1
|
Castagnini F, Pardo F, Lucchini S, Rotini M, Cavalieri B, Dalla Rosa M, Vitacca S, Di Martino A, Faldini C, Traina F. Cementless Primary Stems in Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A Narrative Review. J Clin Med 2024; 13:604. [PMID: 38276110 PMCID: PMC10816713 DOI: 10.3390/jcm13020604] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/28/2023] [Revised: 01/16/2024] [Accepted: 01/17/2024] [Indexed: 01/27/2024] Open
Abstract
Cementless primary stems in revision hip arthroplasties may be conservative options to preserve bone stock and provide adequate reconstruction of the hip biomechanics. However, there is still little evidence about indications, limitations, and outcomes. This narrative review showed that conventional standard stems were adopted in different revision settings, up to Paprosky IIIA grade bone defects. In cases of acceptable metaphyseal bone stock, when a scratch fit of at least 4 cm can be achieved, a conventional cementless stem may be an adequate solution. Mid-term clinical and radiographic outcomes and survival rates were similar to long revision stems, whereas complications, surgical time, and costs were lower among conventional stems. However, unsuitable contexts for conventional stems included canal diameters larger than 18 mm and failed revision stems with cortical weakening. Even short stems can be considered in revisions, in order to preserve bone stock and stay proximal to femoral remodeling zones and bone/cement plugs. Short stems were successfully adopted up to Paprosky IIIA bone defects, achieving mid-term survival rates not inferior to long revision stems. Ageing, osteoporosis, and intraoperative femoral fractures were the main negative prognostic factors. In very select cases, a downsizing technique (from longer to shorter stems) may be adopted to simplify the procedure and reduce complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Francesco Castagnini
- Ortopedia-Traumatologia e Chirurgia Protesica e dei Reimpianti d’Anca e di Ginocchio, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (F.P.); (S.L.); (M.R.); (B.C.); (M.D.R.); (S.V.); (F.T.)
| | - Francesco Pardo
- Ortopedia-Traumatologia e Chirurgia Protesica e dei Reimpianti d’Anca e di Ginocchio, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (F.P.); (S.L.); (M.R.); (B.C.); (M.D.R.); (S.V.); (F.T.)
| | - Stefano Lucchini
- Ortopedia-Traumatologia e Chirurgia Protesica e dei Reimpianti d’Anca e di Ginocchio, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (F.P.); (S.L.); (M.R.); (B.C.); (M.D.R.); (S.V.); (F.T.)
| | - Marco Rotini
- Ortopedia-Traumatologia e Chirurgia Protesica e dei Reimpianti d’Anca e di Ginocchio, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (F.P.); (S.L.); (M.R.); (B.C.); (M.D.R.); (S.V.); (F.T.)
| | - Bruno Cavalieri
- Ortopedia-Traumatologia e Chirurgia Protesica e dei Reimpianti d’Anca e di Ginocchio, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (F.P.); (S.L.); (M.R.); (B.C.); (M.D.R.); (S.V.); (F.T.)
| | - Mattia Dalla Rosa
- Ortopedia-Traumatologia e Chirurgia Protesica e dei Reimpianti d’Anca e di Ginocchio, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (F.P.); (S.L.); (M.R.); (B.C.); (M.D.R.); (S.V.); (F.T.)
| | - Stefano Vitacca
- Ortopedia-Traumatologia e Chirurgia Protesica e dei Reimpianti d’Anca e di Ginocchio, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (F.P.); (S.L.); (M.R.); (B.C.); (M.D.R.); (S.V.); (F.T.)
| | - Alberto Di Martino
- 1 Orthopedics and Traumatology Department, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (A.D.M.); (C.F.)
- Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences—DIBINEM, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
| | - Cesare Faldini
- 1 Orthopedics and Traumatology Department, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (A.D.M.); (C.F.)
- Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences—DIBINEM, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
| | - Francesco Traina
- Ortopedia-Traumatologia e Chirurgia Protesica e dei Reimpianti d’Anca e di Ginocchio, IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via Pupilli 1, 40136 Bologna, Italy; (F.P.); (S.L.); (M.R.); (B.C.); (M.D.R.); (S.V.); (F.T.)
- Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences—DIBINEM, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Conservative two-stage revision with primary components of infected total hip arthroplasty: An analysis of survival, clinical and radiographic outcomes. PLoS One 2020; 15:e0239981. [PMID: 33002069 PMCID: PMC7529346 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239981] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2020] [Accepted: 09/01/2020] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Few studies provide an analysis of conservative two-stage revision of hip
periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and its impact on final outcome. A
conservative revision is defined when soft tissues and bone quality enable the
use of primary prosthetic components. Data of patients treated for chronic hip
PJI who underwent two-stage revision between 2009 and 2016 and had a minimum of
2 years of follow-up were collected. Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Harris Hip Score
(HHS) and radiological and microbiological data were retrieved and analysed.
Clinical and functional outcome, survival, mortality, eradication, reinfection
and re-revision rates within subgroups of patients with primary components and
revision components are reported herein. A total of 148 patients underwent
two-stage hip exchange with a mean follow-up of 55.6 ± 23.1 months and a mean
age at surgery of 64.3 ± 12.7 years. Forty-four percent of patients underwent
conservative revision. The mean HHS significantly improved from 40.6 ± 9.4
points to the final value of 87.8 ± 10.5 points (p = .002), and the mean OHS
went from 20.3 ± 3.8 points to 40.3 ± 5. points (p< .001). Patients who were
treated with primary components or isolated revision stems in the second stage
had a significant reduction in surgical times (p< .001). The mortality rate
for all causes of death was 6.8%, the eradication rate was 89.9%, the
reinfection rate was 4.7% and the reoperation rate was 7.4% without differences
between conservative and non-conservative revisions. Two-stage exchange
arthroplasty for total hip arthroplasty (THA) PJI is a good strategy that
provides satisfactory results, high eradication rates and no further need for
revision. The conservative two-stage revision in patients with adequate bone
stock represents a feasible option with good results and survival rates.
Collapse
|