Cup-cage constructs in revision total hip arthroplasty for pelvic discontinuity
Конструкция «чашка-клетка» при повторной тотальной замене бедренного сустава при тазовом разъединении
2024-05-01
SCID: 54.1/n7n88vkh
Discuss with AI
Kaplan-Meier survival analysisTrabecular Metal Revision Shellcup-cage reconstructionpelvic discontinuityperiprosthetic joint infection
Figures from the paper
Abstract (AI)
Aims: Pelvic discontinuity is a challenging acetabular defect without a consensus on surgical management. Cup-cage reconstruction is an increasingly used treatment strategy. The present study evaluated implant survival, clinical and radiological outcomes, and complications associated with the cup-cage construct. Methods: We included 53 cup-cage construct (51 patients) implants used for hip revision procedures for pelvic discontinuity between January 2003 and January 2022 in this retrospective review. Mean age at surgery was 71.8 years (50.0 to 92.0; SD 10.3), 43/53 (81.1%) were female, and mean follow-up was 6.4 years (0.02 to 20.0; SD 4.6). Patients were implanted with a Trabecular Metal Revision Shell with either a ZCA cage (n = 12) or a TMARS cage (n = 40, all Zimmer Biomet). Pelvic discontinuity was diagnosed on preoperative radiographs and/or intraoperatively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed, with failure defined as revision of the cup-cage reconstruction. Results: The five-year all-cause survival for cup-cage reconstruction was 73.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 61.4 to 85.4), while the ten- and 15-year survival was 63.7% (95% CI 46.8 to 80.6). Survival due to aseptic loosening was 93.4% (95% CI 86.2 to 100.0) at five, ten, and 15 years. The rate of revision for aseptic loosening, infection, and dislocation was 3/53 (5.7%), 7/53 (13.2%), and 6/53 (11.3%), respectively. The mean leg length discrepancy improved (p < 0.001) preoperatively from a mean of 18.2 mm (0 to 80; SD 15.8) to 7.0 mm (0 to 35; SD 9.8) at latest follow-up. The horizontal and vertical hip centres improved (p < 0.001) preoperatively from a mean of 9.2 cm (5.6 to 17.5; SD 2.3) to 10.1 cm (6.2 to 13.4; SD 2.1) and 9.3 cm (4.7 to 15.8; SD 2.5) to 8.0 cm (3.7 to 12.3; SD 1.7), respectively. Conclusion: Cup-cage reconstruction provides acceptable outcomes in the management of pelvic discontinuity. One in four constructs undergo revision within five years, most commonly for periprosthetic joint infection, dislocation, or aseptic loosening.
Key Findings
1
Five-year all-cause survival of cup-cage reconstruction for pelvic discontinuity was 73.4% (95% CI 61.4 to 85.4).
2
Mean leg length discrepancy improved from 18.2 mm preoperatively to 7.0 mm at latest follow-up (p < 0.001); horizontal and vertical hip centre positions also improved (p < 0.001).
3
Revisions for infection and dislocation occurred in 7/53 (13.2%) and 6/53 (11.3%) of cases, respectively, making infection the most common cause of revision.
4
Survival free of aseptic loosening was 93.4% (95% CI 86.2 to 100.0) at five, ten, and 15 years, with aseptic loosening revision rate 3/53 (5.7%).
5
Ten- and 15-year all-cause survival declined to 63.7% (95% CI 46.8 to 80.6).
Research Object
Cup-cage construct used in revision total hip arthroplasty for pelvic discontinuity
Research Subject
Implant survival, clinical and radiological outcomes, and complications (including rates/reasons for revision, leg length discrepancy, and hip centre position) of the cup-cage reconstruction
Publication Details
Publication Date
2024-05-01
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Cited by
14
Access Type
Author Information
Download PDF
Subscribe to digest