Wagner SL股骨柄用于髋关节翻修的适应证及疗效

[目的]通过临床病例总结,观察非组配型股骨柄Wagner SL用于国人髋关节翻修的初期临床疗效。[方法]2010年1月~2012年12月,共32例患者翻修术中使用单体型Wagner SL股骨柄。全髋术后股骨骨缺损按Paprosky分型,其中Ⅱ型19例,Ⅲa型11例,Ⅲb型2例。5例未行髋臼侧翻修。对每例患者术前术后进行Harris评分。通过双侧髋关节正位X线片测量评估肢体长度差异(Leg Length Discrepancy,LLD)。假体下沉的评估使用Callaghan等的方法。[结果]随访18~42个月,平均随访29.3个月。术前Harris评分(34.5±36.8)分,术后Harris评分平均(81.5±23.1)分。8例患者末次复查假体下沉≥5~10 mm;1例复查股骨假体下沉10 mm。均无明显症状。2例术后早期脱位。LLD:术前LLD≥2 cm 7例,≥1 cm 22例。术后末次随访LLD≥2 cm 2例,≥1 cm 8例,≥0.5 cm 17例。术后肢体差异较术前平均减小0.80 cm(1.8~-0.8 cm)。[结论]本组病例证实Wagner SL用于股骨侧Ⅱ,Ⅲa、Ⅲb型骨缺损翻修病例及部分假体周围骨折病例取得良好的初期效果,但在肢体长度差异调节准确性不足。     

生物型翻修加长柄在人工全髋关节翻修术中的应用

目的探讨生物型翻修加长柄治疗全髋关节置换术后股骨假体松动伴股骨骨缺损的早期疗效。方法对15例(15髋)全髋关节置换术后股骨假体松动伴股骨骨缺损采用生物型翻修加长柄治疗,对于骨缺损采用自体或同种异体颗粒骨植骨,自体大块髂骨结构性植骨,使用钢丝、钢缆固定。结果术后髋关节疼痛消失,关节功能改善。15例获随访6~22个月,平均18个月。末次随访时未发现假体周围骨折及假体远端出现新透亮带,Harris评分平均89.8分。结论人工全髋关节翻修术中使用生物型翻修加长柄治疗股骨假体松动伴股骨骨缺损早期疗效可靠,但远期疗效有待进一步观察。     

生物型加长柄在全髋关节置换股骨侧翻修术中的应用

目的 探讨生物型加长柄在全髋关节置换股骨侧翻修术中的临床应用效果.方法 回顾性分析自2014-08-2018-12采用生物型加长柄行股骨侧翻修的62例全髋关节置换术,其中股骨假体无菌性溶解松动24例,股骨假体周围骨折18例,股骨假体感染性松动20例.比较手术前后疼痛VAS评分、髋关节功能Harris评分,观察随访期间有...     

Wagner SL翻修型股骨柄在人工髋关节翻修术中的疗效分析

目的探讨采用Wagner SL翻修型股骨柄在人工髋关节翻修中的方法及疗效。方法自2006年3月至2012年3月,采用Wagner自锁式无骨水泥固定型翻修股骨柄对31例患者(共31髋)行人工髋关节翻修术。其中男性16例,女性15例;年龄41~75岁,平均63.2岁。髋关节翻修术距离初次人工全髋置换的时间是1~20年,平均65.3个月。翻修原因:无菌性假体松动25例,髋关节假体周围感染6例,均为第一次翻修。结果 31例均获得了随访,随访时间为0.5~6年,平均为2.7年。患者手术后切口均为Ⅰ期愈合,无下肢深静脉血栓及坐骨神经损伤等并发症出现。在随访期间没有出现假体松动和感染,假体周围可以看到明显骨长入。有9例患者出现了不同程度的假体下沉,但均无明显的髋部疼痛症状,因此未做特殊处理。末次随访时,Harris评分由(36.24±8.27)分提高到(83.78±4.92)分,Merle D’Aubigne评分由(2.54±5.38)提高到(13.42±3.26)分,VAS疼痛评分由(7.32±0.72)分减低到(1.26±0.61)分,与手术前比较差异具有统计学意义(P0.05)。结论使用Wagner S"L"型翻修股骨柄进行人工髋关节翻修术后,近期疗效满意,能明显地缓解疼痛,改善了髋关节的功能。     

生物型加长柄用于人工髋关节股骨侧翻修术的中短期疗效及生存质量分析

背景:随着人工髋关节翻修术临床应用的逐年增加,选择安全可靠的人工髋关节进行翻修尤为重要。目的:探讨生物型加长柄用于人工髋关节翻修术的中短期疗效及生存质量。方法:2013年1月至2015年12月收治人工髋关节翻修术患者82例,采用随机数字表法分为试验组和对照组各41例。试验组采用生物型加长柄人工髋关节翻修术治疗,对照组采用传统骨水泥人工髋关节翻修术治疗。两组患者术后连续随访18个月,观察两组患者治疗后的中短期疗效及生存质量。结果:试验组术后中短期有效率为95.12%,明显高于对照组的82.93%,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);术后1、6、12、18个月的Harris评分和术后18个月的生存质量评分亦高于对照组,而各项中短期并发症发生率明显低于对照组,均具有统计学差异(P<0.05)。结论:生物型加长柄用于人工髋关节翻修术具有良好的中短期疗效和较高的生存质量。     

非骨水泥型Jumbo杯在人工全髋关节翻修术中的应用

目的探讨Jumbo杯用于髋关节假体无菌性松动翻修手术的远期效果。方法笔者自2003-12—2014-10采用Jumbo杯对11例髋关节假体无菌性松动伴髋臼骨缺损行翻修手术,比较手术前后髋关节Harris评分、VAS评分。结果4例失访,11例(13髋)获得随访0.58~11.3(8.3±1.6)年。Harris评分为76~96(88.6±4.7)分,较术前0~23(7.2±3.5)分明显增加,髋关节功能改善,差异有统计学意义(P=0.018);VAS疼痛评分为0~3(1.7±0.6)分,较术前5~10(7.3±1.2)分明显减少,患者术后髋关节疼痛完全或部分缓解,差异有统计学意义。早期(术后90 d)并发症率为27.3%;远期并发症率为10.1%;10年无翻修率为89.9%。结论 Jumbo杯应用于髋关节翻修具有良好的远期效果。     

钢缆或钢丝环扎固定联合加长生物柄翻修术治疗Vancouver B2型股骨假体周围骨折

目的 探讨钢缆或钢丝环扎固定联合全涂层加长生物柄翻修术治疗Vancouver B2型股骨假体周围骨折的疗效.方法 回顾性分析自2012-01-2019-06诊治的18例Vancouver B2型股骨假体周围骨折,根据股骨骨折线长度在远端骨折线约1 cm处环扎一道钢缆或钢丝,避免扩髓时髓腔劈裂.清理股骨近端髓腔,股骨近端...     

人工髋关节翻修术的临床分析（附32例报告）

目的探讨人工髋关节翻修术的翻修原因、临床特点及手术方法。方法对32例人工髋关节翻修术的临床资料进行回顾性分析。取髋关节后侧入路,取出松动的股骨侧及髋臼侧假体,根据缺损情况植骨,然后按技术要求换置假体。结果2例术中出现股骨骨折,行内固定术,愈合良好。1例髋臼行植骨、骨水泥假体固定,术后1年出现髋臼假体松动。行二期翻修术。Harris评分术前平均41．3分,术后平均83．5分。结论①无菌性松动和医源性错误是人工髋关节翻修的最常见原因;②髋臼翻修首选非骨水泥假体生物型固定,对于包容性髋臼骨质缺损,应行颗粒打压植骨＋非骨水泥臼固定;（蓼翻修术中股骨柄取出困难可行股骨大粗隆延长截骨;④术后功能锻炼至关重要。     

组配式生物型股骨假体行一期人工髋关节翻修术13例

目的 探讨组配式生物型股骨假体行一期人工髋关节翻修的疗效及体会.方法 应用Link MP(R)组配式股骨假体进行一期人工髋关节翻修13例.结果 髋关节功能Harris评分:术前平均37(26～52)分,术后88(72～94)分.11例弃拐行走,2例存在大腿疼痛,需扶拐行走,服用非甾体消炎药物后缓解.通过影像学ARA评分评价假体的稳定性,平均5.13(2.47～7.34)分.结论 组配式生物型股骨假体能满足各种翻修要求,是一种较好的一期人工髋关节翻修股骨假体.     

远端固定型假体结合同种异体骨移植在髋关节股骨翻修中的应用

[目的]探讨应用远端固定生物型假体结合同种异体骨移植进行髋关节股骨侧翻修的临床效果。[方法]2008年7月~2014年5月,行非感染性假体松动股骨侧翻修11例(骨水泥假体10例,非骨水泥假体1例)。所有患者采用远端固定生物型假体结合股骨近端同种异体颗粒骨打压植骨,其中7例同时应用同种异体皮质骨支撑植骨。男4例,女7例;平均年龄65.3岁(48~79岁);左侧7例,右侧4例。初次置换原因:股骨头无菌性坏死6例,股骨颈骨折3例,骨性关节炎2例。翻修距原手术时间平均12.8年(3~21年)。依据Paprosky分型,Ⅱ型4例,ⅢA型4例,ⅢB型3例。临床功能评价采用Harris评分。翻修用假体:Restoration(Stryker)3髋,MP(Link)8髋。[结果]所有患者均获得随访,随防时间12~75个月,平均29个月。1例术后出现切口渗液,15d后愈合;1例术后6年并发假体周围螺旋形骨折(Vancouver分型B1),假体未松动,行切开复位内固定术。随访期内X线片显示移植骨均愈合良好,假体稳固,周围未见透亮带及松动、下沉征象;术前6例双下肢不等长患者均得到矫正(长度差1 cm);无感染、脱位及深静脉血栓形成等并发症;无假体再翻修病例。Harris评分从术前的平均(30.3±7.2)分提高到最后评估时的平均(82.4±5.9)分,Harris评分优良率为81.8%。[结论]在伴有广泛骨质缺失的股骨翻修中,远端固定生物型假体是较好的选择。术中采用股骨近端颗粒骨打压植骨重建干骺端骨缺损,并在股骨干部皮质薄弱或缺损时结合同种异体皮质骨支撑植骨,可使假体柄远近段均获得较好的初始稳定性,且中短期临床效果满意,远期疗效尚有待观察。     

Analyses of Prosthesis Stem Failures in Noncemented Modular Hip Revision Prostheses

In recent years, hip prosthesis stem revision by means of modular revision systems has reached an essential role in revision prosthetics. It is an extremely successful technique. Reports about mechanical failure in nonmodular revision stems have already been published. This complication is rare, but feared. We report about mechanical failure of four non-cemented modular revision stems over a period of 28 months. All failures became clinically apparent because of severe inguinal or thigh pain and were confirmed by conventional x-ray imaging. All stem failures occurred just below the interface between prosthesis stem and neck, which is a biomechanically stressed area. Distal of the failure, all stems were still firmly fixed. In all cases, there was obvious evidence of loosening at the proximal component. Metallographic and energy-dispensive x-ray analysis of one stem showed a fatigue fracture due to dynamic stress. If new pain arises after revision surgery with modular non-cemented prosthesis systems, the possibility of an implant failure should be kept in mind. Patients should be informed accordingly about the risk of implant failure.     

Results of Wagner SL revision stem with impaction bone grafting in revision total hip arthroplasty

Background:

As the number of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed increases, so do the number of required revisions. Impaction bone grafting with Wagner SL Revision stem is a good option for managing bone deficiencies arising from aseptic osteolysis. We studied the results of cementless diaphyseal fixation in femoral revision after total hip arthroplasty and whether there was spontaneous regeneration of bone stock in the proximal femur after the use of Wagner SL Revision stem (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) with impaction bone grafting.

Materials and Methods:

We performed 53 hip revisions using impaction bone grafting and Wagner SL Revision stems in 48 patients; (5 cases were bilateral) for variety of indications ranging from aseptic osteolysis to preiprosthetic fractures. The average age was 59 years (range 44-68 years). There were 42 male and 6 female patients. Four patients died after surgery for reasons unrelated to surgery. 44 patients were available for complete analysis.

Results:

The mean Harris Hip Score was 42 before surgery and improved to 86 by the final followup evaluation at a mean point of 5.5 years. Of the 44 patients, 87% (n=39) had excellent results and 10% (n=5) had good results. The stem survival rate was 98% (n=43).

Conclusion:

Short term results for revision THA with impaction bone grafting and Wagner SL revision stems are encouraging. However, it is necessary to obtain long term results through periodic followup evaluation, as rate of complications may increase in future.     

Revision Hip Arthroplasty Using a Modular Revision Hip System in Cases of Severe Bone Loss

We sought to identify outcomes of the Restoration Modular Hip System in cases of severe femoral bone stock deficiency. We performed a retrospective review of 55 revTHAs with a mean follow-up of 32 months (24–60 months). Outcomes included the WOMAC and HHS. Preoperative bone loss was categorized as Paprosky 3A (n = 13), 3B (n = 14), and 4 (n = 17). Periprosthetic fractures were classified as Vancouver B2 (n = 6) and B3 (n = 5). 53 of 55 stems were in situ at time of final review. WOMAC improved from 46 ± 18 to 70 ± 22 and HHS improved from 47 ± 15 to 78 ± 15. Complications were identified in 9 patients, which included dislocation (3), subsidence (2), infection (2), and periprosthetic fracture (2). In cases of significant proximal femoral bone deficiency, this stem demonstrated improvement in clinical outcomes with good results at short-term follow up.     

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty With a Monoblock Splined Tapered Grit-Blasted Titanium Stem

Background

In revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), proximal femoral bone loss creates a challenge of achieving adequate stem fixation. The purpose of this study was to examine the outcomes of a monoblock, splined, tapered femoral stem in revision THA.

One-Stage Revision Arthroplasty Using Cementless Stem for Infected Hip Arthroplasties

The objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate our results with one-stage revision using cementless femoral stem for infected hip arthroplasties. Twenty-four patients were included in the study. The acetabular component was cemented in 9 cases. In 2 patients a structured bone allograft was necessary to fill an acetabular defect. After a mean follow-up of 44.6 months, 23 patients showed no signs of infection (95.8%), the mean functional response according to the Merle d’Aubigné scale was 13.8 and the mean Harris Hip Score was 65.4. One-stage revision hip arthroplasty using cementless femoral stem was associated with a high success rate.     

A Distal Fluted,Proximal Modular Femoral Prosthesis in Revision Hip Arthroplasty

Most reports on the use of modular femoral stems during revision surgery have involved short follow-up periods. The authors evaluated the clinical and radiographic performance of 59 patients fitted with a distal fix modular stem. The average follow-up period was 8.2 years. Average Harris hip score was improved from 47 to 87.6. Of 19 patients with trochanteric osteotomy, 4 had a displaced greater trochanter. Re-revision was performed in 5 patients, and 3 of these were for subsidence (of these 3, subsidence was associated with dissociation of the coupling part in 1 and with osteotomy nonunion in other 2 [proximal component only]). Modular distally fixed femoral stems were found to offer intraoperative flexibility, but to suffer from subsidence and intraoperative greater trochanter and metaphyseal femoral fractures.     

Treatment of Failed Allograft Prosthesis Composites Used for Hip Arthroplasty in the Setting of Severe Proximal Femoral Bone Defects

This study assessed failures of allograft prosthesis composites (APC) and revisions with a new APC. Twenty-one patients with failed APC’s after revision hip arthroplasty with severe proximal femoral bone loss underwent revision with a new APC. Causes of failure were aseptic loosening (18 patients), infection (3 patients). Of these 21 APC revisions, two patients failed (after 60, 156 months). The 5 and 10 year survival rates were 83.5% (95% CI, 79–100%, number at risk 12 and 6 accordingly). In addition, two patients had non-union at the host-allograft bone junction and were augmented with bone autograft and plate. These results suggest that failed APCs may be revised to a new APC with a predictable outcome.     

Wagner SL股骨假体治疗复杂股骨近端骨折的疗效观察

目的探讨Wagner SL股骨假体治疗复杂股骨近端骨折的疗效。方法自2009-01—2015-05采用Wagner SL股骨假体治疗60例复杂股骨近端骨折,记录手术时间及出血量,采用髋关节功能Harris评分进行评价。结果手术时间45~200(95±27)min,术中出血400~1 500(600±240)ml,术后输血2~10 U悬浮红细胞。所有患者切口均一期愈合,术后假体位置佳。共50例获得随访2~68(34±19)个月,术前Harris评分35~75(58±10)分,末次随访Harris评分65~93(81±9)分,假体无明显松动,假体周围无透亮带、下沉。结论采用Wagner SL股骨假体治疗复杂股骨近端骨折疗效满意,值得临床推广。     

Wagner SL股骨柄治疗陈旧性或伴髋关节炎的股骨粗隆间骨折疗效观察

目的 :探讨Wagner SL股骨柄治疗陈旧性或伴痛性髋关节炎的股骨粗隆间骨折的临床疗效。方法 :自2006年1月至2009年12月对8例陈旧性粗隆间骨折及21例伤前有痛性关节炎的粗隆间骨折使用Wagner SL股骨柄行全髋关节置换并重建粗隆,其中男18例,女11例;年龄43~58岁,平均49岁。术后临床随访,根据Harris评分、肢体长度差异、髋关节活动范围以及髋外展肌力进行评价。影像学随访包括对股骨柄假体周围骨溶解、假体松动、透光线等进行评价。结果:29例患者均成功完成手术,未出现与髋关节置换手术相关的严重并发症。术后均获得随访,时间6~10年,平均8.2年。均无不可接受的大腿疼痛主诉。8例陈旧性粗隆间骨折患者术后首次行走时均有"手术侧肢体过长"抱怨,随时间推移,这种抱怨在明显减少。术后3个月X线片提示21例伤前痛性关节炎的粗隆间骨折愈合,平均术后6个月(3~8个月)X线片提示8例陈旧性粗隆间骨折患者的植骨块与粗隆有明显骨痂连接,末次随访时X线片均未提示假体明显下沉。髋关节活动度基本恢复正常,无髋外展无力。根据Harris评分方法,手术后6年以上对患髋关节进行评价,优18例,良9例,可2例。结论:Wagner SL股骨柄在治疗陈旧性或伴痛性髋关节炎患者粗隆间骨折的初次全髋关节置换中可取得优良的临床疗效,粗隆重建,有利假体和关节稳定,同时增加骨储备。     

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty With a Modular Cementless Femoral Stem

We retrospectively reviewed 123 patients who underwent cementless THA with modular femoral stem designs for revision THA or conversion of failed ORIF and found 75 patients available for analysis. The Harris Hip Score (HHS) improved from 52 ± 14 to 86 ± 11 (P < 0.001). The femoral stem was re-revised in eight patients (11%). The mean time to re-revision was 1.1 years (0.13–2.54). Reasons for re-revision included infection (n = 5, 7%), aseptic loosening (n = 2, 3%) and significant pain (n = 1, 1%). There were no failures of the modular junctions. PC stems had an increased rate of intraoperative fractures (PC 28% vs. STS 9%, P = 0.04). Modular cementless femoral stems provide acceptable mid-term results in revision THA.