翻修术治疗髋关节置换术后感染

目的探讨髋关节置换术后感染的治疗方法，比较一期翻修与二期翻修的随访结果。方法1999年1月-2005年12月，收治15例髋关节置换术后感染患者。男10例，女5例；年龄54～71岁。左侧8例，右侧7例。初次行人工股骨头置换6例，全髋关节置换9例。术后1个月感染6例，6个月感染9例。患者体温均正常，周围血常规检查白细胞总数、中性多核细胞计数正常，血沉34～80mm／h，平均61mm／h，C反应蛋白11．7mg／L（5,4～21．0mg／L）。术前Harris评分25～40分，平均33分。X线片示患者股骨均有不同程度骨膜反应及骨溶解，假体柄有松动。前次手术距本次翻修术1～41个月，平均7．3个月。细菌培养提示11例阳性，其中8例为表皮葡萄球菌，2例为大肠埃希氏菌，1例为金黄色葡萄球菌。单纯清创或采用庆大霉素骨水泥一期翻修术10例，二期抗生素骨水泥假体翻修术5例。术中采集脓液或关节液进行细菌培养及药敏试验，组织标本行病理学检查。结果术中细菌培养结果与术前一致。病理学检查示均为炎性肉芽组织生长，并有大量多核细胞浸润。翻修术后患者切口均Ⅰ期愈合。患者获随访12～37个月，平均19个月，感染均未复发，局部软组织无肿胀和压痛。14例髋关节疼痛消失，1例行走时有轻微疼痛但不影响行走。Harris评分为79～92分，平均84．2分，与术前比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。术后6个月X线片示假体固定可靠，无明显松动迹象及骨溶解发生。结论髋关节置换术后感染，只要诊断明确，处理得当，一期翻修与二期翻修均可取得满意的临床疗效。     

Trochanteric union in revision hip arthroplasty

A total of 69 patients undergoing revision hip arthroplasty using a transtrochanteric approach who all had at least 1 previous transtrochanteric surgical approach. In 6 patients, it was the third time the trochanter was taken down, and in 2 patients, it was the fourth time. We believe this is the first review of trochanteric union in such a subgroup of patients. The mean age was 66 years (range, 46-82 years). Before revision, 49 of 69 patients (71%) had a united trochanter, whereas 20 of 69 (29%) had a pseudarthrosis. The overall pseudarthrosis rate decreased from 20 patients (29%) to 10 patients (14%) after revision surgery. The mean Harris hip score was 86 (range, 29-100). Repeated transtrochanteric osteotomy was not associated with any significant morbidity and did not affect the clinical outcome.     

Bipolar hip arthroplasty as a salvage treatment for instability of the hip

BACKGROUND: Recurrent instability of the hip in the absence of an identifiable cause is a challenging problem. It has been proposed that bipolar hip arthroplasty may have a role in the treatment of these complex cases. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the results of bipolar hip arthroplasty for the treatment of recurrent instability of the hip in a series of patients at our institution. METHODS: We reviewed the records of twenty-seven patients who had undergone bipolar hip arthroplasty as a salvage procedure for the treatment of recurrent instability of the hip after total hip replacement. All patients had undergone at least two, and a mean of three, stabilizing operative procedures on the hip prior to the bipolar arthroplasty. The mean duration of follow-up was five years (range, two to twelve years), with no patient lost to follow-up. There were six deaths, of unrelated causes. RESULTS: Bipolar arthroplasty prevented redislocation in twenty-two hips (81 percent). At the time of final follow-up, twenty-five patients (93 percent) had a stable hip. Five patients (19 percent) had had episodes of subluxation or dislocation following the bipolar arthroplasty. Two of these patients had only a single episode of dislocation that was treated successfully by immobilization. Two of the remaining three patients required a reoperation because of the instability. The hip was stabilized with the use of a constrained cup prosthesis in one of these patients, and the other patient eventually required resection arthroplasty. The third patient had continuing instability but improved function and pain relief, and a reoperation was not performed. There were a total of seven reoperations; these included revision because of disassembly of the cup in one hip, revision bipolar arthroplasty because of continuing instability in two, resection arthroplasty because of deep infection in two, revision arthroplasty because of recalcitrant groin pain in one, and revision arthroplasty because of deep infection and superior migration of the implant in one. The Harris hip score improved significantly, from a mean of 24 points (range, 5 to 45 points) preoperatively to a mean of 55 points (range, 35 to 80 points) postoperatively (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We believe that, despite some potential problems, bipolar hip arthroplasty can have a role in the salvage management of recurrent instability of the hip in patients in whom other stabilization procedures have failed.     

人工髋关节置换术后感染的临床经验分析

目的 总结人工髋关节感染的诊断及治疗方法。方法回顾性分析1975年5月至2004年12月收治的人工髋关节置换术后感染患者43例44髋的临床资料,其中男25例26髋,女18例18髋;本院感染病例16例16髋,外院感染病例27例28髋,平均年龄为54岁（24～81岁）。平均随访时间3年3个月（5个月～16年）。治疗包括：I期翻修7例,其中2例失败后行切除成形术;Ⅱ期翻修15例16髋,切除成形13例;保留假体清创5例;抗生素治疗、髋关节融合和截肢各1例。43例患者中40例术前和术中培养阳性,共培养出59株细菌,其中表皮葡萄球菌19株,金黄色葡萄球菌10株。结果术后随访36例,感染均无复发。29例进行术后Harris评分,平均为78．5分（45～98分）。结论人工髋关节置换术后感染诊断治疗均很困难,细菌毒力高、耐药率高,治疗时应予以重视,治疗方法选择应根据具体情况而定,以Ⅱ期翻修较为理想。     

The fate of revised uncemented acetabular components in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

The results of patients with rheumatoid arthritis who had revision hip arthroplasty have been studied infrequently. The purpose of this study was to review the authors' clinical and radiographic experiences and outcomes with revision hip arthroplasty. Revision total hip arthroplasties were done on 28 patients (30 hips). All hips had morselized bone grafting and four hips had bulk allografts for segmental defects. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 50 years (range, 20-74 years). Patients were followed up for 4 to 15 years (mean, 7 years). At the latest followup, 14 hips (13 patients) of the 30 hips (47%) had good and excellent Harris hip score ratings. Mechanical failures included six hips (five patients) that had revision arthroplasty and two hips (two patients) that had resection arthroplasty. Six other hips (five patients) had poor Harris hip score ratings. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship curve for failure of the acetabular component revealed an 89% chance of survivorship curve for failure of the acetabular component revealed an 89% chance of survival at 60 months and a 44% chance of survival at 108 months. Based on the results of this study, revision hip arthroplasty for acetabular loosening with a cementless acetabular prosthesis has a low rate of success in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.     

Surgical treatment of limb-length discrepancy following total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: Although most patients with limb-length discrepancy following total hip arthroplasty have manageable symptoms, others may be disabled as a result of pain or functional impairment. In these patients, reoperation may be indicated to equalize the limb lengths. There is a paucity of published data regarding the outcome of surgical intervention to treat this problem. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the results of revision hip surgery for the treatment of symptomatic limb-length discrepancy. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and radiographic records of patients who had undergone revision hip surgery at our institution for the treatment of a symptomatic limb-length discrepancy following a previous total hip arthroplasty. We identified twenty-one patients (twenty-one hips) who had an average age of sixty-six years at the time of revision hip arthroplasty. The average duration of follow-up was 2.8 years, and no patient was lost to follow-up. The indications for revision hip arthroplasty were severe hip and/or back pain for eleven patients, instability of the hip for eight, hip pain and ipsilateral limb paresthesia for one, and hip pain and ipsilateral foot drop for one. RESULTS: Revision arthroplasty was performed at a mean of eight months (range, six days to six years) after primary total hip replacement. The mean limb-length discrepancy at the time of the revision was 4 cm (range, 2 to 7 cm). Following revision arthroplasty, which involved revision of a malpositioned acetabular and/or femoral component, equalization of the limb lengths was achieved in fifteen patients. In the remaining six patients, the mean discrepancy had decreased to 1 cm. The mean Harris hip score improved significantly, from 56.5 points before the revision to 83.2 points at the time of the latest follow-up (p < 0.005). All but two patients were satisfied with the outcome of the revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Limb-length discrepancy following hip arthroplasty can be associated with pain, paresthesia, and hip instability. In these patients, careful evaluation of the position and orientation of the components may reveal the cause of the discrepancy. Revision arthroplasty may be indicated when a surgically correctable cause of limb-length discrepancy can be identified.     

病灶清除植骨保留髋臼假体的翻修术治疗假体周围局灶性骨溶解

目的 探讨病灶清除植骨保留髋臼假体的翻修术治疗全髋关节置换(total hip arthroplasty,THA)术后稳定固定的髋臼假体周围局灶性骨溶解的疗效.方法 2006年3月至2009年3月,THA术后髋臼假体稳定固定的假体周围局灶性骨溶解患者23例(23髋),男13例,女10例;年龄39～54岁,平均46.6岁.23例均为非骨水泥髋臼.初次THA至诊断髋臼假体周围骨溶解的时间为4.6～7.4年,平均5.5年.术前HarTis髋关节评分74分.手术经腹股沟入路,行髂骨内板开窗,清除髋臼骨溶解病灶、同种异体颗粒骨植骨;经后外侧人路更换聚乙烯内衬、股骨头假体,保留髋臼假体.翻修术后1、3、6、12个月及之后每年随访1次,以髋关节Harris评分评价临床疗效,摄X线片、CT扫描观察植骨区愈合、新发骨溶解病灶及假体移位情况.结果 16例获得随访,随访时间8～38个月,平均28个月.末次随访时Harris髋关节评分86～100分,平均93.8分.16例植骨区成骨均良好,12例植骨区完全被周围骨爬行替代,髋臼假体固定好,无髋臼假体松动及移位,无新发髋臼假体周围骨溶解,无异位骨化、脱位、深静脉血栓形成及感染等并发症.结论 清除病灶植骨、保留髋臼假体、更换聚乙烯内衬和股骨头假体的翻修术可有效减少聚乙烯磨损颗粒产生,避免骨溶解病灶进展导致的假体松动,近期随访结果良好.     

Ten- to twelve-year follow-up of the furlong hydroxyapatite-coated femoral stem and threaded acetabular cup in patients younger than 65 years

We reviewed 82 patients who had 92 primary Furlong uncemented hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated total hip replacements inserted between 1988 and 1992. All patients had the Furlong HA-coated stem and screw in acetabular cup with a 28-mm alumina oxide ceramic modular head. The mean age at the time of primary total hip arthroplasty was 54 years (range, 31-67 years). At 10 years, we reviewed 64 patients (72 total hip arthroplasties). Eight had died (10 total hip arthroplasties), 3 could not attend for follow-up, 2 were lost to follow-up, and 5 were revised (2 for infection and 3 for acetabular loosening and recurrent dislocation). We conclude that the Furlong HA-coated total hip replacement is a good prosthesis for patients younger than 65 years, with a cumulative survival rate of 94.29% at 10 to 12 years using revision as the end point.     

髋关节置换术后假体周围感染的治疗

目的 探讨髋关节置换术后假体周围感染患者接受清创术、一期翻修术、二期翻修术及旷置术的临床效果.方法 1993年6月至2008年6月因髋关节置换术后假体周围感染接受手术治疗患者46例,男27例,女19例;年龄34～80岁,平均55.8岁.术前诊断感染的方法包括红细胞沉降率、C反应蛋白检查,放射性核素扫描,窦道分泌物及关节穿刺液培养.行保留假体的清创术7例,一期翻修术14例,二期翻修术21例,旷置术4例.术后观察伤口外观,随访时采用Harris评分对髋关节功能进行评估,行实验室检查确定感染控制情况.结果 46例假体周围感染患者中29例培养结果 阳性,表皮葡萄球菌占感染病原体的首位(37.9%),其次为金黄色葡萄球菌(24.2%).35例获得随访,随访时间12～179个月,平均61.6个月.末次随访时Harris评分2～99分,平均76.5分.清创术后假体周围感染的控制率为16.7%,一期翻修术为54.5%,二期翻修术为93.3%,旷置术为100%.二期翻修术后假体周围骨折发生率13.3%,术后脱位率13.3%.11例感染复发,复发时间为感染治疗术后2～127个月,平均39.5个月.其中10例再次接受手术治疗,包括清创术1例、二期翻修术8例、旷置术1例.结论 清创术与一期翻修术的选择应严格把握适应证.二期翻修术感染控制率高,但有发生假体周围骨折和脱位的风险.表皮葡萄球菌及金黄色葡萄球菌足关节感染的主要病原菌.     

髋关节置换术后假体周围感染的治疗

目的 探讨髋关节置换术后假体周围感染患者接受清创术、一期翻修术、二期翻修术及旷置术的临床效果.方法 1993年6月至2008年6月因髋关节置换术后假体周围感染接受手术治疗患者46例,男27例,女19例;年龄34～80岁,平均55.8岁.术前诊断感染的方法包括红细胞沉降率、C反应蛋白检查,放射性核素扫描,窦道分泌物及关节穿刺液培养.行保留假体的清创术7例,一期翻修术14例,二期翻修术21例,旷置术4例.术后观察伤口外观,随访时采用Harris评分对髋关节功能进行评估,行实验室检查确定感染控制情况.结果 46例假体周围感染患者中29例培养结果 阳性,表皮葡萄球菌占感染病原体的首位(37.9%),其次为金黄色葡萄球菌(24.2%).35例获得随访,随访时间12～179个月,平均61.6个月.末次随访时Harris评分2～99分,平均76.5分.清创术后假体周围感染的控制率为16.7%,一期翻修术为54.5%,二期翻修术为93.3%,旷置术为100%.二期翻修术后假体周围骨折发生率13.3%,术后脱位率13.3%.11例感染复发,复发时间为感染治疗术后2～127个月,平均39.5个月.其中10例再次接受手术治疗,包括清创术1例、二期翻修术8例、旷置术1例.结论 清创术与一期翻修术的选择应严格把握适应证.二期翻修术感染控制率高,但有发生假体周围骨折和脱位的风险.表皮葡萄球菌及金黄色葡萄球菌足关节感染的主要病原菌.     

Complications and results of arthroplasty for salvage of failed treatment of malignant pathologic fractures of the hip

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results and complications of hip arthroplasty done for salvage of failed treatment of pathologic proximal femoral fractures secondary to malignancy. Between 1980 and 2000, 42 patients with a mean age of 63 years were treated with hip arthroplasty to salvage failed treatment of a pathologic proximal femoral fracture. Total hip arthroplasty was done in 16 patients (3 uncemented, 2 hybrid, 11 cemented), and bipolar hemiarthroplasty in 26 (2 uncemented, 24 cemented). A modular, proximal femoral replacement construct was used in 15 patients. Patients were followed a mean of 5.8 years (range, 15 days-20 years). Four hips required reoperation, all for deep infection. Harris Hip score improved from an average of 42 points (range, 17-76 points) preoperatively to an average of 83 points (range, 52-100 points) postoperatively. Most recent radiographs showed femoral component loosening in only one patient. Implant survivorship free of revision for any reason at 5 years was 90% (range, 65-96%) and free of revision for aseptic failure or radiographic failure was 97% (range, 64-99%). Hip arthroplasty is an effective treatment for salvage of failed treatment of pathologic proximal femoral fractures. Modular proximal femoral replacements were often required. The most concerning complication was deep prosthetic infection, which occurred in nearly 10% of this patient population, and in 21% of patients with prior irradiation.     

Total hip arthroplasty revision using the press-fit CLS Spotorno cementless stem

A retrospective study of uncemented femoral revision for loosening after total hip arthroplasty was conducted for the period 1987-1998. The study included 24 hips in 22 patients (7 men, 15 women). The revision procedure consisted of the replacement of the loose hip prosthesis using the CLS (Protek) press-fit stem. Patients were followed for a mean duration of 4.5 years. The mean interval between the primary operation and the revision was 10 years (range 2-16 years). Using the Merle D'Aubigné hip score and radiographic findings, a favorable outcome was noted in 20 hips. We suggest that the femoral revision procedure using the uncemented Spotorno stem is a very useful method of correction of loosening after total hip replacement.     

Implications of the changing pattern of bacterial infections following total joint replacements

PURPOSE: To retrospectively review the causative organisms isolated from infected hip and knee replacements requiring revision. METHODS: We reviewed a consecutive series of 36 patients who underwent revision hip or knee arthroplasties due to bacterial infection at Pamela Youde Nethersole Eastern Hospital in Hong Kong between 1995 and 2003. The male to female ratio was 1:2, and the mean age of patients was 70 years (range, 54-82 years). The mean duration of follow-up was 3.8 years (range, 1.1-8.3 years). No patient was lost to follow-up. All 14 revision knee patients had previously undergone cemented and patella-resurfacing total knee arthroplasties. Of the 22 revision hip patients, 9 had cementless, 6 had cemented, and 7 had hybrid total hip arthroplasties previously. RESULTS: None of the bacteria isolated from 1995 to 1996 were multiple-drug resistant. Subsequently, however, most of the isolates were multiple-drug resistant, with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) being the most common. Half of the isolates of Staphylococcus epidermidis and Escherichia coli demonstrated multiple-drug resistance. The incidence of positive culture in revision hip patients was 59%, 46% of which were MRSA. All 13 revision hips with positive cultures showed chronic sepsis: 4 occurred within one year and 10 occurred 2 or more years after the index arthroplasty. The incidence of positive culture in revision knee patients was 57%, 46% of which were MRSA. All 8 revision knees with positive cultures showed chronic sepsis: 3 occurred within one year, 5 occurred 2 or more years after the index arthroplasty. Only one patient, who was infected with gram-negative bacilli, required a second revision for residual sepsis. Harris hip scores for the revision hip patients improved from a mean of 65 (range, 55-75) to 85 (range, 75-90). Knee Society knee scores of the revision knee patients improved from a mean of 68 (range, 55-75) to 80 (range, 70-85). There were no radiological signs suggestive of loosening in the 2 groups at the latest follow-up. CONCLUSION: This study found a definite increase in multiple-drug-resistant bacteria isolated from periprosthetic infections around total hip and knee prostheses.     

Total hip arthroplasties: What are the reasons for revision?

Primary total hip arthroplasties have reported success rates of greater than 95% in many series with a longer than 10-year follow-up. Revision total hip arthroplasty due to such factors as increased high-activity levels, younger patients undergoing the procedure and increasing life expectancy has become more prevalent. An understanding of the mechanisms and timing of total hip arthroplasty failure can direct efforts aimed at reducing revision rates. This study was conducted to evaluate the indications for revision hip arthroplasty and relate these to the time after the index primary hip arthroplasty. A review of all revision hip arthroplasties at two centres over a 6-year time period identified 225 patients who underwent 237 revisions. The overall mean time to revision was 83 months (range: 0-360 months). The cause of failure was aseptic loosening in 123 hips (51.9%), instability in 40 hips (16.9%) and infection in 37 hips (5.5%). When stratified into two groups (less than 5 years, more than 5 years after the index primary hip arthroplasty), 118 of 237 (50%) revisions occurred in less than 5 years, with 33% due to instability and 24% resulting from infection. The majority of the causes of failure within 5 years in these early revisions were instability and deep infection. The success of hip arthroplasty is likely to be compromized if technical aspects of the surgery for appropriate component positioning and critical protocols to minimise complications such as infection are not given the proper attention.     

Contemporary total hip arthroplasty with and without cement in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head: a concise follow-up, at an average of seventeen years, of a previous report

We previously evaluated ninety-eight consecutive patients (148 hips) at mean of 9.3 years after total hip arthroplasty; the mean age at the time of the index surgical procedure was 47.3 years. Fifty patients (100 hips) had simultaneous bilateral arthroplasty with a cemented stem in one hip and a cementless stem in the contralateral hip. Forty-eight patients (forty-eight hips) had unilateral hip arthroplasty with a cementless stem. All patients had a cementless acetabular component. In our first report, we found no difference in clinical results, as measured with the Harris hip score and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), between the cementless and cemented stems. One hip (2%) in the hybrid group (a cementless cup and a cemented stem) had revision because of infection and two hips (2%) in the fully cementless group had revision of the femoral component because of a periprosthetic fracture. Between the time of follow-up in that study (at a mean of 9.3 years) and the time of follow-up in the present study (at a mean of 17.3 years), twenty-two revisions of acetabular components were performed, with eight in the hybrid group and fourteen in the fully cementless group. There was no difference in clinical results, as measured with the Harris hip score and the WOMAC, between the hybrid and fully cementless groups. At the time of the present review, forty (83%) of forty-eight acetabular components in the hybrid group and eighty (85%) of ninety-four acetabular components in the fully cementless group were intact. Most of the femoral components (98%) in both groups were intact. Wear and periacetabular osteolysis were the causes of failure in the hips requiring revision.     

Revision hip arthroplasty using strut allografts and fully porous-coated stems

At a minimum of 10 years after surgery, we prospectively evaluated the clinical and radiographic outcomes of revision total hip arthroplasties using cortical strut allografts and fully porous-coated cementless revision femoral components in patients with massive femoral bone deficiency. There were 21 men and 33 women (54 hips) in the series, with patients' mean age at the time of index revision being 54.6 years (range, 36 to 65 years). All femurs had 2 or 3 fresh-frozen femoral strut allografts. The Harris hip score improved from a mean of 21 points before revision surgery to a mean of 83 points at the latest case review. Two femoral stems (4%) had aseptic loosening and were revised. All allografts were predictably united to the host femur. On the basis of favorable results at a mean follow-up of 10.5 years, we recommend, as a salvage procedure, the use of fully porous-coated cementless femoral stems and strut allografts in revision surgery of the hip for massive femoral bone loss.     

金属骨小梁杯在髋臼翻修中的应用及随访

目的探讨设计新颖的组配式骨小梁金属杯在髋臼翻修中的早期效果。方法自2006年4月至2007年2月期间对24例髋臼假体翻修患者使用了骨小梁金属杯,共计25髋,女13例,男11例,平均年龄73．5岁。每个患者术前及术后6个月,1、2、3年,作X线拍片影像学随访,以及进行Harris髋关节（HHS）评分和（UCLA）活动评分。所有患者随访的临床及影像学资料完整。结果术后随访30—40个月（平均36个月）。Harris评分由翻修前的5～57分（平均33．6分）提高到术后的69～95分（平均92．4分）（t=3．943,P〈0．01）,UCLA评分由翻修前的2～5分（平均3．7）提高到术后的7～9分（平均8．6分）（t=3．910,P〈0．01）。影像学随访未见假体移位、下沉等不稳和松动迹象,骨小梁金属杯周围骨质向内长人。结论对于全髋置换手术（THA）中,初次用骨水泥固定的髋臼杯失败的患者,若无骨缺损,翻修时使用骨小梁金属杯可以获得良好的早期效果。     

Periprosthetic femoral fractures treated with a modular distally cemented stem

PURPOSE: To assess the treatment outcome of revision hip arthroplasty for Vancouver type B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures using a modular distally cemented stem. METHODS: 22 men and 14 women (37 hips) aged 66 to 79 (mean, 70) years underwent revision hip arthroplasty for Vancouver type B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures. The indication for surgery was periprosthetic fracture with stem loosening and loss of proximal bone stock. The patients were referred from other hospitals after previous surgeries had failed: 8 with 3 previous surgeries, 19 with 2, and 9 with one. Using a transtrochanteric approach, the existing prosthesis was removed and a modular proximal femoral replacement stem was inserted, bypassing the area of proximal femoral fracture and bone loss. The stem was distally cemented. Patients were immobilised within 48 hours of surgery. RESULTS: Patients were followed up for a mean of 14 (range, 8-18) years. The mean Harris hip score improved from 29 (range, 5-40) to 78 (range, 56-88); 24 patients attained excellent or good scores (>80), 10 attained fair, and 2 attained poor scores. The mean healing time was 7 (range, 6-14) months; there was no non-union. Improvement in proximal bone stock was noted on serial radiographs. None of the stems had cement fracture or migration, requiring revision. Two (5%) of the patients had dislocations. CONCLUSION: Vancouver type B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures can be successfully treated with a distally cemented modular proximal femoral replacement prosthesis.     

Treatment of deep infection of the hip associated with massive bone loss: two-stage revision with an antibiotic-loaded interim cement prosthesis followed by reconstruction with allograft

We have carried out in 24 patients, a two-stage revision arthroplasty of the hip for infection with massive bone loss. We used a custom-made, antibiotic-loaded cement prosthesis as an interim spacer. Fifteen patients had acetabular deficiencies, eight had segmental femoral bone loss and one had a combined defect. There was no recurrence of infection at a mean follow-up of 4.2 years (2 to 7). A total of 21 patients remained mobile in the interim period. The mean Merle D'Aubigné and Postel hip score improved from 7.3 points before operation to 13.2 between stages and to 15.8 at the final follow-up. The allograft appeared to have incorporated into the host bone in all patients. Complications included two fractures and one dislocation of the cement prosthesis. The use of a temporary spacer maintains the function of the joint between stages even when there is extensive loss of bone. Allograft used in revision surgery after septic conditions restores bone stock without the risk of recurrent infection.     

结构性植骨修复膝关节翻修术中严重骨缺损的临床效果及相关分析

目的探讨同种异体结构性植骨在膝关节翻修术中大块骨缺损中应用的临床效果和意义。方法1994～2001年芬兰坦佩雷大学医院应用单一翻修假体及同种异体骨结构性植骨治疗膝关节置换术大块骨缺损患者10例（膝）,男1例,女9例,平均年龄70岁（61—77岁）,平均随访5年（1～8年）,所有手术均由两名高年资专科医师执行,采取KSS评分评估术前术后膝关节功能。结果最后随访时,患者膝关节KSS评分由术前的平均39分（4～51分）提高至81分（28—102分;P〈0．05）;疼痛评分由术前的18分（0—30分）提高至42分（10—50分;P〈0．05）。2例出现假体周围透亮线（〈1mm）,但没有任何松动症状;所有结构性植骨均获得满意的愈合,最后随访时没有出现吸收征象,1例患者术后出现膝前疼痛,经髌骨表面置换后症状消失。结论同种异体骨结构性植骨应用在膝关节翻修术中大块骨缺损中可取得满意的临床效果,重建下肢力线、第三代骨水泥技术的应用及有由专科医师实施手术是获得良好临床效果的保证。