Cemented femoral reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty

Current Opinion in Orthopaedics

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 9-15

  Spitzer, Andrew I ^a,b   Berkowitz, Richard D ^a  

^a KERLAN JOBE ORTHOPAEDIC CLINIC   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BONE CEMENT;

FEMUR; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REOPERATION; REVIEW; TOTAL HIP PROSTHESIS;

EID: 0030005008     PISSN: 10419918     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00001433-199602000-00003     Document Type: Review

References (68)

1. Amstutz HC, Ma SM, Jinnah RH, Mai L: Revision of aseptic loose total hip arthroplasties. Clin Orthop 1982, 170:21-33.
2. Pellicci PM, Wilson PD, Sledge CB, Salvati EA, Ranawat CS, Poss R, Callaghan J: Long-term results of revision total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985, 67:513-516.
3. Callaghan JJ, Salvati EA, Pellicci PM, Wilson PD, Ranawat CS: Results of revision for mechanical failure after cemented total hip replacement, 1979 to 1982. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985, 67:1074-1085.
4. Hunter GA, Welsh RP, Cameron HU: The results of revision of total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1979, 61:419-421.
5. Stromberg CN, Herberts P, Palmertz B: Cemented revision hip arthroplasty: a multicenter 5-9 year study of 204 first revisions for loosening. Acta Orthop Scand 1992, 63:111-119.
6. Kavanagh BF, Ilstrup DM, Fitzgerald RH: Revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985, 67:517-526.
7. Dohmae Y, Bechtold JE, Sherman RE, Puno RM, Gustilo RB: Reduction in cement-bone interface shear strength between primary and revision arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1988, 236:214-220.
8. Raut VV, Siney PD, Wroblewski BM: Revision for aseptic stem loosening using the cemented Charnley prosthesis: a review of 351 hips. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995, 77:23-37. A total of 351 cemented revisions of aseptically loose femoral stems were examined. Mean follow-up was 6 years. The latest radiographs showed definite stem loosening in 10 hips (2.8%), and 20 hips (5.7%) had required rerevision, only nine of which (2.6%) were for mechanical failure of the stem. Survivorship analysis, with the end point rerevision of the stem, revealed 97% survival at 8 years and 91.6% at 11 years. The authors believe that improved cementing technique positively impacted their results.
9. Barrack RL, Mulroy RD, Harris WH: Improved cementing techniques and femoral component loosening in young patients with hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1992, 74:385-389.
10. Mulroy RJ, Harris WH: The effect of improved cementing techniques on component loosening in total hip replacement: an 11-year radiographic review. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1990, 72:757-760.
11. Poss R, Brick GW, Wright RJ, Roberts DW, Sledge CB: The effects of modern cementing techniques on the longevity of total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 1988, 19:591-598.
12. Rubash HE, Harris WH: Revision of nonseptic, loose, cemented femoral components using modern cementing techniques. J Arthroplasty 1988, 3:241-248.
13. Estok DM, Harris WH: Long-term results of cemented femoral revision surgery using second-generation techniques: an average 11.7-year follow-up evaluation. Clin Orthop 1994, 299:190-202. Thirty-eight hips in which second-generation cementing techniques were used during femoral revision arthroplasty were reviewed at an average follow-up of 11.7 years. Four femoral components (10.5%) required rerevision for aseptic loosening and four additional hips (10.5%) had radiographic evidence of definite femoral component loosening. The authors attribute the 90% implant survival and 79% prevalence of a well-fixed femoral component at 11.7 years to the improved cementing techniques and modern stem design.
14. Harris W: The case for cemented fixation of the femur in every patient. Instr Course Lect 1994, 43:367-371.
15. Jasty M: Cemented fixation of the femur. Instr Course Lect 1994, 43:373-379.
16. Harris WH: Revision total hip arthroplasty: cemented revision for femoral failure. Orthopedics 1995, 18:854-855. This study reports the 15-year follow-up of femoral revisions using second-generation cement techniques. The rerevision rate was 11%, and another 9% was radiographically loose. Significantly improved results were achieved over results after first-generation cemented revisions. Also, a brief technical description of cemented femoral revision is given.
17. Katz R, Callaghan J, Sullivan P, Johnston R: Results of cemented femoral revision total hip arthroplasty using improved cementing techniques. Clin Orthop 1995, 319:178-183. Seventy-nine cemented femoral revisions were performed with a distal cement plug and cement gun delivery system. At a minimum of 10 years of follow-up, the incidence of rerevision for aseptic loosening was 9.5%, and the overall failure rate was 26%, including revisions and those radiographically probably or definitely loose. This represents a significant improvement over results in historical control groups in which first-generation cementing techniques were employed.
18. Kavanagh BF, Fitzgerald RH: Multiple revisions for failed total hip arthroplasty not associated with infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1987, 69:1144-1149.
19. Retpen JB, Jensen JS: Risk factors for recurrent aseptic loosening of the femoral component after cemented revision. J Arthroplasty 1993, 8:471-478.
20. Turner RH, Scheller AJ, Emerson RH: Revisions with cemented long-stem prostheses. In The Hip: Proceedings of the 12th Open Scientific Meeting of the Hip Society. Edited by Welch RB. St. Louis: Mosby; 1984:322-341.
21. Turner RH, Mattingly DA, Scheller A: Femoral revision total hip arthroplasty using a long-stem femoral component: clinical and radiographic analysis. J Arthroplasty 1987, 2:247-258.
22. Chandler HP, Penenberg BL: Bone Stock Deficiency in Total Hip Replacement. Thorofare, NJ: Slack; 1989.
23. Izquierdo RJ, Northmore-Ball MD: Long term results of revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1994, 76:34-39. A total of 148 consecutive hip revision arthroplasties were studied. For cemented femoral stems, the clinical survival at 10 years was 95% and the radiographic survival was 90.5%.
24. Huo MH, Salvati EA: Revision total hip replacement using cement. Techniques Orthop 1993, 7:58-64.
25. McCollum DE, Nunley JA: Bone grafting in acetabular protrusio: a biologic buttress. In The Hip: Proceedings of the Sixth Open Scientific Meeting of the Hip Society. St. Louis: Mosby; 1978:124-146.
26. McCollum DE, Nunley JA, Harrelson JM: Bone-grafting in total hip replacement for acetabular protrusion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1980, 62:1065-1073.
27. Gates HS, McCollum DE, Poletti SC, Nunley JA: Bone grafting in total hip arthroplasty for protrusio acetabuli: a follow-up note. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990, 72:248-251.
28. Gie GA, Linder L, Ling RS, Simon JP, Slooff TJ, Timperley AJ: Contained morselized allograft in revision total hip arthroplasty: surgical technique. Orthop Clin North Am 1993, 24:717-725.
29. Gie GA, Fowler JL, Lee AJC, Ling RSM: The long term behaviour of a totally collarless, polished femoral component in cemented total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1990, 72:935.
30. Fowler J, Gie G, Lee A, Ling R: Experience with the Exeter total hip replacement since 1970. Orthop Clin North Am 1988, 19:477-489.
31. Schreurs BW, Buma P, Huiskes R, Slagter JL, Slooff TJ: Morsellized allografts for fixation of the hip prosthesis femoral component: a mechanical and histological study in the goat. Acta Orthop Scand 1994, 65:267-275.
32. Ling RSM, Timperley AJ, Linder L: Histology of cancellous impaction grafting in the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993, 75:693-696.
33. Nelissen RG, Bauer TW, Weidenhielm LR, LeGolvan DP, Mikhail WE: Revision hip arthroplasty with the use of cement and impaction grafting: histological analysis of four cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995, 77:412-422. Biopsy specimens revealed incorporation of allograft and remodeling of bone in the proximal femur after impaction allografting techniques 11 to 27 months after revision surgery. There was no evidence of osteolysis, nor continuous fibrous membrane. Three histologic zones were identified within the impacted allograft.
34. Elting JJ, Zicat BA, Mikhail WEM, Hubbell JC, House BS: Impaction grafting: preliminary report of a new method for exchange femoral arthroplasty. Orthopedics 1995, 18:107-112. Thirty-seven revision arthroplasties utilizing impaction allografting were reviewed. Results after 2 to 5 years revealed few complications, a majority of satisfactory outcomes, evidence of graft incorporation, and no mechanical loosening. Cautious optimism is suggested.
35. Capello WN: Impaction grafting plus cement for femoral component fixation in revision hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics 1994, 17:878-879. Seventeen revision hip arthroplasties were performed using the impaction allografting technique. At 2-year follow-up, there were no radiographic failures or rerevisions. All cases were clinical successes.
36. Gie GA, Linder L, Ling RS, Simon JP, Slooff TJ, Timperley AJ: Impacted cancellous allografts and cement for revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993, 75:14-21.
37. Ling R: Instructional course lectures 221 : revision total hip arthroplasty: management of bone loss. Proceedings of 1995 AAOS Rosemont. IL:AAOS; 1995.
38. Elting J, Mikhail W, Zicat B, Hubbell J, Lane L, House B: Preliminary report of impaction grafting for exchange femoral arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1995, 319:159-167. Fifty-six hips available for review 2 to 5 years following revision using impaction grafting had an average Harris hip score of 90. Radiographic evidence of graft incorporation and bone remodeling was present in 93% of the hips reviewed. There was no evidence of femoral component loosening in this group.
39. Lieberman JR, Moeckel BH, Evans BG, Salvati EA, Ranawat CS: Cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993, 75:869-871.
40. Rosenstein A, MacDonald W, Iliadis A, McLardy SP: Revision of cemented fixation and cement-bone interface strength. Proc Inst Mech Eng 1992, 206:47-49.
41. McCallum J, Hozack W: Recementing a femoral component into a stable cement mantle using ultrasonic tools. Clin Orthop 1995, 319:232-237. A description of the use of ultrasonic tools for preparation of an intact cement mantle to accept a recemented femoral component. There were no significant complications at the 2-year follow-up in four patients or at shorter follow-up in 11 others.
42. Greenwald AS: Biomechanical considerations in revision arthroplasty. In The Hip: Proceedings of the 12th Open Scientific Meeting of the Hip Society. Edited by Welch RB. St. Louis: Mosby; 1984:254-270.
43. Gross AE: Revision arthroplasty of the hip using allograft bone. In Allografts in Orthopaedic Practice. Edited by Czitrom AA, Gross AE. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1992:147-174.
44. Buchholz HW, Elson RA, Engelbrecht E, Lodenkamper H, Rottger J, Siegel A. Management of deep infection of total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1981, 63:342-353.
45. Garvin KL, Fitzgerald RJ, Salvati EA, Brause BD, Nercessian OA, Wallrichs SL, Ilstrup DM: Reconstruction of the infected total hip and knee arthroplasty with gentamicin- impregnated Palacos bone cement. Instr Course Lect 1993, 42:293-302.
46. Garvin KL, Evans BG, Salvati EA, Brause BD: Palacos gentamicin for the treatment of deep periprosthetic hip infections. Clin Orthop 1994, 298:97-105. Forty hip arthroplasties with documented deep infection were reimplanted using Palacos gentamicin. After thorough debridement, the patients were treated with appropriate intravenous antibiotics. Sixteen hips had implantation of gentamicin-impregnated beads at the time of prosthetic removal. At an average follow-up of 5 years, two of 40 hips (5%) developed recurrent infection at 1 and 5 months postoperatively. No recurrences were noted in patients with gram-negative or mixed infections. The high success rate and lack of systemic complications were attributed to the Palacos gentamicin.
47. Nelson CL, Evans RP, Blaha JD, Calhoun J, Henry SL, Patzakis MJ: A comparison of gentamicin-impregnated polymethylmethacrylate bead implantation to conventional parenteral antibiotic therapy in infected total hip and knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1993, 295:96-101.
48. Salvati EA, Callaghan JJ, Brause BD, Klein RF, Small RD: Reimplantation in infection: elution of gentamicin from cement and beads. Clin Orthop 1986, 207:83-93.
49. Hoff S, Fitzgerald R, Kelly P: The depot administration of penicillin G and gentamicin in acrylic bone cement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1981, 63:798-804.
50. Hill J, Klenerman L, Trustey S, Blowers R: Diffusion of antibiotics from acrylic bone-cement in vitro. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1977, 59:197-199.
51. Elson R, Jephcott A, McGechie D, Verettas D: Antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1977, 59:200-205.
52. Elson RA: Exchange arthroplasty for infection: perspective from the United Kingdom. Orthop Clin North Am 1993, 24:761-767.
53. Raut VV, Siney PD, Wroblewski BM: One- stage revision of infected total hip replacements with discharging sinuses. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1994, 76:721-724. This is a prospective study of 57 one-stage cemented revisions of total hip replacements for deep infection with an actively discharging sinus. The average follow-up was 7 years and 4 months; seven patients required rerevisions, but at the most recent follow-up, the infection was controlled in 49 (86%).
54. Wroblewski BM: One-stage revision of infected cemented total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1986, 211:103-107.
55. Sanzen L, Carlsson AS, Josefsson G, Lindberg LT: Revision operations on infected total hip arthroplasties: two- to nine-year follow-up study. Clin Orthop 1988, 229:165-172.
56. Ivarsson I, Wahlstrom O, Djerf K, Jacobsson SA: Revision of infected hip replacement: two-stage procedure with a temporary gentamicin spacer. Acta Orthop Scand 1994, 65:7-8.
57. Kraay MJ, Goldberg VM, Figgie HD: Use of an antibiotic impregnated polymethylmethacrylate intramedullary spacer for complicated revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1992, 7:397-402.
58. McDonald DJ, Fitzgerald RJ, Ilstrup DM: Two-stage reconstruction of a total hip arthroplasty because of infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1989, 71:828-834.
59. Salvati EA, Callaghan JJ, Brause BD: Prosthetic reimplantation for salvage of the infected hip. Instr Course Lect 1986, 35:234-241.
60. Fitzgerald R: Infected total hip arthroplasty: diagnosis and treatment. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1995, 3:249-262. This is a comprehensive review of the entire topic of infected total hip arthroplasty.
61. Duncan CP, Beauchamp C: A temporary antibiotic-loaded joint replacement for management of complex infections involving the hip. Orthop Clin North Am 1993, 24:751-759.
62. Kendall R, Masri B, Duncan C, Beauchamp C, McGraw R, Bora B: Temporary antibiotic loaded acrylic hip replacement: a novel method for management of the infected THA. Semin Arthroplasty 1994, 5:171-177. Forty-six cases with minimum 2-year follow-up are reviewed in which a prosthesis of antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement was implanted after debridement of an infected total hip arthroplasty. The technique succeeded in controlling infection in 93.5% of cases.
63. Kilgus DJ, Luetzow W, Tipton J, Moreland J, Amstutz H: Factors affecting the outcome of femoral component revision in total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Trans 1993, 17:966-967.
64. Stromberg CN, Herberts P: A multicenter 10-year study of cemented revision total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than 55 years old. J Arthroplasty 1994, 9:595-601. Fifty-nine cemented femoral revision arthroplasties performed for aseptic loosening in patients younger than 55 years were reviewed at an average 10-year follow-up. Forty-nine hips (83%) were rerevised or radiographically loose or painful. Bone loss progressed from the initial to the final visit, increasing the complexity of any future potential revisions.
65. Harris WH: The case for cementing all femoral components in total hip replacements. Can J Surg 1995, 38:555-560.
66. Harris WH: Total hip replacement: "cement versus cementless" resolution. Bull Rheum Dis 1994, 43:1-4.
67. Evans BG, Salvati EA, Huo MH, Huk OL: The rationale for cemented total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am 1993, 24:599-610.
68. Pierson JL, Harris WH: Cemented revision for femoral osteolysis in cemented arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1994, 76:40-44. Twenty-nine consecutive cases of cemented femoral revision arthroplasties for osteolysis were reviewed. After an average follow-up of 8.5 years, osteolysis recurred in only two cases (6.9%) and 25 femoral components (86%) remained well fixed.