异体骨移植修复髋关节翻修术中骨缺损的中期随访

[目的]探讨在髋关节翻修中采用异体骨修复骨缺损的中期疗效.[方法]对2000～2005年间采用异体骨修复髋关节翻修术中骨缺损而获得随访的22例22髋进行回顾性分析,其中男13例,女9例;年龄45～80岁,平均65.5岁.根据AAOS分型:髋臼缺损I型5髋,II型14髋,III型3髋;股骨缺损I型3髋,II型12髋,III型2髋,5髋无明显缺损.骨缺损重建方法:髋臼侧结构性植骨5髋;颗粒骨植骨12髋;钛网联合颗粒骨植骨5髋.股骨侧结构性植骨3髋;颗粒骨植骨12髋;钛网联合颗粒骨植骨2髋;5髋没有植骨.根据Harris评分和X线对其临床效果进行评估.[结果]术后平均随访61个月,Harris评分由翻修前平均45分增加至术后86分.1例出现伤口渗液;1例仍轻度疼痛.未见假体移位及透亮带,没有再翻修病例.[结论]全髋翻修中,根据骨缺损类型,选用相应异体骨修复骨缺损,中期随访效果满意.     

辐照深冻异体骨打压植骨在髋臼翻修中的应用

目的 研究辐照深冻异体骨用于髋臼翻修中严重骨缺损的打压植骨重建的临床效果.方法 2006年2月至2009年1月髋关节翻修术中共有20例21髋应用打压植骨技术结合金属网重建严重髋臼侧骨缺损,18例19髋获得随访.患者翻修时平均年龄为64.4岁(43～81岁).采用Paprosky分型,本组患者均有髋臼骨缺损,其中PaproskyⅡB型4髋,PaproskyⅡC型8髋,PaproskyⅢA型5髋,PaproskyⅢB型2髋.手术用金属网修复髋臼节段性缺损,采用辐照深冻同种异体颗粒骨打压植骨结合骨水泥臼杯完成髋臼翻修.患者术后定期进行影像学和临床评估,观察手术前后髋关节Harris评分变化,假体移位松动及异体骨骨整合情况,及术中、术后并发症等.术前Harris评分平均42.5分(31～56分).术前疼痛评分平均14.4分(10～20分).结果 患者平均随访时间22.4个月(12～48个月).术后Harris评分提高到88.6分(82～96分).术后疼痛评分提高至平均42.3分(40～44分).并发症:术后感染1例,经清创愈合.股神经损伤1例,术后1年随访时已恢复正常.1例患者术后出现股骨近端外侧皮质吸收,大粗隆骨折.有1例Paprosky ⅢB型患者出现金属网及髋臼杯明显移位等影像学松动表现,其余18髋的髋臼假体稳定,未发现臼杯在垂直和水平方向大于1 mm的移位,也未发现髋臼假体外展角的改变;植骨层和宿主骨床可见连续骨小梁通过、移植骨与周围骨床骨密度趋向一致等骨整合表现.结论 金属网与打压植骨及骨水泥髋臼技术联合应用能有效地完成髋臼的生物学翻修.辐照深冻异体骨用于打压植骨能与周围骨床很好的整合.     

全髋关节翻修术中髋臼假体的选择和髋臼骨缺损的处理

目的探讨全髋关节翻修术中髋臼假体的选择和髋臼骨缺损的处理。方法2002年1月至2007年6月收治资料较完整的全髋关节翻修术患者共55例，其中行髋臼假体翻修术的患者有36例，男8例，女28例；年龄52～86岁，平均73岁。左髋13例，右髋23例。髋臼翻修原因：髋臼假体松动20例，髋臼和股骨假体均有明显松动12例；头臼不匹配2例；髋臼假体位置不良导致复发性脱位2例。髋臼骨缺损21例，按照美国矫形外科学会（AAOS）分类标准：Ⅰ型：节段性骨缺损6例；Ⅱ型：腔隙性骨缺损9例；Ⅲ型：混合型骨缺损6例。结果36例中，4例仅翻修髋臼侧假体，保留原股骨假体；3例更换了磨损严重的聚乙烯内衬，未予更换金属假体，其余29例均行全髋关节置换翻修术。髋臼骨缺损21例中，6例使用颗粒骨打压植骨＋骨水泥假体，2例为结构性和颗粒性打压植骨＋骨水泥假体，9例为结构性植骨＋颗粒打压植骨后，使用金属加强环＋骨水泥假体，1例为结构性植骨后，使用常规髋臼假体，3例仅对局部骨缺损部位进行植骨未予更换稳定的金属假体。随访时间6～68个月，平均39个月。Harris评分由术前的平均48分，提高至随访时平均89分。结论机械性磨损是人工髋关节松动翻修的主要原因；翻修时，假体的选择和骨缺损的处理要根据患者个体情况差异和术中具体情况综合考虑；周密的术前计划、准备多种类型髋臼假体供术中选择、充分自体和异体植骨是保证手术顺利进行的根本。     

颗粒骨移植处理人工全髋关节翻修中髋臼骨缺损

[目的]介绍髋臼翻修术中采用颗粒骨移植的方法处理骨缺损的体会.[方法]2001年1月～2004年12月,本院采用颗粒骨植骨行髋臼假体松动合并骨缺损的髋关节翻修术23例.男14例,女9例;年龄41～76岁,平均56.3岁.按美国骨科医师学会（AAOS）分类标准Ⅰ型5例;Ⅱ型12例;Ⅲ型5例;Ⅳ型1例.手术中假体骨水泥固定5例,非骨水泥固定18例.[结果]颗粒骨植骨术后X线检查骨愈合良好,包容假体牢固,原骨缺损区骨质得以修复.翻修前Harris评分平均为42分,术后随访平均为85分.[结论]髋臼翻修中采用自体或异体颗粒骨移植修复骨缺损,行挤压植骨可使颗粒骨与假体金属表面直接接触.观察证明移植颗粒骨生长好,达到了修复骨缺损和固定假体的目的.     

髋臼加强环联合同种异体骨植骨髋关节翻修的中期临床疗效观察

[目的]观察分析髋臼加强环联合同种异体骨植骨在严重髋臼骨缺损人工髋关节翻修术中的应用及临床疗效,探讨其在髋臼骨缺损重建中的作用。[方法]2010年3月~2015年2月,采用髋臼加强环联合同种异体骨植骨行髋关节翻修75例(87髋),67例患者79髋获得随访(失随访8例)。男39例,女28例;年龄45~72岁,平均59.2岁。初次置换至此次翻修时间为2~15年,平均10.3年。翻修原因:假体松动和骨溶解。术前髋关节功能Harris评分为(32.5±3.3)分。髋臼骨缺损按照美国骨科医师协会(AAOS)分型标准:Ⅲ型51髋,Ⅳ型28髋。[结果]67例患者79髋获得随访(失随访8例),随访时间3~60个月,平均32个月。术后切口Ⅰ期愈合,无股神经和坐骨神经损伤、下肢深静脉血栓形成等并发症发生。3例患者术后1个月发生髋关节脱位,2例腰麻下切开复位,1例手法复位后无再脱位。患者术后疼痛症状均明显缓解或消失,末次随访时髋关节Harris评分为(82.5±8.2)分,与术前比较差异有统计学意义(P=0.002)。X线片提示髋臼假体均无骨溶解、松动,所植异体骨与宿主骨融合,未见明显骨吸收区。[结论]采用髋臼加强环联合同种异体骨植骨技术,髋臼假体可获得满意的初始稳定,近期疗效满意,远期疗效尚需进一步观察。髋臼加强环联合同种异体骨植骨可成为严重髋臼骨缺损人工髋关节翻修时重建髋臼的方法之一。     

非骨水泥臼杯结合结构性骨移植修复髋臼骨缺损的临床应用

目的介绍非骨水泥髋臼假体结合结构性骨移植修复骨缺损及重建髋臼结构的方法及临床效果。方法回顾性分析25例（26髋）患者应用该方法修复骨缺损并重建髋臼骨性结构的临床经验。本组中翻修患者16例，初次置换患者9例；女性14例，男性11例，平均年龄56岁；根据美国骨科医师学会（AAOS）骨缺损分类法，所有患者的骨缺损均为节段型（AAOSI型）。臼杯置于真性髋臼水平后由于骨缺损均需进行结构性骨移植，植骨块来源于自体股骨头或冷冻干燥同种异体骨，植骨块覆盖假体面积均〈50％。平均随访时间5．2年（1，2～7．4年）。采用改良Harris评分对临床结果进行评估。术前及术后随访时均拍X线进行观察。结果所有植骨块均获得放射学上骨愈合。无植骨块塌陷或骨折，2髋的植骨块出现轻度的骨吸收。翻修患者无1例假体需再次翻修，初次置换患者均无临床髋假体松动症状，仅一例在X线上出现髋臼侧透亮线，但并无进行性增宽表现。改良Harris评分由术前平均50分提高到88分。结论使用非骨水泥臼杯结合结构性骨移植修复髋臼骨缺损是重建髋臼结构的有效方法之一，可获得满意的临床效果。该方法在植骨块覆盖假体面积〈50％时，髋臼假体可获得良好的固定，并有效恢复髋臼骨量。     

打压植骨结合金属网重建髋臼严重骨缺损

目的 评价打压植骨结合金属网重建严重骨缺损髋臼的中期临床效果,分析Paprosky骨缺损分型在评价骨缺损时的重要性.方法 1998年12月至2007年12月采用打压植骨技术结合使用金属网片和(或)金属网杯进行严重髋臼缺损重建63例(67髋),所有患者均为AAOS Ⅲ型混合型缺损.其中58例患者(61髋)获得了完整随访,平均63个月.Paprosky Ⅱ B 19例(20髋),Paprosky Ⅱ C 27例(28髋),Paprosky Ⅲ A 12例(13髋).术前Harris髋关节评分平均41.7分(21～52分).术后随访时进行临床疗效、影像学及并发症等评估.结果 58例(61髋)患者Harris髋关节评分术后平均89.2分(81～98分),术后优良率达93%,除3例发生聚乙烯髋臼从网杯中脱出外,其余55例患者髋臼无影像学松动.1例使用金属网杯患者髋臼旋转中心未能恢复正常.3例术后脱位患者,其中2例手法复位,1例切开复位,均获成功.术后发生感染1例(1.6%),经二期翻修打压植骨成功治愈.结论 异体骨打压植骨配合金属网是处理严重髋臼骨缺损的理想技术.建议在使用打压植骨技术对严重髋臼缺损重建时,采用AAOS分型结合Paprosky分型方法对缺损的严重程度进行评价.金属网杯不适用于严重髋臼骨缺损的打压植骨重建.     

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。     

全髋关节翻修术中髋臼骨缺损的重建

目的探讨全髋关节置换术（THA）后，翻修术中髋臼骨缺损重建的方法及疗效。方法对81例（84髋）在THA翻修术中处理的髋臼骨缺损患者进行回顾性分析，根据AAOS分型法，Ⅰ型7髋，Ⅱ型56髋，Ⅲ型17髋，Ⅳ型4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＋松质颗粒植骨等方法，对不同类型骨缺损的患者进行修复。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。结果对本组患者进行术后随访，平均随访45个月（13～118个月）。术后Harris评分平均86．2分，较术前平均改善40．6分。2髋因脱位需进行再翻修，其余效果良好，X线片无假体松动下沉，可见移植骨一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独特优势，具有良好的临床应用前景。     

螺旋臼在半髋关节置换术后翻修术中的应用

目的探讨螺旋臼在半髋关节置换术后髋臼翻修术中的应用。方法笔者自2007-01—2013-12采用Zweymüller螺旋臼对30例半髋关节置换术后患者行翻修术。股骨柄假体不松动者只翻修髋臼和更换股骨头,松动者髋臼和股骨柄均翻修。髋臼骨缺损少者采用稍大号的螺旋臼杯,骨缺损大者用同种异体骨颗粒填充缺损,反锉将骨粒压实,选用更大型号的螺旋臼杯。结果 2例感染患者取出假体一期抗生素骨水泥旷置、半年后二期翻修。翻修手术时间平均60(45~70)min,髋臼侧10例未植骨,20例颗粒植骨,均无进行结构性植骨。股骨粗隆部延展截骨12例;保留原股骨柄12例、翻修18例。所有患者均获得随访1.5~7年,平均3年。无下肢深静脉血栓形成及肺栓塞发生,翻修术后双下肢长度差异2 cm。未出现关节脱位、感染、假体松动。术后Harris评分65~90分,平均80分。结论针对半髋关节置换术后髋臼骨缺损的翻修,螺旋臼是个理想选择。螺旋臼旋入臼壁、避免结构性植骨,操作简单,降低手术难度,临床效果好。     

Acetabular revision total hip arthroplasty using an impacted morselized allograft and a cementless cup: minimum 10-year follow-up

This study was undertaken to analyze the clinical and radiologic results of acetabular revision arthroplasty using an impacted morselized allograft and a cementless cup and was performed on 71 hips of 62 patients who were followed up for a minimum of 10 years (10 years to 14 years 8 months; mean, 12 years). The acetabular bone defects were classified using the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Committee on the Hip and Paprosky classifications. Cementless hemispherical cups were inserted via a press-fit technique, using an impacted morselized allograft. The mean Harris hip score at the last follow-up visit was 92. Only 3 cases were re-revised, and the 12-year survival rate was thus 95.8%. The study shows that acetabular revision arthroplasty using an impacted morselized allograft and a cementless cup is an excellent treatment option.     

Cavitary acetabular defects treated with morselized cancellous bone graft and cementless cups

The use of impacted morselized cancellous bone grafts in conjunction with cementless hemispherical acetabular cups for treatment of AAOS type II acetabular cavitary deficiencies was evaluated in a retrospective study of 23 primary and 24 revision total hip arthroplasties, at a mean follow-up of 7.9 and 8.1 years, respectively. All primary hips received autografts, while all revision hips received allografts. Modified Harris Hip Scores for primary and revision hip replacements increased from a pre-operative mean of 37 and 47 to a postoperative mean of 90 and 86, respectively. All 23 autografts and 23 out of 24 cancellous allografts were radiographically incorporated without evidence of resorption. There were no instances of infection, component migration, or cases requiring subsequent acetabular revision. We conclude that impacted morselized cancellous bone-graft augmentation of cementless cups is a viable surgical option for AAOS type II cavitary acetabular defects.     

Revision total hip arthroplasty using a Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device with bone allograft: minimum 4.5-year follow-up results and mechanical analysis

We retrospectively reviewed 40 hips in 36 patients who had undergone acetabular reconstruction using a titanium Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device with bone allografts between May 2001 and April 2006. Impacted bone allografts were used for the management of American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Type II defects in 17 hips, and bulk bone allografts together with impacted allografts were used for the management of Type III defects in 23 hips. A total of five hips showed radiological failure at a mean follow-up of 6.7 years (4.5 to 9.3), two of which were infected. The mean pre-operative Merle d'Aubigné score was 10 (5 to 15) vs 13.6 (9 to 18) at the latest follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier survival rate at ten years, calculated using radiological failure or revision of the acetabular component for any reason as the endpoint, was 87% (95% confidence interval 76.3 to 97.7). A separate experimental analysis of the mechanical properties of the device and the load-displacement properties of bone grafts showed that a structurally hard allograft resected from femoral heads of patients with osteoarthritis should be preferentially used in any type of defect. If impacted bone allografts were used, a bone graft thickness of < 25 mm was acceptable in Type II defects. This clinical study indicates that revision total hip replacement using the Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device with bone allografts yielded satisfactory mid-term results.     

The incorporation of morselized bone grafts in cementless acetabular revisions

The treatment of large osteolytic lesions is a challenge during acetabular revisions. Periprosthetic bone loss can compromise the stability of new implants. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 5- to 10-year clinical and radiographic results of morselized bone grafting for acetabular osteolysis during cementless acetabular revisions. Ninety-nine patients (108 hips) who had an acetabular revision hip arthroplasty for osteolysis were retrospectively reviewed. There were 44 men and 55 women who had a mean age of 66 years. At the index revision, the acetabular defects were debrided of granulomatous tissue and packed tightly with morselized cancellous femoral head allograft. All the revision acetabular components were implanted using cementless fixation. At a mean followup of 85 months (range, 60-118 months), the results of 103 of 108 hips (95%) were clinically and radiographically successful. The mean preoperative Harris hip score was 37 points, which improved to a mean of 91 points at the last followup. All cavitary defects had complete radiographic incorporation of the bone grafts except for two lesions. The results of this study indicate that morselized bone graft incorporates into cementless acetabular revisions. This treatment method provided a stable reconstruction in 98% of patients at a mean of 7 years followup.     

Strukturelle Femurkopfallografts in der Revisionschirugie von gelockerten Hüftendoprothesenpfannen

BACKGROUND: Treatment of acetabular bone defects presents a great challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Many methods of acetabular reconstruction have been described. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the midterm results of structural femoral head allografts for acetabular reconstruction. METHODS: Thirty-six patients (33 females and 3 males) with acetabular defects ranging from type 2C to type 3B according to Paprosky's classification were included in the study. In all cases acetabular defects were closed using allografts from femoral heads. In 13 cases an uncemented press-fit cup, in 17 cases a cemented polyethylene socket, and in 6 cases a Burch-Schneider antiprotrusion cage was implanted. The mean follow-up period was 84.2 months (range: 5-147). RESULTS: Four acetabular components failed. All 36 grafts were osseointegrated radiographically and formed a mechanically stable construction. The mean Harris Hip Score at the most recent follow-up was 79.8 points. The distance from the obturator line to the prosthesis head center was 3.73 cm (1.17-5.80 cm) preoperatively and 2.79 cm (0.85-4.8 cm) postoperatively (p<0.05). The distance from the teardrop figure to the prosthesis head center was 3.02 cm (1.0-5.8 cm) preoperatively and 3.25 cm (1.6-4.8 cm) postoperatively (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Closure of acetabular defects of types 2C to 3B according to Paprosky's classification can be satisfactorily accomplished using femoral head allografts. These allografts may facilitate future revision surgery. Femoral heads are readily available due to widespread primary total hip replacement surgery. However, the use of structural femoral head allografts for acetabular reconstruction is cost intensive. Individual patient-related aspects, such as the function of revision arthroplasty, have to be considered when planning revision arthroplasty using femoral head allografts.     

Jumbo cups for revision of acetabular defects after total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective review of a case series

The treatment of acetabular bone defects presents a great challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcome of revision THA using jumbo cups for acetabular reconstruction after applying the bone-grafting technique. We studied 17 patients with acetabular defects ranging from Type 2A to Type 3A according to Paprosky`s classification. According to the AAOS-score twelve patients were classified as Type II and five patients as Type III. Uncemented press-fit cups with an outer diameter larger than 64 mm were used in all cases. Fifteen patients received morselized bone allografts. In eight patients an additional screw fixation was necessary. The mean follow-up period was 82 months (range 33–149). The mean Harris Hip Score was preoperatively 62 and at the time of the last follow-up examination 83 points (p = 0.007). Two acetabular components failed, one due to aseptic loosening and another one due to septic loosening. There was a trend of displacement of the femoral head centre towards the infero-lateral position after using jumbo cups that approached statistical significance (p = 0.065). Closure of acetabular defects of Types 2A to 3A according to Paprosky’s classification and type II to III according to the AAOS-score respectively can be satisfactorily accomplished using jumbo cups after applying the bone-grafting technique.     

Reconstruction of Acetabular Defects With Impaction Grafting in Primary Cemented Total Hip Arthroplasty Produces Favorable Results: Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes Over 6.4 Years on Average

BackgroundCemented primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) associated with acetabular reconstruction (AR) involving impacted bone grafting has been employed successfully in the revision of cavitary defects but the results are reportedly less predictable for segmental defects. The objective of the study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic results of patients who had presented cavitary, segmental, and combined acetabular defects and received THA/AR involving impacted morselized cancellous bone autografts followed by rigorous postoperative management.MethodsClinical outcomes were assessed retrospectively of 154 patients who had been submitted to 169 THA/AR procedures performed by a single surgeon over a 15-year period. The Harris Hip Score system was applied to 103 patients, and the degree of acetabular migration was determined from radiograph images of 91 AR procedures, of which 40 were segmental/combined and 51 were cavitary reconstructions.ResultsThe frequency of aseptic acetabular loosening was 3% while that of thromboembolic events was 4.1%. According to Harris Hip Score, 87.4% of outcomes were classified as excellent/good after an average follow-up period of 6.4 years irrespective of the type of acetabular defect. Horizontal and/or vertical acetabular migrations and changes in angular tilt were observed in all ARs, although the minor movements detected did not undermine the structural stability of the reconstructions or the functional capacity of patients.ConclusionThe described THA/AR technique can be used effectively in the reconstruction of segmental/combined and cavitary acetabular defects. The success of the technique as applied to segmental/combined defects was attributed in part to the rigorous rehabilitation protocol with temporary postoperative weight-bearing restriction.     

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.     

异体骨移植在髋关节翻修术中应用的1O年随访

目的探讨异体骨移植在髋关节翻修术中应用的长期效果。方法自1997年6月至2000年12月,共进行15例15髋髋关节翻修术,得到随访13例13髋,男9例9髋,女4例4髋;左侧8髋,右侧5髋;平均年龄53岁（45-65岁）;初次置换术后至翻修时间4年8个月-11年9个月（平均9年2个月）;骨缺损情况：髋臼和股骨缺损均按AAOS分类,髋臼缺损Ⅰ型6髋,Ⅱ型5髋,Ⅲ型2髋;股骨缺损Ⅰ型5髋,Ⅱ型4髋,Ⅲ型3髋,无明显缺损1髋。手术采用髋关节后外侧切口,髋臼侧用髋臼锉打磨修整,将异体骨粒植入骨缺损区,打压塑形;2髋安放加大的生物型髋臼假体,11髋安上钛网杯或加强臼杯,螺钉固定后行骨水泥固定臼假体。股骨侧,假体应长于原假体的长度;尽可能保存股骨结构,以颗粒骨填入髓腔以获得重建;如缺损严重采用1-3块异体骨块放置于缺损区,骨块应长于缺损区2-3cm。术后1周,3个月,6个月,12个月,以后每年一次摄X片观察假体的变化。结果本组13例13髋随访时间10-12.5年（平均11年5个月）。Harris评分由翻修前43分（41-47分）提高至87分（85-89分）。影像学,2髋股骨柄假体术后两年出现垂直移位,1髋10mm,另1髋20mm,以后没有继续发展,11年后假体仍然稳定,无松动;宿主骨与颗粒骨的骨整合血管化,术后6个月出现并不断进行至2年左右完成,但宿主骨与块状骨的整合血管化时间要在5年以上,有5例在术后8年仍可辩认出骨块;2例在术后10年,1例在术后12年仍可清晰地辩认出部份骨块,而其余骨块己完全整合血管化。结论在髋关节翻修术中,应用同种异体骨修复骨缺损,为假体提供可靠的、充分的支撑,已成为必要的技术手段。骨的改建过程,视乎个体的特性,宿主骨的保有量,植入骨的多少等条件而定,一般在术后1-2年,部份患者超过10年。