Zofka P
Ortopedicko-Urazové Oddelení Nemocnice Kladno.
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2006 Jun;73(3):190-6.
To evaluate the results of acetabular reconstruction in total hip replacement and to compare them in view of the use of autologous or allogenic solid bone grafts.
The author evaluates a group of 48 total hip replacements carried out in the years 1990-1999, in which solid bone graft was used for reconstruction of an insufficient acetabulum. In 25 hips, the patient's own femoral head was used in primary surgery and, in 23 hips, a frozen femoral head from a tissue bank was used in revision arthroplasty. Most of the acetabular components used in this study were cemented. The patients were evaluated at 5- to 15-year follow-up. Each group was assessed separately and the results were divided into three categories according to X-ray and intra-operative findings, as follows: I. No radiographic evidence of cup loosening and incorporated graft II. Loosened cup and incorporated graft suitable for use in reimplantation III. Loosened cup and graft non-union or resorption
In the autograft group, 80 % of the patients fell in category I and 12 % in category II; in the allograft group, 82 % of the patients were in category I and 9 % in category II. Complete failure, i.e., graft resorption and acetabular loosening, was recorded in 8 % and 9 % of group I and group II patients, respectively. Biopsy samples obtained during revision hip surgery showed good incorporation of both autografts and allografts.
Other authors' views on the function of solid bone grafts after implantation and on methods of treating a defective acetabulum are discussed. The author puts the good outcomes shown in this study down to a careful implantation technique and thorough preoperative planning.
By using a solid graft, the surgeon will achieve good primary fixation of a standard hip socket in a defective acetabulum and will make conditions for repair of defective bone tissue. The results imply that incorporation of both graft and acetabular component can be expected regardless of whether the graft is fresh or frozen. Although this method has its drawbacks and contraindications, it should be considered one of the options when planning total hip arthroplasty for an insufficient acetabulum.
评估全髋关节置换术中髋臼重建的结果,并根据自体或异体实体骨移植的使用情况进行比较。
作者评估了1990年至1999年间进行的48例全髋关节置换术,其中使用实体骨移植来重建髋臼不足。在25例髋关节中,患者自身的股骨头用于初次手术;在23例髋关节中,来自组织库的冷冻股骨头用于翻修关节成形术。本研究中使用的大多数髋臼组件是骨水泥固定的。对患者进行了5至15年的随访。对每组分别进行评估,并根据X线和术中发现将结果分为三类,如下:I. 无髋臼杯松动且移植骨融合的影像学证据;II. 髋臼杯松动且移植骨适合再次植入;III. 髋臼杯松动且移植骨不愈合或吸收。
在自体骨移植组中,80%的患者属于I类,12%属于II类;在异体骨移植组中,82%的患者属于I类,9%属于II类。I组和II组患者中分别有8%和9%记录为完全失败,即移植骨吸收和髋臼松动。翻修髋关节手术期间获取的活检样本显示自体骨和异体骨均融合良好。
讨论了其他作者关于植入后实体骨移植功能以及治疗髋臼缺陷方法的观点。作者将本研究中显示的良好结果归因于仔细的植入技术和全面的术前规划。
通过使用实体移植骨,外科医生将在有缺陷的髋臼中实现标准髋关节窝的良好初次固定,并为修复有缺陷的骨组织创造条件。结果表明,无论移植骨是新鲜的还是冷冻的,移植骨和髋臼组件都有望融合。虽然这种方法有其缺点和禁忌证,但在为髋臼不足计划全髋关节置换术时,应将其视为选择之一。