This Article
Right arrow Full Text Free
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by DEARBORN, J. T.
Right arrow Articles by HARRIS, W. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by DEARBORN, J. T.
Right arrow Articles by HARRIS, W. H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 81:469-80 (1999)
© 1999 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.

High Placement of an Acetabular Component Inserted without Cement in a Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty. Results After a Mean of Ten Years*

JOHN T. DEARBORN, M.D.{dagger} and WILLIAM H. HARRIS, M.D.{ddagger}, BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS

Investigation performed at the Orthopaedic Biomechanics Laboratory and the Hip and Implant Unit, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston

Background: Revision of an acetabular component in a patient who has severe periacetabular bone loss is a complex problem, particularly when there is not enough bone stock to allow placement of an acetabular component near the normal anatomical hip center. A valuable option for revision in such a situation is placement of a hemispherical shell, fixed with screws and without cement, against the superior margin of the acetabular defect. The resulting hip center is more proximal than that seen following a typical primary total hip replacement. Methods: Forty-six hips in forty-four patients were treated consecutively, between July 1984 and February 1988, with a revision in which a hemispherical acetabular component was fixed with screws and without cement. All shells but one were placed with a so-called line-to-line fit. The procedures resulted in a so-called high hip center—that is, the center of rotation of the revised hip was located at least thirty-five millimeters proximal to the interteardrop line. The mean age of the patients at the time of the index procedure was fifty-two years (range, twenty-five to eighty-one years). The most common diagnosis for which the original arthroplasty was performed was osteoarthritis secondary to congenital hip dysplasia or dislocation (twenty-two hips). Thirty-four hips had had a high hip center before the index revision, and most patients had had a substantial limb-length discrepancy, with a mean of 1.6 centimeters of shortening on the side of the operation. In thirty-three hips, the femoral component was replaced as well, with a long-neck or calcar-replacement stem used when necessary to maintain or increase the length of the limb. Results: Six patients (six hips) died before the minimum eight-year follow-up interval; none had had another revision or loosening of the revised acetabular component. Of the remaining patients, four (four hips) had the implant removed. One of them had a resection arthroplasty and one of them had a hip disarticulation because of infection after a subsequent femoral reoperation. Another had a hip disarticulation because of late infection. The fourth implant was removed because it had displaced into the pelvis at approximately six years; this was the only reoperation for aseptic loosening in the series. The remaining thirty-six hips (thirty-four patients) were followed for a mean of 10.4 years (range, 8.5 to 12.7 years). One acetabular component migrated medially and was scheduled for revision. No other acetabular component was loose or had been revised. The mean Harris hip score was 81 points (range, 56 to 100 points) at the time of the most recent follow-up. Despite the use of a high hip center, the prevalence of a positive Trendelenburg sign was reduced from 98 percent (forty-five of forty-six hips) preoperatively to 44 percent (sixteen of thirty-six hips) at the time of the most recent follow-up. The short limbs were lengthened a mean of seven millimeters (range, five millimeters of shortening to forty millimeters of lengthening). Conclusions: In this study of acetabular revisions with use of a high hip center in patients who had major periacetabular bone loss, mechanical failure occurred in 4 percent (two) of the forty-six hips in the entire series and in 6 percent (two) of the thirty-six hips in patients who were alive and still had the implant in place after a mean of 10.4 years of follow-up. The use of a high hip center did not adversely affect function of the abductor muscles, and the mean limb-length discrepancy was reduced by the femoral reconstruction.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 JBJSHome page
K. J. Hendricks and W. H. Harris
High Placement of Noncemented Acetabular Components in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty. A Concise Follow-Up, at a Minimum of Fifteen Years, of a Previous Report
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., October 1, 2006; 88(10): 2231 - 2236.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
B. J. Hampton and W. H. Harris
Primary Cementless Acetabular Components in Hips with Severe Developmental Dysplasia or Total Dislocation. A Concise Follow-up, at an Average of Sixteen Years, of a Previous Report
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., July 1, 2006; 88(7): 1549 - 1552.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
K. J. Hendricks and W. H. Harris
Revision of Failed Acetabular Components with Use of So-Called Jumbo Noncemented Components. A Concise Follow-Up of a Previous Report
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., March 1, 2006; 88(3): 559 - 563.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
C. Hendrich, I. Mehling, U. Sauer, S. Kirschner, and J.M. Martell
Cementless Acetabular Reconstruction and Structural Bone-Grafting in Dysplastic Hips
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., February 1, 2006; 88(2): 387 - 394.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
A. Eskelinen, I. Helenius, V. Remes, P. Ylinen, K. Tallroth, and T. Paavilainen
Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients with High Congenital Hip Dislocation
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., January 1, 2006; 88(1): 80 - 91.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
B. R. Hallstrom, G. J. Golladay, D. A. Vittetoe, and W. H. Harris
Cementless Acetabular Revision with the Harris-Galante Porous Prosthesis. Results After a Minimum of Ten Years of Follow-up
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., May 1, 2004; 86(5): 1007 - 1011.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
C. Perka, U. Fischer, W. R. Taylor, and G. Matziolis
Developmental Hip Dysplasia Treated with Total Hip Arthroplasty with a Straight Stem and a Threaded Cup
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., February 1, 2004; 86(2): 312 - 319.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
E. Winter, M. Piert, R. Volkmann, F. Maurer, C. Eingartner, K. Weise, and S. Weller
Allogeneic Cancellous Bone Graft and a Burch-Schneider Ring for Acetabular Reconstruction in Revision Hip Arthroplasty
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., June 1, 2001; 83(6): 862 - 867.
[Abstract] [Full Text]

Home page
 JBJSHome page
J. T. Dearborn and W. H. Harris
Acetabular Revision After Failed Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients with Congenital Hip Dislocation and Dysplasia : Results After a Mean of 8.6 Years
J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., August 1, 2000; 82(8): 1146 - 1146.
[Abstract] [Full Text]