人工全髋关节翻修术中髋臼骨缺损的分类和重建

人工全髋关节置换术作为一项逐渐成熟的技术,已经被越来越多的骨科医师所熟知和开展,但随之也使髋关节翻修术患者增多。翻修的原因主要包括假体的无菌性松动、不稳、周围骨折、内衬磨损等,而髋臼骨缺损和髋臼假体的选择一直困扰着广大医师。本文总结了人工全髋关节翻修术中髋臼骨缺损的分类和重建,比较各种分类法的优缺点,在此基础上有多种植骨方式及髋臼假体的选择来重建髋臼,阐述了植骨的材料来源、植骨方式、复杂髋臼骨缺损的重建以及假体固定方式的选择,为临床医生处理各种髋臼骨缺损提供依据,以期更精准地指导临床个体化治疗。     

全髋关节翻修术中髋臼骨缺损的处理方法

目的探讨全髋关节翻修术中对于髋臼骨缺损重建的方法及其术后疗效。方法回顾性分析自2007-03—2011-12的75例（76髋）全髋关节翻修术,髋臼骨缺损根据Paprosky分型：Ⅰ型9髋,ⅡA型21髋,ⅡB型18髋,ⅡC型11髋,ⅢA型10髋,ⅢB型7髋。髋臼骨缺损采用不同方式修复,术后定期随访。采用髋关节功能Harris评分评估髋关节功能,根据X线片判断假体是否松动、植骨是否融合。结果 75例（76髋）均获得平均36（16~73）个月随访。术后12个月不同类型骨缺损患者髋关节功能Harris评分较术前明显提高,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。术后症状和关节功能明显改善,未出现髋臼骨折、感染、下肢深静脉血栓形成、坐骨神经损伤等严重并发症。X线片可见移植骨与宿主骨质交界处有连续性骨小梁通过,假体未见松动迹象。结论髋臼假体无菌性松动及骨溶解是需要进行全髋关节翻修的主要原因,而髋臼骨缺损Paprosky分型法对髋臼翻修重建方法有指导意义,正确选择假体类型及合理选择植骨方式是全髋关节翻修术后取得满意疗效的保证。     

Cementless acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty

Reconstruction of the failed acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be challenging. Although there are multiple reconstructive options available, a cementless acetabular component inserted with screws has been shown to have good intermediate-term results and is the reconstructive method of choice for the majority of acetabular revisions. We reviewed the results of 138 consecutive acetabular revisions done with a hemispheric, cementless acetabular component that is sintered with Ti fiber metal mesh and was inserted with line-to-line reaming and multiple screws for fixation. At a mean of 15 years, 19 acetabular components had been revised (13.8%); seven were revised for recurrent instability, six were revised for deep periprosthetic infection, five well-fixed cups were removed at the time of femoral revision, and one cup was fixed by fibrous tissue only at the time of femoral revision and was removed. One acetabular component was radiographically loose. Survivorship of the component was 81% at 15 years when revision for any reason was considered as an end point and 96% when revision for loosening or radiographic evidence of loosening was considered as a second end point. Cementless acetabular revision provides durable results at 15 years with a low rate of failure for loosening.     

Radiological evaluation of allograft reconstruction in acetabulum with Ganz reinforcement ring in revision total hip replacement

Background  

In revision total hip replacement (THR), cages and rings are commonly used for the reconstruction of bone defects that are due to mechanical loosening of the acetabular cup and migration of the femoral head prosthesis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the radiological results of the use of Ganz reinforcement rings with bone allografts in acetabular revision THR.     

全髋翻修术中髋臼骨缺损翻修重建

全髋关节置换术后髋臼失败的翻修重.是骨科医生面临的巨大的技术挑战.翻修时面对广泛的髋臼骨缺损,可能需要采用几种不同技术,尽可能使髋臼侧恢复到初次全髋关节置换术时的骨量.获得翻修假体初始稳定是翻修手术成功的关键.该文就全髋翻修术中髋臼骨缺损的分类、术前计划和翻修重建策略作一综述.     

Extensile anterior column acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty

The extensile triradiate approach, with anterior-column plate reconstruction using structural allografts, was used in 12 cases. Pelvic discontinuity requiring posterior-plate application was present in eight of these cases. Allograft reconstructions seemed to be radiographically incorporated by approximately 8 months postoperatively and all discontinuities united. The results were excellent in four cases, good in two cases, fair in three cases, and poor in three cases. Two cups were revised for loosening. Deep sepsis resulted in graft and component removal in two cases. At reexploration, discontinuity and allografts were noted to be healed in these cases.     

全髋关节翻修术中髋臼骨缺损的分类和重建研究进展

在髋关节翻修术中,髋臼骨缺损的治疗具有相当的挑战性。术前的计划,缺损的辨认和稳固的重建是成功翻修手术的基础。应用自体骨和同种异体骨移植填充骨缺损,目前使用特殊的重建方法行髋臼重建已取得了一定的疗效。临床上髋关节翻修手术越来越多,因此有必要针对髋臼骨缺损建立系统的诊断和治疗程序。本文就髋臼骨缺损的分类和重建进展做一综述。     

Structural acetabular allograft in revision total hip arthroplasty

Structural allografts are a surgical option only in cases of severe bone loss. Structural allografting techniques have been developed to fill large bony defects and can be used to provide structural support and reconstitute bone stock. Superior dome allografts are utilized when 50% or more of host bone is available for contact with the ingrowth cup. In revision surgery where the allograft supports more than 50% of the reconstruction, complications are more common. Although good results are reported, implant failure and graft resorption are more commonly seen. The addition of a reconstruction ring to the reconstruction unloads some of the stress applied to the allograft. In these cases, superior results have been reported.     

Acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty

The number of total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures performed annually continues to rise. Specific challenges, including acetabular bone loss, are commonly encountered at the time of revision surgery, and orthopaedic surgeons must be prepared to address them. This review focuses on topics related to acetabular reconstruction, including pre-operative patient evaluation (clinical and radiographic), pre-operative planning, common causes of acetabular failure, classification of acetabular bone loss, methods of acetabular reconstruction, and clinical results based on reconstruction method. Pre-operative patient evaluation for revision THA begins with a thorough history and physical examination as well as laboratory workup to rule out infection. Detailed radiographic evaluation and pre-operative planning are also essential and will facilitate communication amongst all members of the operative team. Although there are several ways to describe acetabular bone loss, the Paprosky classification system – defined by anterosuperior and posteroinferior acetabular column integrity – is the system most commonly used today and will guide treatment strategy. Several treatment strategies have been developed and may be termed either “cemented” (e.g. impaction grafting, ring and cage construction, structural allograft) or “uncemented” (e.g. hemispheric shell ± porous metal augment, cup-cage, custom triflange acetabular component). Although each strategy has its advantages and disadvantages, the general principles remain the same. Successful treatment depends upon detailed pre-operative assessment, planning, and team-based plan execution. Uncemented techniques that allow for biologic fixation are preferred. In the special case of pelvic discontinuity, acetabular distraction is the authors’ preferred technique. Longer term studies are still needed to evaluate the longevity of each of the various reconstruction methods presented.     

Allograft reconstruction of large proximal femoral defects in revision total hip arthroplasty

Surgical Principles With the increasing frequency of total joint replacement, the orthopaedic surgeon is often confronted with cases of aseptic, time related loosening of total hip arthroplasties. This is compounded by the severe bone loss associated with loosening and the reaction to particular debris [3, 9, 11]. Conventional methods of revision can be difficult and even inadequate for some of these situations [2, 8, 15, 17]. The use of structural allografts for significant proximal femoral deficiencies can restore skeletal architecture and mechanical integrity to these patients. The aim of this technique is to allow the reconstruction of large structural defects with a physiologically compatible material rather than the traditional techniques of custom prosthetic replacement with or without extensive cement augmentation.     

Acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty

Acetabular revision surgery is always associated with some degree of bone loss. Where an intact peripheral rim is present it can be used to achieve ingrowth and cementless prosthetic fixation. Where major segmental defects are present and prosthetic stability is not possible in host bone, structural allografts may be necessary to satisfy the principles of acetabular reconstruction. Using quality bone, proper fixation, and buttressing of structural allografts against host bone, a high degree of success can be expected. The majority of acetabular revisions can be reconstructed with large hemispherical sockets and adjuvant screw fixation and the use of bulk allografts should be reserved for those reconstructions where no good alternative exists.     

加强性网杯在人工全髋关节置换术中的应用及其近期随访结果

目的评价Burch-Schneider(BS)网杯和颗粒状异体骨打压植骨技术在人工全髋关节置换术中的作用及其近期疗效。方法利用对患者主观症状、患髋客观体征和功能进行评价的评分系统,对9例术后平均3.8年的使用网杯的全髋关节置换或翻修患者评分,按得分情况评价临床效果。结果随访时患者均完全脱拐,能上下楼梯,生活可自理,部分患者行走时跛行和穿袜困难,治疗的优良率为89%。结论(1)加强性网杯重建髋臼适用于存在重度腔洞型和混合型髋臼缺损的全髋关节置换或翻修患者,它是解决严重髋臼缺损的有效方法。(2)BS网杯属生物固定型网杯,网杯和髋臼的骨性愈合为术后良好的远期疗效创造了条件。(3)在骨盆环完整的条件下,BS网杯下翼无须按常规固定于坐骨或耻骨上,可将其自髋臼横韧带上方插入,同时用多枚螺钉固定上翼并使网杯有向外的弹力,这种固定方式的效果最佳。(4)网杯上翼的折弯应顺应髂翼的弧度一次成型,反复折弯易致其断裂或下翼与髋臼横韧带之间松脱,造成网杯与骨床接触不良。(5)在髋臼缺损内填充颗粒状异体骨并压实,植骨颗粒以0.8cm×0.8cm×0.8cm大小为宜,提倡术后早期下床活动。     

Extra-large uncemented hemispherical acetabular components for revision total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: Extra-large uncemented components provide several advantages for acetabular revision, but limited information is available on the results of their use. The purpose of this study was to evaluate, at a minimum of five years, the results associated with the use of an extra-large uncemented porous-coated component for acetabular revision in the presence of bone loss. METHODS: Eighty-nine extra-large uncemented hemispherical acetabular components were used for revision after aseptic failure of a total hip arthroplasty in forty-six men and forty-three women (mean age at revision, fifty-nine years; range, thirty to eighty-three years). The revision implant (a Harris-Galante-I or II cup fixed with screws) had an outside diameter of > or = 66 mm in men and > or = 62 mm in women. Seventy-nine patients had a segmental or combined segmental and cavitary acetabular bone deficiency before the revision. Particulate bone graft was used in fifty-four hips and bulk bone graft, in nine. RESULTS: One patient died with the acetabular component intact and two patients were lost to follow-up within five years after the operation. At the time of the last follow--up, four acetabular components had been removed or revised again (two for aseptic loosening). All of the remaining patients were followed clinically for at least five years (mean, 7.2 years; range, 5.0 to 11.3 years). In the hips that were not revised again, only two sockets had definite radiographic evidence of loosening. All four of the sockets that loosened were in hips that had had combined cavitary and segmental bone loss preoperatively. In the hips that were not revised again, the mean modified Harris hip score increased from 56 points preoperatively to 83 points at the time of the most recent follow-up. The most frequent complication, dislocation of the hip, occurred in eleven patients. The probability of survival of the acetabular component at eight years was 93% (95% confidence interval, 85% to 100%) with removal for any reason as the end point, 98% (95% confidence interval, 92% to 100%) with revision for aseptic loosening as the end point, and 95% (95% confidence interval, 88% to 100%) with radiographic evidence of loosening or revision for aseptic loosening as the end point. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that extra-large uncemented components used for acetabular revision in the presence of bone loss perform very well and have a low rate of aseptic loosening at the time of intermediate-term follow-up.     

Threaded acetabular components for primary and revision total hip arthroplasty

A clinical and radiographic review of 48 total hip arthroplasty patients with threaded acetabular components was undertaken at 24-44 months of follow-up study. Twenty-five patients had primary hip arthroplasties and 23 had revision procedures. Clinical scores revealed good to excellent results in 60% of primary and 30% of revision procedures. Radiographic analysis revealed stable acetabular components in 88% of primary and 61% of revision procedures. Potentially loose acetabular components were noted in 8% of primary and 4.3% of revision procedures and loose acetabular components in 4% of primary and 34.7% of revision procedures. The rate of acetabular component loosening was considered unacceptably high in revision cases and an area of concern in primary cases. Discretionary use of these components is advised.     

Allogeneic cancellous bone graft and a Burch-Schneider ring for acetabular reconstruction in revision hip arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is an ever-increasing number of failed hip arthroplasties associated with massive deficiency of acetabular bone stock consisting of a segmental or cavitary defect. This study was undertaken to evaluate the long-term results after use of morselized cryopreserved allogeneic bone graft and an antiprotrusio cage to treat such a deficiency. METHODS: From January 1, 1988, to January 1, 1994, forty-one patients (forty-one hips) with an acetabular defect classified as type IIl or IV according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons system were operated on with use of a Burch-Schneider ring and morselized cryopreserved allogeneic cancellous bone graft. Thirty-eight patients (thirty-eight hips) were available for clinical and radiographic follow-up examinations at an average of 7.3 years (range, 4.2 to 9.4 years) after surgery. RESULTS: All measured clinical parameters had improved significantly by the time of the follow-up examination (p < 0.0001). Radiographs confirmed that none of the thirty-eight hips had any measurable migration or displacement of the acetabular component and that osseous consolidation occurred only within the grafted area in all patients. CONCLUSION: Acetabular reconstruction with use of morselized cryopreserved allogeneic cancellous bone graft and the Burch-Schneider ring can be highly successful in managing massive acetabular deficiencies in revision hip arthroplasty.     

THA翻修术中髋臼骨缺损的处理策略

目的探讨全髋关节置换术（THA）翻修术中髋臼骨缺损重建的方法及疗效。方法回顾1999年6月至2007年5月,在THA翻修术中处理的髋臼骨缺损112例（117髋）。根据Saleh KJ的改良分型法,Ⅰ型缺损14髋、Ⅱ型缺损26髋、Ⅲ型缺损47髋、Ⅵ型缺损16髋、Ⅴ型缺损14髋。分别采用大直径非骨水泥假体臼、非骨水泥假体臼＋松质颗粒植骨、骨水泥假体臼＋Cage＋松质颗粒植骨和骨水泥假体臼＋定制型假体＋松质颗粒植骨,对不同类型骨缺损进行修复。术后定期随访,采用Harris方法评估髋关节功能,根据X线片判断假体是否有松动,移植骨是否愈合。结果随访时间平均45（13～118）个月。除4髋因脱位或假体周围骨折进行再翻修外,其余效果良好。术后Harris评分平均86.2分,较术前平均改善40.6分。X线片无假体松动下沉,可见移植骨-宿主骨交界处有连续性小梁骨通过。结论在THA翻修术中,大部分髋臼骨缺损可使用较大型号非骨水泥假体或加松质颗粒植骨进行修复;对于影响假体稳定性的较大缺损,使用骨水泥假体臼＋Cage＋松质颗粒植骨的方法可获得良好效果;定制型假体在处理严重髋臼骨缺损中有具独特优势,有良好的临床应用前景。     

Management of acetabular bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty

Most acetabular revisions can be managed with a hemispherical component with screw fixation. Areas of segmental bone loss that preclude acetabular component stability may be managed with structural allograft or second-generation porous metal augments. Acetabular cages have a limited application but can be a useful tool in the management of massive bone loss and pelvic discontinuity.     

Cancellous impaction bone grafting of acetabular defects in complex primary and revision total hip arthroplasty

The reconstruction of major acetabular bone defects during revision, conversion, and primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) is challenging. We reviewed a consecutive series of 168 THAs (108 revisions, 8 conversions, and 52 primary THAs) performed by 1 surgeon (S.B.G.) between 1997 and 2008 using impaction bone grafting for acetabular reconstruction. Autograft, cancellous allograft croutons, and demineralized bone matrix were used to fill bone defects as needed. The acetabular bone deficiency was classified according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons: type I, segmental deficiency with significant rim defect; type II, cavitary defects medially or posteriorly; type III, combined cavitary and segmental deficiency; type IV, pelvic discontinuity; and type V, arthrodesis. According to this method, 56 hips had type I, 31 hips had type II, 48 hips had type III, and 27 hips had type IV deficiencies. Of the 168 patients, 19 subsequently died of causes unrelated to the THA, and 11 were lost to follow-up. All patients had at least 2 years of follow-up. Average Harris Hip Score improved from 45.5±17.9 preoperatively to 81.1±16.5 postoperatively (P<.05) for revision THAs, from 40.0±11.3 preoperatively to 85.0±12.8 postoperatively (P<.05) for conversion THAs, and from 42.3±14.9 preoperatively to 85.0±12.0 postoperatively (P<.05) for primary THAs. All impaction grafted bone (allograft, autograft, or a combination) incorporated radiographically, thus restoring bone stock. Complications included 1 early infection, which was managed successfully with debridement and liner exchange, and 2 late infections that were managed successfully with staged revision. Two revisions required subsequent re-revision for late loosening. Two hip dislocations occurred, 1 of which required surgical treatment to place a constrained liner.     

加强杯联合植骨技术修复翻修术中巨大髋臼骨缺损

[目的]介绍加强杯联合植骨技术在髋关节翻修手术中巨大髋臼骨缺损的修复应用。[方法]回顾分析2002—2007年，8例在翻修术中存在严重髋臼骨缺损患者，按D’Antonio分类：ⅡB型1例，ⅡC型2例，Ⅲ型5例；加强杯联合颗粒打压植骨3例，加强杯联合颗粒骨植骨＋结构性植骨5例；术后进行临床评估及X线评估。[结果]术后平均随访时间2．7年（6—49个月），未出现假体失败而需要再次翻修病例，植骨组织未见明显骨吸收。Harris评分系统评估患者髋关节功能，术后平均提高47分。[结论]采用颗粒骨打压植骨技术修复腔隙性骨缺损，结构性植骨恢复髋臼后方结构的完整，提高局部骨量，增加假体的骨性接触面，同时利用加强杯固定植骨组织，稳定假体，该方法可有效修复髋臼侧的巨大骨缺损。     

颗粒骨打压植骨结合多孔非骨水泥臼杯在AAOSⅢ型髋臼大面积骨缺损翻修中的应用

背景：颗粒骨打压植骨是修复髋臼骨缺损的重要方法,对大面积髋臼骨缺损采用打压植骨结合非骨水泥臼杯重建仍然存在争议。目的：探讨同种异体颗粒骨打压植骨结合多孔非骨水泥臼杯髋臼重建术修复AAOSⅢ型髋臼大面积骨缺损的方法及近期疗效。方法：随访2005年6月至2010年4月收治的28例（28髋）AA0SⅢ型髋臼大面积骨缺损患者。男18例,女10例,年龄34-74岁,平均53．8岁。髋关节置换术后感染醐翻修9例,骨溶解及髋臼假体松动翻修19例。本组AAOSⅢ型髋臼骨缺损面积大,术中见髋臼骨缺损超过髋臼关节面的50％。全部采用同种异体颗粒骨打压植骨结合多孔非骨水泥臼杯髋臼重建术。术后定期随访,观察臼杯有无松动、植入骨与宿主骨整合情况,髋关节功能评分采用Harris评分。结果：28例均获得随访,术后随访时间为13-70个月,平均43个月。Harris评分由术前32-48分,平均41分,提高至末次随访时86-95分,平均90分。28例髋臼假体均固定牢固无松动征象,植入骨逐渐与宿主骨整合,无感染及坐骨神经损伤。结论：在获得臼杯初始稳定固定的情况下,大面积颗粒骨打压植骨（臼杯与宿主骨接触面积〈50％）结合多孔非骨水泥臼杯髋臼重建术修复AAOSⅢ型髋臼大面积骨缺损近期疗效较好,远期疗效尚待进一步随访。