Dataset Information

Cup-Cage Solution for Massive Acetabular Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Our systematic review compiled multiple studies and evaluated survivorship and clinical outcomes of cup-cage construct usage in the management of massive acetabular bone defects. This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Various combinations of "acetabular", "pelvis", "cup cage" and their corresponding synonyms were used to search relevant articles in the Cochrane, EMBASE, and PubMed databases. Basic information of the functional scores, implant revision rate, and complication rate were selected as outcomes for analysis. Finally, a total of 11 articles published between 1999 and 2019 were selected, which include 232 patients with an average age of 68.5?years (range, 30-90). The mean follow-up period was 48.85?months (range, 1-140). Our study shows that the cup-cage construct has a good clinical outcome with a low revision rate and a low complication rate. Improved clinical outcomes of cup-cage constructs were seen with a revision rate of 8% and an all-cause complication rate of 20%. The most commonly reported complication was dislocation, followed by aseptic loosening, infection, and nerve injuries. In summary, it is a promising method for managing large acetabular bone defects in total hip revision.

SUBMITTER: Wang CX

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7307242 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cup-Cage Solution for Massive Acetabular Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Wang Chao-Xin CX Huang Zi-da ZD Wu Bai-Jian BJ Li Wen-Bo WB Fang Xin-Yu XY Zhang Wen-Ming WM

Orthopaedic surgery 20200603 3

Our systematic review compiled multiple studies and evaluated survivorship and clinical outcomes of cup-cage construct usage in the management of massive acetabular bone defects. This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Various combinations of "acetabular", "pelvis", "cup cage" and their corresponding synonyms were used to search relevant articles in the Cochrane, EMBASE, and PubMed databases. Ba ...[more]

PMID: 32495512

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and Objectives: Adequate initial fixation of the uncemented acetabular component in total hip arthroplasty is necessary to achieve long-term survival. Although screw fixation contributes to improved cup stability, there is currently no consensus on the use of this method. This study aimed to assess the existing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of cup fixation in total hip arthroplasty without screws. Materials and Methods: We searched the EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases to identify RCTs published before February 2022. Primary outcomes were reoperation, cup migration, and Harris Hip Score. Secondary outcomes were the presence of a radiolucent line in the acetabular region, translation and rotation movement, and polyethylene wear. We conducted meta-analyses using the random-effects models. The revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias for outcomes of interest; the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to summarize the body of evidence. Results: We included six reports from four studies. Total hip arthroplasty without screw fixation to the acetabular cup had little to no effect on reoperation (pooled relative risk, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.14-6.68; I2 = 0%), cup migration (pooled relative risk, 1.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.29-10.33; I2 = 1%), Harris Hip Score (mean difference, 1.19; 95% confidence interval, -1.31-3.70; I2 = 0%), radiolucent line (pooled relative risk, 5.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.32-109.35), translation and rotation of all axes, and polyethylene wear (mean difference, 0.01; 95% confidence interval, -0.01-0.04; I2 = 0%), with very low certainty of evidence on all measures. Conclusions: The efficacy of acetabular cups without screw fixation in total hip arthroplasty remains uncertain, suggesting the need for prudent clinical application. Further large-scale, well-designed studies with low risk of bias are required.

Project description:Background: Acetabular cage reconstruction with bone allografts is among the successful strategies to deal with massive acetabular bone loss. However, the nonbiological fixation nature of cages can compromise long-term success. Tantalum trabecular metal acetabular cups (TM cups) have been used in acetabular revision surgery because of their increased initial stability and good bone ingrowth features. This study was performed to determine whether the bone stock of the acetabulum is enough to support a hemispheric TM cup after failed cage reconstruction with bone allografts. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who received acetabular revision surgery with TM cups after failed cage reconstruction with bone allografts from 2006 to 2017. There were 12 patients (5 males and 7 females) included in this study, with a mean age of 61.5 years (38 to 81) at the time of re-revision surgery. The mean follow-up after re-revision surgery was 8.6 years (2.6 to 13.3). The endpoint was defined as the aseptic loosening of the TM cup and reoperation for any causes. The change in bone stock of the acetabulum between index revision and re-revision was assessed according to the Gross classification for acetabular bone loss. Results: One patient died after eight years of follow-up of a cause not related to hip surgery. Two patients received two-stage revision arthroplasty due to PJI after 3.2 and 9.4 years of follow-up, respectively. The bone stock of the acetabulum was significantly improved between index revision and re-revision surgery (p < 0.0001). The Kaplan-Meier survivorship was 100% with aseptic loosening as the endpoint and 90% and 75% at five- and ten-year follow-up, respectively, with reoperation for any reason as the endpoint. Even cage reconstruction with bone allografts will fail eventually, and the bone stock of the acetabulum will improve after union and incorporation between host bone and allografts. The restored bone stocks will facilitate further revision surgery with hemispheric TM cups. The biological fixation between host bone and tantalum trabecular metal can provide longstanding stability of the TM cup. Conclusions: The results of our study offer a viable option for patients with failed cage reconstruction with bone allografts.

Project description:BackgroundGirls and women need effective, safe, and affordable menstrual products. Single-use products are regularly selected by agencies for resource-poor settings; the menstrual cup is a less known alternative. We reviewed international studies on menstrual cup leakage, acceptability, and safety and explored menstrual cup availability to inform programmes.MethodsIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Popline, Cinahl, Global Health database, Emerald, Google Scholar, Science.gov, and WorldWideScience from database inception to May 14, 2019, for quantitative or qualitative studies published in English on experiences and leakage associated with menstrual cups, and adverse event reports. We also screened the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience database from the US Food and Drug Administration for events related to menstrual cups. To be eligible for inclusion, the material needed to have information on leakage, acceptability, or safety of menstrual cups. The main outcome of interest was menstrual blood leakage when using a menstrual cup. Safety outcomes of interest included serious adverse events; vaginal abrasions and effects on vaginal microflora; effects on the reproductive, digestive, or urinary tract; and safety in poor sanitary conditions. Findings were tabulated or combined by use of forest plots (random-effects meta-analysis). We also did preliminary estimates on costs and environmental savings potentially associated with cups. This systematic review is registered on PROSPERO, number CRD42016047845.FindingsOf 436 records identified, 43 studies were eligible for analysis (3319 participants). Most studies reported on vaginal cups (27 [63%] vaginal cups, five [12%] cervical cups, and 11 [25%] mixed types of cups or unknown) and 15 were from low-income and middle-income countries. 22 studies were included in qualitative or quantitative syntheses, of which only three were of moderate-to-high quality. Four studies made a direct comparison between menstrual cups and usual products for the main outcome of leakage and reported leakage was similar or lower for menstrual cups than for disposable pads or tampons (n=293). In all qualitative studies, the adoption of the menstrual cup required a familiarisation phase over several menstrual cycles and peer support improved uptake (two studies in developing countries). In 13 studies, 73% (pooled estimate: n=1144; 95% CI 59-84, I2=96%) of participants wished to continue use of the menstrual cup at study completion. Use of the menstrual cup showed no adverse effects on the vaginal flora (four studies, 507 women). We identified five women who reported severe pain or vaginal wounds, six reports of allergies or rashes, nine of urinary tract complaints (three with hydronephrosis), and five of toxic shock syndrome after use of the menstrual cup. Dislodgement of an intrauterine device was reported in 13 women who used the menstrual cup (eight in case reports, and five in one study) between 1 week and 13 months of insertion of the intrauterine device. Professional assistance to aid removal of menstrual cup was reported among 47 cervical cup users and two vaginal cup users. We identified 199 brands of menstrual cup, and availability in 99 countries with prices ranging US$0·72-46·72 (median $23·3, 145 brands).InterpretationOur review indicates that menstrual cups are a safe option for menstruation management and are being used internationally. Good quality studies in this field are needed. Further studies are needed on cost-effectiveness and environmental effect comparing different menstrual products.FundingUK Medical Research Council, Department for International Development, and Wellcome Trust.

Dataset Information

Cup-Cage Solution for Massive Acetabular Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Publications

Cup-Cage Solution for Massive Acetabular Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets