Total hip arthroplasty in patients with bone defciency of the acetabulum

Radiographics

Volumn 28, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 771-786

  Choplin, Robert H ^a   Henley, Christopher N ^a   Edds, Eric M ^a   Capello, William ^a   Rankin, James L ^a   Buckwalter, Kenneth A ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACETABULUM; ADULT; AGED; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HIP ARTHROPLASTY; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OSTEOPOROSIS; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; REVIEW;

ACETABULUM; ADULT; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, HIP; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOPOROSIS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 45549092353     PISSN: 02715333     EISSN: 15271323     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/rg.283075085     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. DeFrances CJ, Hall MJ. 2005 National Hospital Discharge Survey. Adv Data July 12, 2007;385: 1-19.
2. Kurtz S, Mowat F, Ong K, Chan N, Lau E, Halp-ern M. Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87:1487-1497.
3. Bozic KJ, Durbhakula S, Berry DJ, et al. Differences in patient and procedure characteristics and hospital resource use in primary and revision total joint arthroplasty: a multicenter study. J Arthroplasty 2005;20(suppl 3):17-25.
4. Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM. Acetabular defect classifcation and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty: a 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty 1994;9:33-44.
5. Miller TT. Imaging of hip arthroplasty. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2006;10:30-46. Duffy P, Masri BA, Garbuz D, Duncan CP. Evaluation of patients with pain following total hip replacement. Instr Course Lect 2006;55:223-232.
6. D'Antonio JA, Capello WN, Borden LS, et al. Classifcation and management of acetabular abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989;243:126-137.
7. Manaster BJ. Total hip arthroplasty: radiographic evaluation. RadioGraphics 1996;16:645-660.
8. Tehranzadeh J, Schneider R, Freiberger RH. Radiological evaluation of painful total hip replacement. Radiology 1981;141:355-362.
9. Sporer SM, O'Rourke M, Chong P, Paprosky WG. The use of structural distal femoral allografts for acetabular reconstruction: average ten-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87:760-765.
10. Carlsson AS, Gentz CF. Radiographic versus clinical loosening of the acetabular component in non-infected total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1984;185:145-150.
11. Hodgkinson JP, Shelley P, Wroblewski BM. The correlation between the roentgenographic appearance and operative fndings at the bone-cement junction of the socket in Charnley low friction arthroplasties. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988;228: 105-109.
12. Sutherland CJ. Radiographic evaluation of acetabular bone stock in failed total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1988;3(1):73-79.
13. Puri L, Wixson RL, Stern SH, Kohli J, Hendrix RW, Stulberg SD. Use of helical computed tomography for the assessment of acetabular osteolysis after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002;84-A(4):609-614.
14. Buckwalter KA, Parr JA, Choplin RH, Capello WN. Multichannel CT imaging of orthopedic hardware and implants. Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2006;10:86-97.
15. Kitamura N, Naudie DD, Leung SB, Hopper RH Jr, Engh CA Sr. Diagnostic features of pelvic oste-olysis on computed tomography: the importance of communication pathways. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87(7):1542-1550.
16. Potter HG, Nestor BJ, Sofka CM, Ho ST, Peters LE, Salvati EA. Magnetic resonance imaging after total hip arthroplasty: evaluation of peripros-thetic soft tissue. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86: 1947-1954.
17. Weiland DE, Walde TA, Leung SB, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of peripros-thetic acetabular osteolysis: a cadaveric study. J Orthop Res 2005;23:713-719.
18. Fessy MH, N'Diaye A, Carret JP, Fischer LP. Locating the center of rotation of the hip. Surg Radiol Anat 1999;21:247-250.
19. Brady OH, Masri BA, Garbuz DS, Duncan CP. Use of reconstruction rings for the management of acetabular bone loss during revision hip surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1999;7:1-7.
20. Hedley AK, Gruen TA, Ruoff DP. Revision of failed total hip arthroplasties with uncemented porous-coated anatomic components. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1988;235:75-90.
21. Tanzer M, Drucker D, Jasty M, McDonald M, Harris WH. Revision of the acetabular component with an uncemented Harris-Galante porous-coated prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1992;74: 987-994.
22. Perka C, Ludwig R. Reconstruction of segmental defects during revision procedures of the acetabu-lum with the Burch-Schneider anti-protrusio cage. J Arthroplasty 2001;16:568-574.
23. Eggli S, Müller C, Ganz R. Revision surgery in pelvic discontinuity. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002;398:136-145.
24. Gustke KA. Jumbo cup or high hip center: is bigger better? J Arthroplasty 2004;19:120-123.
25. Gross AE, Duncan CP, Garbuz D, Mohamed EM. Revision arthroplasty of the acetabulum in association with loss of bone stock. Instr Course Lect 1999;48:57-66.
26. Gross AE, Goodman S. The current role of structural grafts and cages in revision arthroplasty of the hip. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004;429:193-200.
27. Learmonth ID. Total hip replacement and the law of diminishing returns. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006;88:1664-1673.
28. Petrera P, Rubash H. Revision total hip arthro-plasty: the acetabular component. J Am Acad Or-thop Surg 1995;3:15-21.