Advanced

Comparable Results With Porous Metal Augments in Combination With Either Cemented or Uncemented Cups in Revision Hip Arthroplasty : An Analysis of One Hundred Forty-Seven Revisions at a Mean of Five Years

Mahmoud, Ahmed Nageeb LU ; Sundberg, Martin LU and Flivik, Gunnar LU (2017) In Journal of Arthroplasty 32(5). p.1612-1617
Abstract

Background: Porous metal augments have been used successfully for management of large acetabular defects during revision hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively review and compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of porous metal augments in cemented and uncemented acetabular revisions, all performed at the same institution. Methods: Using our institutional clinical databases, the clinical and radiological outcomes of 104 cemented and 43 uncemented acetabular revisions with metal augments, performed between 2006 and 2015, were studied and compared. Acetabular augments were used when preoperative and intraoperative findings indicated the presence of large acetabular defects that can hinder the stability of... (More)

Background: Porous metal augments have been used successfully for management of large acetabular defects during revision hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively review and compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of porous metal augments in cemented and uncemented acetabular revisions, all performed at the same institution. Methods: Using our institutional clinical databases, the clinical and radiological outcomes of 104 cemented and 43 uncemented acetabular revisions with metal augments, performed between 2006 and 2015, were studied and compared. Acetabular augments were used when preoperative and intraoperative findings indicated the presence of large acetabular defects that can hinder the stability of the revision implants. Results: At a mean follow-up of 60.1 months (range 12.7-112.1), a total of 5 cups (3.4%), being 3 cemented (2.8%) and 2 uncemented (4.6%), had shown signs of aseptic loosening with cup and augment migration and 4 of these have been re-revised (2.7%). At final follow-up, the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions for generic health, and the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) parameters had improved substantially without any significant difference between fixation techniques. Conclusion: Porous metal augments show comparable excellent radiographic and clinical mid-term outcomes when combined with cemented or uncemented cups in revision hip arthroplasty.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Acetabular defects, Bone cement, Cup revision, Impaction grafting, Porous metal augments, Revision hip surgery
in
Journal of Arthroplasty
volume
32
issue
5
pages
1612 - 1617
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • scopus:85008444967
  • wos:000401132100037
ISSN
0883-5403
DOI
10.1016/j.arth.2016.12.007
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
632f0632-7dd5-474b-9b21-2f1018f5d491
date added to LUP
2017-01-23 13:48:28
date last changed
2018-01-07 11:46:19
@article{632f0632-7dd5-474b-9b21-2f1018f5d491,
  abstract     = {<p>Background: Porous metal augments have been used successfully for management of large acetabular defects during revision hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively review and compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of porous metal augments in cemented and uncemented acetabular revisions, all performed at the same institution. Methods: Using our institutional clinical databases, the clinical and radiological outcomes of 104 cemented and 43 uncemented acetabular revisions with metal augments, performed between 2006 and 2015, were studied and compared. Acetabular augments were used when preoperative and intraoperative findings indicated the presence of large acetabular defects that can hinder the stability of the revision implants. Results: At a mean follow-up of 60.1 months (range 12.7-112.1), a total of 5 cups (3.4%), being 3 cemented (2.8%) and 2 uncemented (4.6%), had shown signs of aseptic loosening with cup and augment migration and 4 of these have been re-revised (2.7%). At final follow-up, the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions for generic health, and the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) parameters had improved substantially without any significant difference between fixation techniques. Conclusion: Porous metal augments show comparable excellent radiographic and clinical mid-term outcomes when combined with cemented or uncemented cups in revision hip arthroplasty.</p>},
  author       = {Mahmoud, Ahmed Nageeb and Sundberg, Martin and Flivik, Gunnar},
  issn         = {0883-5403},
  keyword      = {Acetabular defects,Bone cement,Cup revision,Impaction grafting,Porous metal augments,Revision hip surgery},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {5},
  pages        = {1612--1617},
  publisher    = {Elsevier},
  series       = {Journal of Arthroplasty},
  title        = {Comparable Results With Porous Metal Augments in Combination With Either Cemented or Uncemented Cups in Revision Hip Arthroplasty : An Analysis of One Hundred Forty-Seven Revisions at a Mean of Five Years},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.12.007},
  volume       = {32},
  year         = {2017},
}