Top

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

Published in:

01-10-2012 | Hip Arthroplasty

Impaction bone grafting for femoral revision hip arthroplasty with Exeter Universal stem in Japan

Authors: Toshiki Iwase, Hiromi Otsuka, Naoyuki Katayama, Hiroshi Fujita

Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery | Issue 10/2012

Abstract

Objectives

The purpose of the present study was to analyze the retrospective clinical and radiographic results of femoral revision arthroplasties with impaction bone grafting performed by experienced Japanese surgeons.

Patients and methods

We investigated the radiographic and clinical records more than 2 years after the surgery in 99 hips of 93 patients. The average age was 66.3 years (36–84 years) and the average follow-up period was 5.2 years (2–13 years). The Merle d’Aubigné and Postel hip score was used for clinical assessment, and peri-operative fractures were recorded. The survival curve was estimated using Kaplan–Meier method.

Results

The mean Merle d’Aubigné and Postel hip score improved from 9.0 points to 15.2 points at the final follow-up. Augmentations for segmental defect of femoral cortices were undertaken in 55 hips. Metal or strut allograft plates were applied to 9 hips and 21 hips, respectively. Intra-operative fractures or perforations occurred in 20 hips. Re-operations of the femur were undertaken in nine hips including five post-operative femoral fractures. More than 5 mm of subsidence was observed in only 2 hips. The survival rates at 8 years after the operation were 94.8 % with femoral fractures as the end point, 93.1 % with any stem removal or exchange as the end point, and 99.0 % with aseptic stem loosening as the end point, respectively.

Conclusion

The present study showed encouraging mid-term results of impaction bone grafting for femoral revision arthroplasty by experienced surgeons in Japan. Aggressive augmentation of segmental defects and attenuated femoral shafts prevents massive stem subsidence and periprosthetic fracture.

Gie GA, Linder L, Ling RS et al (1993) Impacted cancellous allografts and cement for revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Br 75B:14–21

Lind M, Krarup N, Mikkelsen S et al (2002) Exchange impaction allografting for femoral revision hip arthroplasty: results in 87 cases after 3.6 years’ follow-up. J Arthroplast 17:158–164CrossRef

Ullmark G, Hallin G, Nilsson O (2002) Impacted corticocancellous allografts and cement for revision of the femur component in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 17:140–149CrossRef

Halliday BR, English HW, Timperley AJ et al (2003) Femoral impaction grafting with cement in revision total hip replacement. Evolution of the technique and results. J Bone Jt Surg Br 85B:809–817

Ornstein E, Franzén H, Johnsson R et al (2004) Hip revision using the Exeter stem, impacted morselized allograft bone and cement: a consecutive 5 year radiostereometric and radiographic study in 15 hips. Acta Orthop Scand 75:533–543PubMedCrossRef

Mahoney CR, Fehringer EV, Kopjar B et al (2005) Femoral revision with impaction grafting and a collarless, polished, tapered stem. Clin Orthop Relat Res 432:181–187PubMedCrossRef

Schreurs BW, Arts JJ, Verdonschot N et al (2005) Femoral component revision with use of impaction bone-grafting and a cemented polished stem. J Bone Jt Surg Am 87A:2499–2507CrossRef

Wraighte PJ, Howard PW (2008) Femoral impaction bone allografting with an Exeter cemented collarless, polished, tapered stem in revision hip replacement: a mean follow-up of 10.5 years. J Bone Jt Surg Br 90B:1000–1004

Ornstein E, Linder L, Ranstam J et al (2009) Femoral impaction bone grafting with the Exeter stem—the Swedish experience: survivorship analysis of 1,305 revisions performed between 1989 and 2002. J Bone Jt Surg Br 91B:441–446

10.

Meding JB, Ritter MA, Keating EM et al (1997) Impaction bone-grafting before insertion of a femoral stem with cement in revision total hip arthroplasty. A minimum two-year follow-up study. J Bone Jt Surg Am 79A:1834–1841

11.

Cabanela ME, Trousdale RT, Berry DJ (2003) Impacted cancellous graft plus cement in hip revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res 417:175–182PubMed

12.

Farfalli GL, Buttaro MA, Piccaluga F (2007) Femoral fractures in revision hip surgeries with impacted bone allograft. Clin Orthop Relat Res 462:130–136PubMedCrossRef

13.

Sierra RJ, Charity J, Tsiridis E et al (2008) The use of long cemented stems for femoral impaction grafting in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 90A:1330–1336CrossRef

14.

Kim Y-H (2004) Cemented revision hip arthroplasty using strut and impacted cancellous allografts. J Arthroplast 19:726–732CrossRef

15.

Yim SJ, Kim MY, Suh YS (2007) Impaction allograft with cement for the revision of the femoral component. A minimum 39 month follow-up study with the use of the Exeter stem in Asian hips. Int Orthop 31:297–302PubMedCrossRef

16.

Steinbrink K (1987) Procedure in extensive or complete loss of bone substance of the femur following shaft loosening. Orthopade 16:277–286 In GermanPubMed

17.

Dall D (1986) Exposure of the hip by anterior osteotomy of the greater trochanter. A modified anterolateral approach. J Bone Jt Surg Br 68B:382–386

18.

Gie GA, Ling RSM (1998) Femoral bone grafting: intramedullary impaction grafting. In: Steinberg ME, Garino JP (eds) Revision total hip arthroplasty. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 281–297

19.

Schreurs BW, Arts JJ, Verdonschot N (2006) Femoral component revision with use of impaction bone-grafting and a cemented polished stem. Surgical technique. J Bone Jt Surg Am 88A(Suppl 1 Pt 2):259–274CrossRef

20.

Leone WA Jr, Naughton M, Gratto-Cox G et al (2008) The effect of preoperative planning and impaction grafting surgical technique on intraoperative and postoperative complication rate for femoral revision patients with moderate to severe bone loss mean 4.7 year results. J Arthroplast 23:383–394CrossRef

21.

Lee G-C, Nelson CL, Virmani S et al (2010) Management of periprosthetic femur fractures with severe bone loss using impaction bone grafting technique. J Arthroplast 25:405–409CrossRef

22.

Bolder SB, Schreurs BW, Verdonschot N et al (2004) The initial stability of an Exeter femoral stem after impaction bone grafting in combination with segmental defect reconstruction. J Arthroplast 19:598–604CrossRef

23.

Merle d’Aubigne′ R, Postel M (1954) Functional results of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 36A:451–475

24.

Fowler JL, Gie GA, Lee AJC, Ling RSM (1988) Experience with the Exeter total hip replacement since 1970. Orthop Clin N Am 19:477–489

25.

Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC (1979) “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–27PubMed

26.

Kaplan EL, Meier P (1958) Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53:457–481CrossRef

27.

Duncan CP, Masri BA (1995) Fractures of the femur after hip replacement. Instr Course Lect 44:293–304PubMed

28.

Chandler HP, Ayres DK, Tan RC et al (1995) Revision total hip replacement using the S-ROM femoral component. Clin Orthop Relat Res 319:130–134PubMed

29.

Ling RS, Timperley AJ, Linder L (1993) Histology of cancellous impaction grafting in the femur. A case report. J Bone Jt Surg Br 75B:693–696

30.

Nelissen RG, Bauer TW, Weidenhielm LR et al (1995) Revision hip arthroplasty with the use of cement and impaction grafting. Histological analysis of four cases. J Bone Jt Surg Am 77A:412–422

31.

Mikhail WE, Weidenhielm LR, Wretenberg P et al (1999) Femoral bone regeneration subsequent to impaction grafting during hip revision: histologic analysis of a human biopsy specimen. J Artheoplast 14:849–853CrossRef

32.

Ullmark G, Obrant KJ (2002) Histology of impacted bone-graft incorporation. J Arthroplast 17:150–157CrossRef

33.

Ling RS, Charity J, Lee AJ et al (2009) The long-term results of the original Exeter polished cemented femoral component: a follow-up report. J Arthroplast 24:511–517CrossRef

34.

Lewthwaite SC, Squires B, Gie GA et al (2008) The Exeter Universal hip in patients 50 years or younger at 10–17 years’ followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:324–331PubMedCrossRef

35.

Kaneuji A, Yamada K, Hirosaki K et al (2009) Stem subsidence of polished and rough double-taper stems. In vitro mechanical effects on the cement-bone interface. Acta Orthopaedica 80:270–276PubMedCrossRef

36.

Nelissen RG, Valstar ER, Pöll RG et al (2002) Factors associated with excessive migration in bone impaction hip revision surgery: a radiostereometric analysis study. J Arthroplast 17:826–833CrossRef

37.

Hassaballa M, Mehendale S, Poniatowski S et al (2009) Subsidence of the stem after impaction bone grafting for revision hip replacement using irradiated bone. J Bone Jt Surg Br 91B:37–43

Title: Impaction bone grafting for femoral revision hip arthroplasty with Exeter Universal stem in Japan
Authors: Toshiki Iwase
Hiromi Otsuka
Naoyuki Katayama
Hiroshi Fujita
Publication date: 01-10-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery / Issue 10/2012
Print ISSN: 0936-8051
Electronic ISSN: 1434-3916
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-012-1561-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Impaction bone grafting for femoral revision hip arthroplasty with Exeter Universal stem in Japan

Abstract

Objectives

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objectives

Patients and methods

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2012

Effectiveness of educational intervention on undermanagement of osteoporosis in fragility fractures

Posterior transpedicular debridement, decompression and instrumentation for thoracic tuberculosis in patients over the age of 60

Instep split skin grafts on muscle flaps to reconstruct pressure exposed soft tissue parts at the lower extremity

Clinical evaluation of the stability of single-segment short pedicle screw fixation for the reconstruction of lumbar and sacral tuberculosis lesions

Predictors of blood transfusion in patients undergoing elective surgery for degenerative conditions of the spine

Reliability and consequences of intraoperative 3D imaging to control positions of thoracic pedicle screws