Reconstruction of massive uncontained acetabular defects using allograft with cage or ring reinforcement: an assessment of the graft's ability to restore bone stock and its impact on the outcome of re-revision
- PMID: 24589785
- DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B3.32850
Reconstruction of massive uncontained acetabular defects using allograft with cage or ring reinforcement: an assessment of the graft's ability to restore bone stock and its impact on the outcome of re-revision
Abstract
We retrospectively reviewed 44 consecutive patients (50 hips) who underwent acetabular re-revision after a failed previous revision that had been performed using structural or morcellised allograft bone, with a cage or ring for uncontained defects. Of the 50 previous revisions, 41 cages and nine rings were used with allografts for 14 minor-column and 36 major-column defects. We routinely assessed the size of the acetabular bone defect at the time of revision and re-revision surgery. This allowed us to assess whether host bone stock was restored. We also assessed the outcome of re-revision surgery in these circumstances by means of radiological characteristics, rates of failure and modes of failure. We subsequently investigated the factors that may affect the potential for the restoration of bone stock and the durability of the re-revision reconstruction using multivariate analysis. At the time of re-revision, there were ten host acetabula with no significant defects, 14 with contained defects, nine with minor-column, seven with major-column defects and ten with pelvic discontinuity. When bone defects at re-revision were compared with those at the previous revision, there was restoration of bone stock in 31 hips, deterioration of bone stock in nine and remained unchanged in ten. This was a significant improvement (p < 0.001). Morselised allografting at the index revision was not associated with the restoration of bone stock. In 17 hips (34%), re-revision was possible using a simple acetabular component without allograft, augments, rings or cages. There were 47 patients with a mean follow-up of 70 months (6 to 146) available for survival analysis. Within this group, the successful cases had a minimum follow-up of two years after re-revision. There were 22 clinical or radiological failures (46.7%), 18 of which were due to aseptic loosening. The five and ten year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 75% (95% CI, 60 to 86) and 56% (95% CI, 40 to 70) respectively with aseptic loosening as the endpoint. The rate of aseptic loosening was higher for hips with pelvic discontinuity (p = 0.049) and less when the allograft had been in place for longer periods (p = 0.040). The use of a cage or ring over structural allograft bone for massive uncontained defects in acetabular revision can restore host bone stock and facilitate subsequent re-revision surgery to a certain extent.
Keywords: Acetabulum; Allograft; Bone stock; Cage; Hip revision; Reinforcement ring.
Similar articles
-
THA revisions using impaction allografting with mesh is durable for medial but not lateral acetabular defects.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Dec;473(12):3882-91. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4483-7. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015. PMID: 26245166 Free PMC article.
-
Ganz reinforcement ring for reconstruction of acetabular defects in revision total hip arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003 Dec;85(12):2358-64. doi: 10.2106/00004623-200312000-00013. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003. PMID: 14668505
-
Radiological evaluation of allograft reconstruction in acetabulum with Ganz reinforcement ring in revision total hip replacement.J Orthop Sci. 2010 Nov;15(6):764-71. doi: 10.1007/s00776-010-1549-y. Epub 2010 Nov 30. J Orthop Sci. 2010. PMID: 21116894
-
Acetabular reinforcement rings associated with allograft for severe acetabular defects.Int Orthop. 2019 Mar;43(3):561-571. doi: 10.1007/s00264-018-4142-1. Epub 2018 Sep 13. Int Orthop. 2019. PMID: 30218182 Review.
-
Acetabular reconstruction using porous metallic material in complex revision total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review.Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019 Feb;105(1S):S53-S61. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2018.04.030. Epub 2018 Aug 20. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2019. PMID: 30138711
Cited by
-
Treatment options for chronic pelvic discontinuity.J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2018 Jan-Mar;9(1):58-62. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2017.09.009. Epub 2017 Sep 18. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2018. PMID: 29628686 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Preliminary biomechanical study of different acetabular reinforcement devices for acetabular reconstruction.PLoS One. 2015 Mar 23;10(3):e0121588. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121588. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 25799569 Free PMC article.
-
The mid-long term results of reconstructional cage and morselized allografts combined application for the Paprosky type III acetabular bone defects in revision hip arthroplasty.BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019 Nov 7;20(1):517. doi: 10.1186/s12891-019-2915-3. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2019. PMID: 31699067 Free PMC article.
-
Custom-Made 3D-Printed Augments and Cages: An Effective Solution for Managing Severe Acetabular Bone Loss.J Orthop Case Rep. 2025 Jan;15(1):208-214. doi: 10.13107/jocr.2025.v15.i01.5180. J Orthop Case Rep. 2025. PMID: 39801861 Free PMC article.
-
Use of the Burch-Schneider cage and structural allografts in complex acetabular deficiency: 3- to 10-year follow up.Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2015 Oct;31(10):540-7. doi: 10.1016/j.kjms.2015.08.001. Epub 2015 Sep 16. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2015. PMID: 26520694 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical