Mancino Fabio, Cacciola Giorgio, Di Matteo Vincenzo, De Marco Davide, Greenberg Alexander, Perisano Carlo, Ma Malahias, Sculco Peter K, Maccauro Giulio, De Martino Ivan
Division of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Department of Aging, Neurological, Orthopaedic and Head- Neck Studies, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario Agostino Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2020 Jun 25;12(Suppl 1):8655. doi: 10.4081/or.2020.8655. eCollection 2020 Jun 29.
Revision total hip arthroplasty in the setting of acetabular bone loss is a challenging procedure and requires a solid understanding of current acetabular reconstruction options. Despite major developments in the field of revision hip surgery in recent decades, reconstruction of acetabular defects remains a major problem in order to achieve primary stability and durable fixation without sacrificing additional bone stock. Although there are several ways to classify acetabular bone defects, the Paprosky classification system is the most commonly used to describe the defects and guide treatment strategy. An understanding of the bone defects associated with detailed pre-operative assessment and planning are essential elements in order to achieve satisfactory outcomes. Multiple acetabular reconstructive options are currently available including impaction bone grafting with metal mesh, reinforcement rings and antiprotrusio cage, structural allografts, cementless hemispherical cups, extra-large "jumbo cups", oblong cups, modular porous metal augments, cup-cage constructs, custom- made triflange cups, and acetabular distraction. To date, debate continues as to which technique is most effective due to the lack of long-term studies of modern reconstruction systems. Further long-term studies are necessary to assess the longevity of the different implants. The purpose of this study was to review the current literature and provide a comprehensive understanding of the available reconstruction options with their clinical outcomes.
在髋臼骨缺损情况下进行全髋关节翻修术是一项具有挑战性的手术,需要对当前的髋臼重建选择有深入的了解。尽管近几十年来髋关节翻修手术领域取得了重大进展,但为了在不牺牲额外骨量的情况下实现初始稳定性和持久固定,髋臼缺损的重建仍然是一个主要问题。虽然有几种方法对髋臼骨缺损进行分类,但Paprosky分类系统是最常用的描述缺损和指导治疗策略的方法。了解与详细术前评估和规划相关的骨缺损是取得满意结果的关键要素。目前有多种髋臼重建选择,包括金属网打压植骨、加强环和防髋臼突出笼、结构性同种异体骨移植、非骨水泥半球形髋臼杯、超大号“巨型髋臼杯”、椭圆形髋臼杯、模块化多孔金属增强物、髋臼杯-笼结构、定制三翼髋臼杯以及髋臼撑开术。迄今为止,由于缺乏对现代重建系统的长期研究,关于哪种技术最有效仍存在争议。需要进一步的长期研究来评估不同植入物的使用寿命。本研究的目的是回顾当前文献,并全面了解可用的重建选择及其临床结果。