Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, North Hospital Saint-Étienne Teaching Medical Center, 42055 Saint-Étienne cedex 2, France.
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2011 Dec;97(8):807-13. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2011.09.010. Epub 2011 Nov 25.
The main causes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) revisions are loosening and instability. Dual mobility cups were introduced to prevent instability, but their behavior during revisions with acetabular reconstruction has not been assessed.
Use of a dual mobility cup cemented in a acetabular reconstruction cage device limits the risk of instability and does not hinder the acetabular fixation during THA revisions.
The objective of this study was to test this hypothesis on a retrospective series of 96 revisions.
At a mean follow-up of 41 months (range, 1-101 months), we analyzed a continuous series of 96 revisions using a reconstruction device (70 Kerboull™ cross-plates, six Burch-Schneider™ antiprotrusio cages, 20 custom-fit Novae ARM™ cages associated in all cases with a Novae Stick dual mobility cup cemented into the cage). Fifteen patients died at a mean follow-up of 22 months (range, 1-66 months) and four patients were lost to follow-up at a mean follow-up of 16 months (range, 9-27 months). These were acetabular revisons involving major bone loss, with 62 stage III and 26 stage IV cases on the SOFCOT classification. Eighty-seven patients (87.5%) underwent structural bone allografting.
The mean Merle d'Aubigné score increased from 9.6 ± 3.06 (range, 2-16) preoperatively to 15.5 ± 2.32 (range, 7-18) at the follow-up. Ten dislocations (10.4%) occurred, five of which were delayed over three months after the index procedure (5.2%), but there were no intraprosthetic dislocations. At the follow-up, the X-rays showed eight hardware failures, including one cross-plate fracture, one hook fracture, and one flange fracture. Analysis of the radiological position of the cup showed a mean lowering of 15.6mm and a 9.4mm lateralization compared to the preoperative position. One revision for aseptic loosening and another for septic loosening were performed. Taking all-cause acetabular component exchange as a criterion, the survival rate at 8 years was 95.6% (95% CI, 93.3-97.7%) and 99.3% (95% CI, 98.9-99.6%) if the endpoint was aseptic acetabular exchange.
This study confirms the advantage of dual mobility cups during acetabular reconstruction cemented in antiprotrusio cages as a way to limit, without eliminating, the risk of dislocation. Therefore cemented fixation of dual mobility cups in cages appears to be a reliable short-term option.
全髋关节置换术(THA)翻修的主要原因是松动和不稳定。双动杯的引入是为了防止不稳定,但它们在髋臼重建时的行为尚未得到评估。
使用在髋臼重建笼装置中固定的双动杯可降低不稳定的风险,并且不会在 THA 翻修期间阻碍髋臼固定。
本研究旨在通过对 96 例翻修的连续系列进行回顾性研究来检验这一假设。
在平均随访 41 个月(范围 1-101 个月)时,我们分析了 96 例使用重建装置(70 个 Kerboull™交叉板、6 个 Burch-Schneider™抗前突笼、20 个定制 fit Novae ARM™笼,所有情况下均在笼中固定了 Novae Stick 双动杯)的连续系列。15 例患者在平均随访 22 个月(范围 1-66 个月)时死亡,4 例患者在平均随访 16 个月(范围 9-27 个月)时失访。这些都是涉及大量骨丢失的髋臼翻修,SOFCOT 分类中有 62 例 III 期和 26 例 IV 期病例。87 例患者(87.5%)接受了结构性植骨。
术前 Merle d'Aubigné 评分平均为 9.6 ± 3.06(范围 2-16),随访时平均为 15.5 ± 2.32(范围 7-18)。发生了 10 例脱位(10.4%),其中 5 例在指数手术后三个月以上发生(5.2%),但没有发生假体内脱位。在随访时,X 射线显示有 8 例硬件故障,包括 1 例交叉板骨折、1 例钩骨折和 1 例法兰骨折。对杯的放射学位置进行分析显示,与术前位置相比,平均降低了 15.6mm,侧向移动了 9.4mm。进行了 1 次无菌性松动和 1 次感染性松动的翻修。以所有原因的髋臼部件置换为标准,8 年时的生存率为 95.6%(95%CI,93.3-97.7%),如果终点为无菌性髋臼置换,则为 99.3%(95%CI,98.9-99.6%)。
本研究证实了在抗前突笼中固定的双动杯在髋臼重建中的优势,可降低脱位风险,而不会消除脱位风险。因此,在笼中固定双动杯似乎是一种可靠的短期选择。