Severe Corrosion of Modular Dual Mobility Acetabular Components Identified During Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Abdelaal MS
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8167322 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Removing well-fixed acetabular components can be a challenge for orthopaedic surgeons in revision of total hip arthroplasty. Acetabular bone loss, fracture, and other complications occurred in extracting implants may result in instability and fail of revision. Thus, instruments are developed to avoid such complications. We report a simple technique by drilling a tunnel on the superolateral quadrant of acetabulum and using an offset staff to remove acetabular components without many matching units. The procedure of removing well-fixed acetabular components is a simple, efficient, inexpensive, bone stock preserving technique.
| S-EPMC5712023 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInstability remains the most common complication after revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was a difference in aseptic revision rates and survivorship between dual-mobility (DM) and constrained liners (CL) in revision THA.MethodsWe reviewed a consecutive series of 2432 revision THA patients from 2008 to 2019 at our institution and identified all patients who received either a CL or DM bearing. We compared demographics, comorbidities, indications, dislocations, and aseptic failure rates between the two groups. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to determine risk factors for failure, and a Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed with an aseptic re-revision as the endpoint.ResultsOf the 191 patients, 139 (72%) received a DM bearing, and 52 (28%) had a CL. At a mean follow-up of 14.3 months, there was no statistically significant difference in rates of dislocation (10.4% vs 14.0%, P = .667), aseptic revision (30.9% vs 46.2%, P = .073), or time to revision (3.78 vs 6 months, P = .565) between the two groups. The multivariate analysis revealed CL had no difference in aseptic re-revision rates when compared with DM (odds ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 0.84-2.52, P = .177). The survivorship analysis found no difference in aseptic failure between the groups at 12 months (P = .059).ConclusionBoth CL and DM bearings have high aseptic failure rates at intermediate term follow-up after revision THA. CL did show a higher risk of failure than DM bearings, but it was not statistically significant with the numbers available for this study. Further prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal treatment for recurrent instability.
| S-EPMC8661104 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:The most common indications for revision total hip arthroplasty are instability/dislocation and mechanical loosening. Efforts to address this have included the use of dual mobility (DM) articulations. The aim of this study is to report on the use of cemented DM cups in complex acetabular revision total hip arthroplasty cases with a high risk of recurrent instability. Methods:A multicenter, retrospective study was conducted. Patients who received a novel acetabular construct consisting of a monoblock DM cup cemented into a fully porous metal shell were included. Outcome data included 90-day complications and readmissions, revision for any reason, and Harris Hip Scores. Results:Thirty-eight hips in 38 patients were included for this study. At a median follow-up of 215.5 days (range 6-783), the Harris Hip Score improved from a mean of 50 ± 12.2 to 78 ± 11.2 (P < .001). One (2.6%) patient experienced a dislocation on postoperative day 1, and was closed reduced with no further complications. There was 1 (2.6%) reoperation for periprosthetic joint infection treated with a 2-stage exchange. Conclusions:In this complex series of patients, cementation of a monoblock DM cup into a newly implanted fully porous revision shell reliably provided solid fixation with a low risk of dislocation at short-term follow-up. Although longer term follow-up is needed, utilization of this novel construct should be considered in patients at high risk for instability.
| S-EPMC6728441 | biostudies-other
Project description:The following case demonstrates an example of a catastrophic failure of a dual mobility (DM) bearing used in the setting of a revision total hip arthroplasty for an acetabular component with an excessive abduction angle. Currently, in the literature, it has been demonstrated that DM bearings have decreased polyethylene wear at abduction angles up to 65°; however, this has only been shown in in vitro studies. To our knowledge, there have been no reports of in vivo DM bearings that have demonstrated these same results. In this case, a DM bearing was used in a revision surgery with a retained acetabular component that had an abduction angle of approximately 70°-75° which ultimately led to catastrophic polyethylene failure.
| S-EPMC6123245 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The concept of a dual mobility (DM) cup has been in existence for more than 40 years and was initially popularized in Europe. Only recently has it started to garner attention in the United States. Its design, consisting of a small femoral head articulating within a larger polyethylene (PE) insert, which articulates with an outer shell, has found increasing use in patients that are at risk for post-operative dislocations. This case report describes a case of recurrent total hip arthroplasty (THA) dislocation managed with the implantation of a DM cup with an acute intraprosthetic dislocation of the DM construct.A 52-year-old woman underwent an uneventful left THA through a posterior approach. Within 6 weeks of her surgery, she had four dislocations, managed with closed reductions. She then underwent an open revision of her acetabular component with conversion to a DM construct. 5 weeks after her revision, she had another dislocation treated with closed reduction in the operating room, with the resultant eccentric location of the femoral head in the acetabular component. Computed tomography (CT) confirmed intraprosthetic dislocation with the PE liner lodged in the gluteal tissue. She was taken to the operating room with a plan to revise her acetabular component to another DM construct, but with an increase in the anteversion despite initial anteversion being "appropriate" on CT imaging. Intraoperatively, the PE liner was embedded in gluteal tissue as depicted on the CT. The abductors were intact. There was no impingement in extension and maximal external rotation when trialed with a conventional head/liner construct. A new DM construct was then implanted.Intraprosthetic dislocation is a rare occurrence and unique complication to DM constructs. It is not common in the short-term setting postoperatively to our knowledge, and this case report represents an early report of intraprosthetic dislocation in the literature. Care should be taken during reduction of dislocated DM constructs to avoid intraprosthetic dislocations. Open revisions can be managed with revisions to another DM construct or to a constrained liner construct to maximize stability.
| S-EPMC5553828 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundWe evaluated the early outcomes, including all-cause revisions, aseptic revisions, and reoperations after revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a single modern modular femoral stem design.MethodsA retrospective cohort study on a consecutive series of 62 patients (65 hips) who underwent revision THA with a modern modular femoral stem system, between January 2011 and October 2015, at a single academic medical center was performed. A cumulative incidence competing risk model was used to evaluate the cumulative incidence of failure with death as the competing risk.ResultsThe cumulative incidence rate of all-cause revision THA was 14.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 6%-24%) at 2 years when accounting for the competing risk of death. The rate of aseptic revisions was 6.8% (95% CI, 0.1%-13%), and the rate of all-cause reoperations was 21.6% (95% CI, 11%-31%). Ten THA cases (15%) underwent re-revision THA for any reason: five for infection and five for aseptic failures. The mean time to re-revision was 1 year (range, 0.04-5.34). Patients with a preoperative Mallory classification of 3 or more were at greater risk for reoperation (sub-hazard rate, 3.84; 95% CI, 1.54-9.53; P = .004).ConclusionsAlthough the high incidence of reoperation illustrates the complexity of the revision THA population, particularly related to infection and joint instability, the relatively low rate of aseptic failures, minimal radiographic subsidence, and the lack of modular junctional failures suggest that the use of this modular revision THA system may provide adequate fixation and could be considered as a viable treatment option in the setting of revision THA.
| S-EPMC6470366 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFused hips with spine stiffness in ankylosing spondylitis (AS) reduce spinopelvic mobility. We aimed to assess spinopelvic mobility pattern and acetabular anteversion in AS after total hip arthroplasty (THA).Material and methodsNinety-four stiff hips in 58 AS individuals (mean age: 37.05) who underwent THA between 2012 and 2018 with a modified lateral approach were included. Twenty-three hips were fused, and 71 hips had mean flexion of 37.67°. Pelvic tilt, pelvic inclination, sacral slope (SS), and lumbar lordosis were correlated with THA, and functional outcomes were assessed at 34.6-month mean follow-up.ResultsThirty-seven had a stuck sitting pattern with stuck standing seen in 4 individuals. SS standing before and after THA were 25.08° and 27.30°. SS sitting was 8.99° compared to 16.80°. SS from sitting to standing was reduced (17.7°) in 17 individuals. Spine stiffness in extension was seen in 4 out of 37. Mean acetabular inclination after THA was 42.67°, and acetabular anteversion was 17.48°. Flexion after THA improved to mean 98.47°. Changes in SS from sitting to standing were correlated with THA (r-value: 0.93, P-value: .0001). The Harris Hip Score improved from 25.31 to 82.39 (P-value <.05), and the mean 12-item Short Form Survey at review was 52.18 and 59.55 (physical and mental components). The mean Western Ontario and Mc Master Universities Arthritis Index score was 17.56.ConclusionsSpinopelvic mobility change was <10° after THA in AS, stuck sitting was seen in 37 of 58 (63.8%), and stuck standing was seen in 4 of 58 (6.9%), including spine stiffness in flexion or extension. Acetabular anteversion assessed was 17.48° (standard deviation: 4.41), with significant functional improvement.Level of evidenceLevel 4.
| S-EPMC9237950 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) is estimated to grow in the following decades with a consequent increase of THA revisions (rTHA). This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare modular and monoblock stem in rTHA surgery, focusing on clinical and radiological outcomes and complication rates.MethodsA literature search was performed using the following search strategy: ((Modular stem) OR (monolithic stem)) AND (hip review) on PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies (OS) compared clinical and radiological outcomes, and complication rates for monoblock and modular revision femoral stem were included. The risk of bias was assessed through the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) score. The Review Manager (RevMan) software was used for the meta-analysis. The rate of complications was assessed using odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsThe authors included 11 OS and one RCT with 3,671 participants (mean age: 68.4 years old). The mean follow-up was 46.9 months. There was no prevalence of subsidence for one type of stem. Mean subsidence was from 0.92 to 10 mm for modular stem and from 1 to 15 mm for monoblock stem. Postoperative Harris Hip Score (HHS) showed better results with modular stems without statistical significance [mean difference (MD) =1.32; 95% CI: -1.62 to 4.27; P=0.38]. No statistically significant difference was found for dislocations (OR =2.48; 95% CI: 0.67 to 9.14; P=0.17), infections (OR =1.07; 95% CI: 0.51 to 2.23; P=0.86), intraoperative fractures (OR =1.62; 95% CI: 0.42 to 6.21; P=0.48), and postoperative fractures (OR =1.60; 95% CI: 0.55 to 4.64; P=0.39).ConclusionsModular and monoblock stems show comparable and satisfactory clinical and radiological outcomes for rTHA. Both stems are valid and effective options for managing femoral bone deficit in hip revision surgery. The main limitation of this study is the small number and low quality of enclosed studies that compared the two stems. Moreover, the modular stem is usually used for more complex cases with lower quality femoral bone stock.
| S-EPMC10929344 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Revision total hip arthroplasty presents many challenges in regards to reconstructing or managing large amounts of bone loss and soft-tissue damage. Modern revision components, as well as techniques, have helped to address these challenges; however, the goal of any surgery is to provide the least amount of surgery with the most successful outcome. This case highlights a 74-year-old man with a Tronzo total hip arthroplasty placed over 50 years prior. He presented with subjective hip instability and radiographs demonstrating disassociation of the modular component. In an attempt to avoid more extensive and costly surgery, a custom-made all-polyethylene femoral head was used. This case illustrates the revision of likely one of the few Tronzo total hips remaining and the utility of obtaining a compassionate-use clearance from the Food and Drug Administration to create a custom piece, to minimize potential morbidity and mortality from extensive hip revision surgery.
| S-EPMC7225601 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background:Dual mobility (DM) has been used in primary total hip arthroplasty recently for their low dislocation rates, low revision rates, and improved patient functional outcomes. We compared 2 DM systems, anatomic dual mobility (ADM; Stryker, Mahwah, NJ) and modular dual mobility (MDM; Stryker, Mahwah, NJ), to determine differences in dislocation rates, revision rates, and patient outcome scores. Methods:The study was a single-center matched retrospective review of prospectively collected data of patients who underwent primary total hip arthroplasty surgery with an ADM or MDM system by a single surgeon from 2012 to 2017. Demographics, operative details, postoperative patient-reported outcomes, and clinical outcomes were recorded. A Kaplan-Meier survivorship curve to compare survival time between groups was collected as well. Results:Five hundred seventy-four patients were included in the study with 287 patients matched in each group with mean 2.86 years of follow-up. The dislocation rate in each cohort was 0%, the acetabular-specific revision rate was 0%, and in each cohort, overall revision rate in each cohort was 1.7%. In general, patient-reported outcomes were similar for each group (Harris Hip Score Pain (P = .919), Harris Hip Score Function (P = .736), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (P = .139), Pain Visual Analog Scale (P = .146), Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (P = .99), University of California, Los Angeles (P = .417), and Harris Hip Score Total (P = .136). There was a slight clinically insignificant increase in hip flexion between the cohorts favoring the ADM group (98.6 ± 9.8 vs 94.0 ± 9.7, P < .001). Conclusions:Both DM systems had similar patient-reported outcomes that were quite favorable. At 2.86 years of follow-up, neither the ADM nor MDM systems demonstrated dislocation, and both had low acetabular-specific and overall revision rates in this matched cohort study.
| S-EPMC6920720 | biostudies-literature