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

IMPACTION BONE GRAFTING FOR ACETABULAR RECONSTRUCTION: AVERAGE 5.5-YEAR RESULTS



Abstract

Though over ten-year follow-up results of impaction bone grafting for acetabular reconstruction from European countries are available in literatures, clinical reports from Asian countries are rare. The purpose of the present study is to assess mid-term clinical and radiographic follow-up results at least three years after acetabular reconstruction with impaction bone grafting technique by single surgeon in Japanese cohort.

The senior author performed 24 acetabular revisions with impaction bone grafting technique in 24 patients from February 2001 to June 2005. The average age of the patients at the revision was 67.5 years (36–82 years). The average follow-up period was 5 years and 5 months (3–7.3 years). The reasons for the operation were aseptic loosening of sockets in 17 hips and migration of bipolar heads in seven. The acetabular bone defects were classified as cavitary in 3 hips and as combined segmental-cavitary in 21 hips according to AAOS classification. For clinical assessment, Merle d’Aubigné and Postel hip score was assessed. Peri-operative complications were recorded. For radiological assessment, antero-posterior hip radiograph was analyzed pre-operatively, and post-operatively at one month, 6 months and every 6 months thereafter. Clear lines more than 2 mm around the sockets using DeLee and Charnley zone classification, and migration of the sockets were assessed. Hodgikinson’s type 3 (complete demarcation line) and type 4 (migration more than 5 mm or change of the angle more than 5 degrees) were classified as “loosening”. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed with radiographic loosening and any re-operation (including recommendation for the re-operation) for the sockets as the end point, respectively.

The mean Merle d’Aubigné and Postel hip score improved from 11.5 points before operation to 15.7 points at the final follow-up. Though, intra-operative blow-out fracture of the acetabular floor was detected in 3 hips, re-containment had been achieved by adding metal mesh or bone graft. Clear lines at cement-bone interface were detected at zone 3 in 2 hips. Migration more than 5 mm was detected in 2 hips of type III defect at 2 years and 6 months. Re-revision was recommended for one migrated hip at 3 years and 6 months after the operation, and the other hip was stable with no clinical symptom without progressive migration at the final follow-up of 5 years. The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, with loosening and re-operation as the end point, predicted a rate of survival of the socket of 91.7% and 95.2% at 5 years, respectively.

In conclusion, acetabular reconstruction with impaction bone grafting is attractive, but technical demanding procedure. The survival rate of the present series was compatible with the results of previous literatures. However, careful follow-up is essential, especially for the cases with massive bone defect.

Correspondence should be addressed to ISTA Secretariat, PO Box 6564, Auburn, CA 95604, USA. Tel: 1-916-454-9884, Fax: 1-916-454-9882, Email: ista@pacbell.net