Compensation of acetabular defects in hip arthroplasty

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Acetabular reconstruction is a necessary condition for improving the survival rate and proper functioning of the implant. The issue of compensation for bone loss remains one of the most difficult and controversial in orthopaedics. The article aimed to analyze approaches to the problem of management of acetabular defects in hip replacement. The paper presents the key features of the anatomy and radiological anatomy of the acetabulum. Modern modifications of acetabular components of an endoprosthesis, their advantages and disadvantages, as well as ways to compensate for acetabular bone loss with bone substitute materials are considered. The review highlights the use of 3D printing technologies, the interaction between physicians and other experts in this field. Currently, an active search for materials, alternatives to autogenous bone, as well as ways to facilitate the design and reduce the negative impact of the implant on the patient's bone tissue continues. The use of additive technologies seems to be the most promising direction that allows applying an individual approach to each clinical case, but it is available only in specialized centres and is associated with significant material, technical and legal difficulties. Stable fixation of the acetabular component, according to the literature, is achieved under the condition of restoration of hip rotation centre in the native acetabulum area, restoration of normal anatomical relations in the hip joint and adequate replacement of bone loss.

About the authors

Maria Yu Udintseva

Ural State Medical University

Author for correspondence.
Email: izmodenova96@gmail.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5500-4012

PhD stud., Depart. of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Russian Federation, Yekaterinburg, Russia

Elena A Volokitina

Ural State Medical University

Email: Volokitina_elena@rambler.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5994-8558

MD, D.Sc. (Med.), Prof., Head, Depart. of Traumatology and Orthopedics

Russian Federation, Yekaterinburg, Russia

Sergey M Kutepov

Ural State Medical University

Email: axr@usma.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3069-8150

MD, D.Sc. (Med.), Prof., President

Russian Federation, Yekaterinburg, Russia

References

  1. Sadovoy MA, Pavlov VV, Bazlov VA, Mamuladze TZ, Efimenko MF, Aro­nov AM, Panchenko AA. Potentialities of 3d-visualization in preoperative planning of primary and revision total hip arthroplasty. Vestnik travmatologii i ortopedii im NN Prio­rova. 2017;(3):37–42. (In Russ.) doi: 10.32414/0869-8678-2017-3-37-42.
  2. Schierjott RA, Hettich G, Graichen H, Jansson V, Rudert M, Traina F, Weber P, Grupp TM. Quantitative assessment of acetabular bone defects: a study of 50 computed tomography data sets. PLoS One. 2019;14(10):e0222511. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222511.
  3. Badarudeen S, Shu AC, Ong KL, Baykal D, Lau E, Malkani AL. Complications after revision total hip arthroplasty in the medicare population. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32(6):1954–1958. DOI: 10.1016/j. arth.2017.01.037.
  4. Pierannunzii L, Zagra L. Bone grafts, bone graft extenders, substitutes and enhancers for acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty. EFORT Open Rev. 2017;1(12):431–439. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.160025.
  5. Amirouche F, Solitro GF, Walia A, Gonzalez M, Bobko A. Segmental acetabular rim defects, bone loss, oversizing, and press fit cup in total hip arthroplasty evalua­ted with a probabilistic finite element analysis. Int Orthop. 2017;41(8):1527–1533. doi: 10.1007/s00264-016-3369-y.
  6. Kasch R, Assmann G, Merk S, Barz T, Melloh M, Hofer A, Merk H, Flessa S. Economic analysis of two-stage septic revision after total hip arthroplasty: what are the re­levant costs for the hospital’s orthopedic department? BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016;17:112. doi: 10.1186/s12891-016-0962-6.
  7. Koenig L, Feng C, He F, Nguyen JT. The effects of revision total hip arthroplasty on medicare spending and bene­ficiary outcomes: implications for the comprehensive care for joint replacement model. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(9):2764–2769. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.05.008.
  8. Blatz MB, Vonderheide M, Conejo J. The effect of resin bonding on long-term success of high-strength ceramics. J Dent Res. 2018;97(2):132–139. doi: 10.1177/0022034517729134.
  9. Nikolaev NS, Malyuchenko LI, Preobrazhenskaya EV, Karpukhin AS, Yakovlev VV, Maksimov AL. Use of customized acetabular components for hip joint arthroplasty in posttraumatic coxarthrosis. Geniy ortopedii. 2019;25(2):207–213. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2019-25-2-207-213.
  10. Liu B, Gao YH, Ding L, Li SQ, Liu JG, Qi X. Computed tomographic evaluation of bone stock in patients with crowe type III developmental dysplasia of the hip: implications for guiding acetabular component placement using the high hip center technique. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(3):915–918. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2017.10.021.
  11. Samim M, Youm T, Burke C, Meislin R, Vigdor­chik J, Gyftopoulos S. Hip arthroscopy-MRI correlation and differences for hip anatomy and pathology: What radio­logists need to know. Clin Imaging. 2018;52:315–327. doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2018.09.005.
  12. Pelliccia L, Lorenz M, Heyde CE, Kaluschke M, Klimant P, Knopp S, Schleifenbaum S, Rotsch C, Weller R, Werner M, Zachmann G, Zajonz D, Hammer N. A cada­ver-based biomechanical model of acetabulum rea­ming for surgical virtual reality training simulators. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):14545. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-71499-5.
  13. Safir O, Lin C, Kosashvili Y, Mayne IP, Gross AE, Backstein D. Limitations of conventional radiographs in the assessment of acetabular defects following total hip ­arthroplasty. Can J Surg. 2012;55(6):401–407. doi: 10.1503/cjs.000511.
  14. Telleria JJ, Gee AO. Classifications in brief: Paprosky classification of acetabular bone loss. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(11):3725–3730. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3264-4.
  15. Koob S, Scheidt S, Randau TM, Gathen M, Wimmer MD, Wirtz DC, Gravius S. Biological downsizing: ace­tabular defect reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty. Orthopade. 2017;46(2):158–167. (In German.) doi: 10.1007/s00132-16-3379-x.
  16. Morison Z, Moojen DJ, Nauth A, Hall J, ­Mc­Kee MD, Waddell JP, Schemitsch EH. Total hip arthroplasty after acetabular fracture is associated with ­lower survivorship and more complications. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(2):392–398. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4509-1.
  17. Korytkin AA, Novikova YaS, Kovalev KA, Korolev SB, Zykin AA, Gerasimov SA, Gerasimov EA. Mid-term outcomes of revision hip arthroplasty with acetabular augments. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii. 2019;25(1):9–18. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2019-25-1-9-18.
  18. Bozic KJ, Kamath AF, Ong K, Lau E, Kurtz S, Chan V, Vail TP, Rubash H, Berry DJ. Comparative epidemiology of revision arthroplasty: failed THA poses grea­ter clinical and economic burdens than failed TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(6):2131–2138. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-4078-8.
  19. Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM. Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 1994;9(1):33–44. doi: 10.1016/0883-5403(94)90135-x.
  20. Horas K, Arnholdt J, Steinert AF, Hoberg M, Ru­dert M, Holzapfel BM. Acetabular defect classification in times of 3D imaging and patient-specific treatment protocols. Orthopade. 2017;46(2):168–178. doi: 10.1007/s00132-016-3378-y.
  21. Aboushelib MN. Influence of surface nano-roughness on osseointegration of zirconia implants in rabbit femur heads using selective infiltration etching technique. J Oral Implantol. 2013;39(5):583–590. doi: 10.1563/AAID-JOI-D-11-00075.
  22. Ghanem M, Zajonz D, Heyde CE, Roth A. Acetabular defect classification and management: revision arthroplasty of the acetabular cup based on 3-point fixation. Orthopade. 2020;49(5):432–442. doi: 10.1007/s00132-020-03895-8.
  23. Plate JF, Shields JS, Langfitt MK, Bolognesi MP, Lang JE, Seyler TM. Utility of radiographs, computed tomography, and three dimensional computed tomography pelvis reconstruction for identification of acetabular defects in residency training. Hip Pelvis. 2017;29(4):247–252. doi: 10.5371/hp.2017.29.4.247.
  24. Jenkins DR, Odland AN, Sierra RJ, Hanssen AD, Lewallen DG. Minimum five-year outcomes with porous tantalum acetabular cup and augment construct in complex revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99(10):e49. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.16.00125.
  25. Khatod M, Cafri G, Inacio MC, Schepps AL, Paxton EW, Bini SA. Revision total hip arthoplasty: factors associated with re-revision surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(5):359–366. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.00073.
  26. Grishchuk AN, Usol'tsev IV. Hip replacement at posttrauma­tic defects of coxal cavity. Acta biomedica scientifica (East siberian biomedical journal). 2015;(6):17–20. (In Russ.)
  27. Chegurov OK, Menshchikov IN, Zhdanov AS. Reconstructive total hip arthroplasty in a female patient with posttraumatic acetabulum (case study). Geniy ortopedii. 2017;(3):364–367. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2017-23-3-364-367.
  28. Garkaviy NG, Vereshagin N., Zhiltsov A., Vereshagina EN. Endoprosthetics in post trauma alterations of acetabulum. Vestnik IvGMA. 2017;(4):15–19. (In Russ.)
  29. Kazhanov IV, Dulaev AK, Mikityuk SI, Besaev GM, Bagdasa­ryanz VG, Andreeva AA, Samokhvalov IM. Specialized trauma care in the acute period of trauma for a victim with unstable pelvic ring injury and acute acetabulum fracture. Vestnik khirurugii im II Grekova. 2020;179(5):98–103. (In Russ.) doi: 10.24884/0042-4625-2020-179-5-98-103.
  30. Mandelli F, Tiziani S, Schmitt J, Werner CML, Simmen HP, Osterhoff G. Medial acetabular wall breach in total hip arthroplasty — is full-weight-bearing possible? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2018;104(5):675–679. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2018.04.020.
  31. Chen M, Luo ZL, Wu KR, Zhang XQ, Ling XD, Shang XF. Cementless total hip arthroplasty with a high hip center for Hartofilakidis type B developmental dysplasia of the hip: results of midterm follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(5):1027–1034. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2015.11.009.
  32. Baauw M, van Hooff ML, Spruit M. Current construct options for revision of large acetabular defects: A systematic review. JBJS Rev. 2016;4(11). doi: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.15.00119.
  33. Anastasieva EA, Sadovoy MA, Voropaeva VV, Kirilova IA. Reconstruction of bone defects after tumor resection by autoand allografts (review of literature). Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii. 2017;23(3):148–155. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2017-23-3-148-155.
  34. Sheth NP, Melnic CM, Paprosky WG. Aceta­bular distraction: An alternative for severe acetabular bone loss and chronic pelvic discontinuity. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B(11, Suppl A):36–42. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B11.34455.
  35. Sheth NP, Melnic CM, Brown N, Sporer SM, Paprosky WG. Two-centre radiological survivorship of acetabular distraction technique for treatment of chronic pelvic discontinuity. Bone Joint J. 2018;100-B(7):909–914. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B7.BJJ-2017-1551.R1.
  36. Mäkinen TJ, Kuzyk P, Safir OA, Backstein D, Gross AE. Role of cages in revision arthroplasty of the ace­tabulum. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98(3):233–242. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.O.00143.
  37. Maslov AP, Korolko AS, Solovey AN. Analysis of revision operations after hip joint replacement. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of ­Belarus. Medical series. 2017;(4):24–30. (In Russ.)
  38. Maruyama M, Wakabayashi S, Ota H, Tensho K. Reconstruction of the shallow acetabulum with a combination of autologous bulk and impaction bone grafting fixed by cement. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017;475(2):387–395. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-5107-6.
  39. Morison Z, Moojen DJ, Nauth A, Hall J, ­McKee MD, Waddell JP, Schemitsch EH. Total hip arthroplasty after acetabular fracture is associated with lower survivorship and more complications. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(2):392–398. doi: 10.1007/s11999-015-4509-1.
  40. Whitehouse MR, Dacombe PJ, Webb JC, Blom AW. Impaction grafting of the acetabulum with ceramic bone graft substitute mixed with femoral head allograft: high survivorship in 43 patients with a median follow-up of 7 years: a follow-up report. Acta Orthop. 2013;84(4):365–370. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2013.792031.
  41. Lee JM, Kim TH. Acetabular cup revision arthroplasty using morselized impaction allograft. Hip Pelvis. 2018;30(2):65–77. doi: 10.5371/hp.2018.30.2.65.
  42. Gibon E, Kerboull L, Courpied JP, Hamadouche M. Acetabular reinforcement rings associated with allograft for severe acetabular defects. Int Orthop. 2019;43(3):561–571. doi: 10.1007/s00264-018-4142-1.
  43. Gilev MV, Zaytsev DV, Izmo­de­nova MYu, Kiseleva DV, Volokitina EA. The influence of bone substitute material on mechanical properties of trabecular bone in augmentation of intra-articular impression fractures. Experimental study. Geniy ortopedii. 2018;24(4):492–499. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2018-24-4-492-499.
  44. Pelliccia L, Lorenz M, Heyde CE, Kaluschke M, Klimant P, Knopp S, Schleifenbaum S, Rotsch C, Weller R, Werner M, Zachmann G, Zajonz D, Hammer N. A cada­ver-based biomechanical model of acetabulum reaming for surgical virtual reality training simulators. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):14545. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-71499-5.
  45. Gredes T, Kubasiewicz-Ross P, Gedrange T, Dominiak M, Kunert-Keil C. Comparison of surface modi­fied zirconia implants with commercially available zirconium and titanium implants: A histological study in pigs. Implant Dent. 2014;23(4):502–507. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000110.
  46. Izmodenova MYu, Gilev MV, Ananyev MV, Zaytsev DV, Antropova IP, Farlenkov AS, Tropin ES, Volokitina EA, Kutepov SM, Yushkov BG. Bone tissue properties after lanthanum zirconate cera­mics implantation: experimental study. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii. 2020;26(3):130–140. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2020-26-3-130-140.
  47. Anisimova EA, Yusupov KS, Anisimov DI, Bondareva EV. Morphology of bone structures of acetabulum and femoral component of hip joint. Saratovskiy nauchno-meditsinskiy zhurnal. 2014;10(1):32–38. (In Russ.)
  48. Kovalenko AN, Tikhilov RM, Bilyk SS, Shubnyakov II, Cherkasov MA, Denisov AO. Positioning of custommade acetabular components at revision hip arthroplasty: do they really match as “a key and a lock”? Vestnik travmatologii i ortopedii im NN Priorova. 2017;(4):31–37. (In Russ.) doi: 10.32414/0869-8678-2017-4-31-37.
  49. Korytkin AA, Zakharova DV, Novikova YS, Gorbatov RO, Kovaldov KA, El Moudni YM. Custom triflange acetabular components in revision hip replacement (experience review). Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii. 2017;23(4):101–111. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2017-23-4-101-111.
  50. Kavalerskiy GM, Murylev VY, Rukin YA, Elizarov PM, Lychagin AV, Tselisheva EY. Three-Dimensio­nal models in planning of revision hip arthroplasty with complex acetabular defects. Indian J Orthop. 2018;52(6):625–630.
  51. Tikhi­lov RM, Shubnyakov II, edi­tors. Rukovodstvo po khirurgii tazobedrennogo sustava. (Guide to hip surgery.) Vol. 1. Saint-Petersburg; 2014. p. 221–256. (In Russ.)
  52. Koenig L, Feng C, He F, Nguyen JT. The effects of revision total hip arthroplasty on medicare spending and beneficiary outcomes: implications for the comprehensive care for joint replacement model. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(9):2764–2769. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.05.008.
  53. Tikhi­lov RM, Shubnyakov II, Kovalenko AN, Totoyev ZA, Lyu B, Bilyk SS. The structure of early revisions after hip replacement. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii. 2014;(2):5–13. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2014-0-2-5-13.
  54. Petrov AB, Ruzanov VI, Mashukov TS. Long-term outcomes of surgical treatment of patients with acetabular fractures. Geniy ortopedii. 2020;26(3):300–305. (In Russ.) doi: 10.18019/1028-4427-2020-26-3-300-305.
  55. Kovalenko AN, Tikhilov RM, Shubnykov II, Bilyk SS, Deni­sov AO, Cherkasov MA, Ibragimov KI. Mini­mum one-year outcomes after revision hip arthroplasty with custome-made implants: function, quality of life and patients satisfaction. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii. 2019;25(1):21–31. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2019-25-1-21-31.
  56. Markov DA, Zvereva KP, Belonogov VN, Bychkov AE, Troshkin AYu. Bone autoplasty of acetabular roof in total arthroplasty for patients with dysplastic coxarthrosis. Politravma. 2018;(2):51–58. (In Russ.)
  57. Pavlov VV, Pronskikh AA, Mamyladze TZ, Bazlov VA, Efimenko MV, Zhilenko VY, Tsegelnikov MM. Staged surgical reconstruction of massive pelvic defect. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii. 2018;24(3):125–134. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2018-24-3-125-134.
  58. Pavlov VV, Kirilova IA, Efimenko MV, Bazlov VA, Mamuladze TZ. Two-stage revision hip replacement patiens with severe acetabulum defect (case report). Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii. 2017;23(4):125–133. (In Russ.) doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2017-23-4-125-133.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

© 2022 Eco-Vector




Согласие на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика»

1. Я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных»), осуществляя использование сайта https://journals.rcsi.science/ (далее – «Сайт»), подтверждая свою полную дееспособность даю согласие на обработку персональных данных с использованием средств автоматизации Оператору - федеральному государственному бюджетному учреждению «Российский центр научной информации» (РЦНИ), далее – «Оператор», расположенному по адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А, со следующими условиями.

2. Категории обрабатываемых данных: файлы «cookies» (куки-файлы). Файлы «cookie» – это небольшой текстовый файл, который веб-сервер может хранить в браузере Пользователя. Данные файлы веб-сервер загружает на устройство Пользователя при посещении им Сайта. При каждом следующем посещении Пользователем Сайта «cookie» файлы отправляются на Сайт Оператора. Данные файлы позволяют Сайту распознавать устройство Пользователя. Содержимое такого файла может как относиться, так и не относиться к персональным данным, в зависимости от того, содержит ли такой файл персональные данные или содержит обезличенные технические данные.

3. Цель обработки персональных данных: анализ пользовательской активности с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика».

4. Категории субъектов персональных данных: все Пользователи Сайта, которые дали согласие на обработку файлов «cookie».

5. Способы обработки: сбор, запись, систематизация, накопление, хранение, уточнение (обновление, изменение), извлечение, использование, передача (доступ, предоставление), блокирование, удаление, уничтожение персональных данных.

6. Срок обработки и хранения: до получения от Субъекта персональных данных требования о прекращении обработки/отзыва согласия.

7. Способ отзыва: заявление об отзыве в письменном виде путём его направления на адрес электронной почты Оператора: info@rcsi.science или путем письменного обращения по юридическому адресу: 119991, г. Москва, Ленинский просп., д.32А

8. Субъект персональных данных вправе запретить своему оборудованию прием этих данных или ограничить прием этих данных. При отказе от получения таких данных или при ограничении приема данных некоторые функции Сайта могут работать некорректно. Субъект персональных данных обязуется сам настроить свое оборудование таким способом, чтобы оно обеспечивало адекватный его желаниям режим работы и уровень защиты данных файлов «cookie», Оператор не предоставляет технологических и правовых консультаций на темы подобного характера.

9. Порядок уничтожения персональных данных при достижении цели их обработки или при наступлении иных законных оснований определяется Оператором в соответствии с законодательством Российской Федерации.

10. Я согласен/согласна квалифицировать в качестве своей простой электронной подписи под настоящим Согласием и под Политикой обработки персональных данных выполнение мною следующего действия на сайте: https://journals.rcsi.science/ нажатие мною на интерфейсе с текстом: «Сайт использует сервис «Яндекс.Метрика» (который использует файлы «cookie») на элемент с текстом «Принять и продолжить».