Lachiewicz Paul F, O'Dell Jane Anne
Chapel Hill Orthopedics Surgery & Sports Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2018 Feb;476(2):336-342. doi: 10.1007/s11999.0000000000000005.
The best method for acetabular revisions in patients with severe bone loss remains controversial; typical approaches include jumbo cups, cages, cup-cages, and custom components. Tantalum (TM) components have good results at midterm followup, but the longer term survival and complications are not available. We previously reported on a series of such reconstructions; here we provide additional followup on that group along with a larger study cohort.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What is the survival at a minimum followup of 5 years of these components implanted in difficult revisions and what is the mechanism of failure? (2) What is the most common complication of these reconstructions, and what hip scores did these patients achieve?
Between 2001 and 2010, one surgeon performed 150 acetabular revisions, of which 74 (49%) were done using TM components. The general indication for use of these devices was the surgeon's perception that there was sufficient bone loss to place the reconstruction at a high risk of mechanical failure (generally Paprosky Type 3 or 4 or lower Paprosky type with < 50% host bone coverage or morbid obesity). No cages were used during this time. Fifteen patients died and 11 were lost or did not return, leaving 48 hips (46 patients) with a mean followup of 8 years (range, 5-14 years). Of these, 39 were reported on in our previous series, and nine are new in the present series; the overall group here has an additional median of 5 years followup (range, 3-7 years). Five hips had six augments placed to obtain stability. Patients were evaluated by the Harris hip score and standard radiographs; survivorship was estimated using the cumulative incidence competing risks survival analysis. The primary outcome was fixation and survival of the TM component and the secondary outcome was complications.
Cumulative incidence competing risks estimate survival free from aseptic loosening was 92% at 10 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81-0.98). Dislocation, the most common complication, occurred in seven of 48 (15%) patients, and five of 48 (10%) had a reoperation for it. Survival free from any reoperation was 84% at 10 years (95% CI, 0.72-0.92). The Harris hip score improved from a mean of 50 points (SD 17) before surgery to 85 points (SD 10; p < 0.001) at latest followup.
Given the findings of this study, TM components appear to provide durable fixation at midterm followup in complex acetabular revisions. Steps to minimize dislocation, the most frequent complication of these revisions, may include the routine use of larger femoral heads. Future studies likely will need to be multisurgeon or multicenter and should evaluate different techniques and components for long-term fixation and the prevention of dislocation.
Level IV, therapeutic study.
严重骨量丢失患者髋臼翻修的最佳方法仍存在争议;典型的方法包括使用超大号髋臼杯、髋臼笼、杯笼组合以及定制假体。钽(TM)假体在中期随访时效果良好,但长期生存率及并发症情况尚不清楚。我们之前报道过一系列此类翻修手术;在此,我们对该组患者进行了额外随访,并纳入了更大的研究队列。
问题/目的:(1)在困难翻修手术中植入的这些假体,至少随访5年时的生存率如何,失败机制是什么?(2)这些翻修手术最常见的并发症是什么,这些患者的髋关节评分如何?
2001年至2010年期间,一名外科医生进行了150例髋臼翻修手术,其中74例(49%)使用了TM假体。使用这些假体的总体指征是外科医生认为骨量丢失严重,重建手术存在较高机械失败风险(一般为Paprosky 3型或4型,或更低Paprosky分型且宿主骨覆盖<50%,或病态肥胖)。在此期间未使用髋臼笼。15例患者死亡,11例失访或未返回,剩余48髋(46例患者),平均随访8年(范围5 - 14年)。其中,39例曾在我们之前的系列报道中提及,本系列中有9例为新增病例;总体队列在此基础上又增加了5年的中位随访时间(范围3 - 7年)。5髋使用了6枚增强装置以获得稳定性。通过Harris髋关节评分和标准X线片对患者进行评估;采用累积发病率竞争风险生存分析估计生存率。主要结局是TM假体的固定和生存情况,次要结局是并发症。
累积发病率竞争风险估计10年无菌性松动生存率为92%(95%置信区间[CI],0.81 - 0.98)。脱位是最常见的并发症,48例患者中有7例(15%)发生脱位,其中5例(10%)因脱位接受了再次手术。10年无再次手术生存率为84%(95% CI,0.72 - 0.92)。Harris髋关节评分从术前平均50分(标准差17)提高到末次随访时的85分(标准差10;p < 0.001)。
基于本研究结果,TM假体在复杂髋臼翻修的中期随访中似乎能提供持久的固定。减少脱位(这些翻修手术最常见的并发症)的措施可能包括常规使用更大的股骨头。未来的研究可能需要多外科医生或多中心参与,并应评估不同技术和假体用于长期固定及预防脱位的效果。
IV级,治疗性研究。