Haddad F S, Garbuz D S, Masri B A, Duncan C P
Department of Orthopaedics, Vancouver General Hospital, British Columbia, Canada.
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2000 Aug;82(6):830-6. doi: 10.1302/0301-620x.82b6.10485.
There are few medium- and long-term data on the outcome of the use of proximal femoral structural allografts in revision hip arthroplasty. This is a study of a consecutive series of 40 proximal femoral allografts performed for failed total hip replacements using the same technique with a minimum follow-up of five years (mean 8.8 years; range 5 to 11.5 years). In all cases the stem was cemented into both the allograft and the host femur. The proximal femur of the host was resected in 37 cases. There were four early revisions (10%), two for infection, one for nonunion of the allograft-host junction, and one for allograft resorption noted at the time of revision of a failed acetabular reconstruction. Junctional nonunion was seen in three patients (8%), two of whom were managed successfully by bone grafting, and bone grafting and plating respectively. Instability was observed in four (10%). Trochanteric nonunion was seen in 18 patients (46%) and trochanteric escape in ten of these (27%). The mean Harris hip score improved from 39 to 79. Severe resorption involving the full thickness of the allograft was seen in seven patients (17.5%). This progressed rapidly and silently, but has yet to cause failure of any of the reconstructions. Profound resorption of the allograft may be related to a combination of factors, including a slow form of immune rejection, stress shielding and resorption due to mechanical disuse with solid cemented distal fixation, and the absence of any masking or protective effect which may be provided by the retention of the bivalved host bone as a vascularised onlay autograft. Although continued surveillance is warranted, the very good medium-term clinical results justify the continued use of structural allografts for failed total hip replacements with severe loss of proximal femoral bone.
关于在髋关节翻修术中使用股骨近端结构性同种异体骨的长期和中期疗效数据较少。本研究连续纳入了40例因全髋关节置换失败而进行股骨近端同种异体骨移植的病例,均采用相同技术,随访时间最短为5年(平均8.8年;范围5至11.5年)。所有病例中,假体柄均用骨水泥固定于同种异体骨和宿主股骨。37例患者切除了宿主的股骨近端。有4例早期翻修(10%),2例因感染,1例因同种异体骨与宿主骨结合处不愈合,1例因髋臼重建失败翻修时发现同种异体骨吸收。3例患者出现结合处不愈合(8%),其中2例分别通过植骨和植骨加钢板固定成功治疗。4例(10%)出现不稳定。18例患者(46%)出现转子不愈合,其中10例(27%)出现转子逃逸。Harris髋关节评分平均从39分提高到79分。7例患者(17.5%)出现累及同种异体骨全层的严重吸收。这种吸收进展迅速且无明显症状,但尚未导致任何重建失败。同种异体骨的严重吸收可能与多种因素有关,包括一种缓慢形式的免疫排斥、应力遮挡以及由于远端牢固骨水泥固定导致的机械性废用性吸收,并且缺乏保留双瓣宿主骨作为带血管蒂贴附自体骨可能提供的任何屏蔽或保护作用。尽管需要持续监测,但中期良好的临床结果证明在股骨近端严重骨丢失的全髋关节置换失败病例中继续使用结构性同种异体骨是合理的。