use of an ETO for the treatment of periprosthetic femur fractures provides excellent exposure, facilitates component implantation, and is compatible with fracture healing and good short-term clinical results.     

定制肿瘤型关节假体髓外柄断裂的有限翻修技术

 目的 介绍定制肿瘤型关节假体髓外柄断裂的有限翻修方法,并评价其临床应用效果。方法 3例患者行定制肿瘤型关节假体置换术后发生假体髓外柄断裂,男2例,女1例;年龄分别为25岁、51岁和52岁。原发肿瘤部位及病理组织学类型分别为股骨远端骨肉瘤、股骨远端复发性骨巨细胞瘤及股骨近端软骨肉瘤。假体髓外柄断裂分别发生于术后11个月、34个月和28个月,均无明显外伤史,为行走时发生假体断裂。假体断裂处位于股骨远端假体髓外柄结合部和股骨近端假体的股骨颈基底部。依据假体断裂后髓内柄固定牢固及髓外柄残留足够长度的情况,为避免常规翻修手术中较困难的原假体髓内柄及骨水泥取出,设计了股骨近端和远端翻修假体进行有限翻修,该翻修假体由套筒部和关节部组成,材质及关节部外形与原假体相同,翻修时保留原假体髓内柄,将翻修假体套接于残留的髓外柄,骨水泥及挤压螺钉固定,同时更换磨损的配件,从而完成有限翻修。术后常规功能锻炼,定期随访观察翻修假体稳定性及肢体功能恢复情况。结果 3例患者假体断裂原因为股骨远端假体髓外柄结合部、股骨近端假体股骨颈基底部疲劳断裂各1例,股骨远端假体髓外柄结合部松动、锁钉断裂1例。翻修术后分别随访1个月、103个月和110个月,1例骨巨细胞瘤患者发生软组织内肿瘤复发而再行肿瘤切除术。至末次随访时,3例患者翻修假体固定牢固、无松动。MSTS评分肢体功能评分分别为66.7%、86.7%和83.3%。结论 定制肿瘤型关节假体由于疲劳或结构失效可发生断裂,套接式翻修假体可保留固定牢固的原假体髓内柄而行有限翻修,降低了手术难度,有利于肢体功能的尽快恢复。