header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

RECOGNISING & TREATING PELVIC DISCONTINUITY: RUN OR REFER?



Abstract

Uncemented hemispherical sockets are the implant of choice for most acetabular revisions. Several studies at mid-term document good clinical results, and furthermore, the implants are both versatile and technically straightforward to insert. When bone loss is present, the indications for uncemented sockets are expanded by using jumbo uncemented cups or uncemented cups placed at a high hip center. The main limitation of uncemented hemispherical cups is the need to place them on sufficient host bone to provide initial mechanical stability with a high, long-term likelihood of biologic fixation. The amount of host bone needed to meet these criteria has been debated. One rule of thumb that has been used is 50% surface area contact of the shell with host bone. However, for large sockets with a large surface area, a smaller percentage of the surface in contact with host bone may prove acceptable, provided the shell has host bone support in key areas including a peripheral rim fit and support in the dome of the socket.

When these criteria cannot be fulfilled, an alternative method of acetabular reconstruction must be considered. These alternatives include structural bone grafts, impaction grafting, and anti-protrusio cages. Anti-protrusio cages have the advantage of distributing forces over a large surface area of native bone, resisting migration, and being compatible with either bulk or particulate graft in massive acetabular deficiencies. These implants do not provide for biologic fixation and thus their use probably is best restricted to situations in which porous coated implants are not likely to work.

Pelvic discontinuity is a specific form of acetabular bone deficiency in which there is a transverse fracture of the acetabulum. Usually this occurs in association with marked acetabular bone loss and represents a stress fracture through deficient bone. Preoperative findings suggestive of pelvic discontinuity include: medial/lateral offset of the superior pelvis relative to the inferior hemipelvis, malrotation of the inferior hemipelvis relative to superior hemipelvis, or visible fracture line demonstrating the pelvic discontinuity. Judet films and true lateral radiographs of the hip can be helpful to delineate the presence of pelvic discontinuity.

The treatment principles for pelvic discontinuity include the following: 1.) gain stable fixation of the new acetabular implant. When the bone deficiency is relatively modest this may be possible with a hemispherical uncemented socket. Frequently, however, bone deficiency is massive and an anti-protrusio cage is necessary; 2.) restore pelvic continuity and stability. Usually this is possible with just a posterior column plate; 3.) bone graft large defects using particulate versus structural bone graft. In massive deficiencies structural bone grafts have the advantage of bridging the discontinuity and allowing healing of the native pelvis to the structural graft inferiorly and superiorly which may promote healing of the discontinuity.

The results of treatment of pelvic discontinuity are dependent on the severity of bone loss and whether or not the pelvis had previous therapeutic radiation; milder bone loss is associated with better results; and more severe bone loss and previous therapeutic pelvic radiation with worse results.

Surgery for pelvic discontinuity is complex and the most common complications include recurrent instability, infection, and sciatic neuropathy.

The abstracts were prepared by Mrs Dorothy L. Granchi, Course Coordinator. Correspondence should be addressed to her at PMB 295, 8000 Plaza Boulevard, Mentor, Ohio 44060, USA.