Cargando…
Impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum at hip revision using a mix of bone chips and a biphasic porous ceramic bone graft substitute: Good outcome in 43 patients followed for a mean of 2 years
Background and purpose One of the greatest problems of revision hip arthroplasty is dealing with lost bone stock. Good results have been obtained with impaction grafting of allograft bone. However, there have been problems of infection, reproducibility, antigenicity, stability, availability of bone,...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Informa Healthcare
2009
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2823174/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19404794 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453670902884767 |
_version_ | 1782177609845571584 |
---|---|
author | Blom, Ashley W Wylde, Vikki Livesey, Christine Whitehouse, Michael R Eastaugh-Waring, Steve Bannister, Gordon C Learmonth, Ian D |
author_facet | Blom, Ashley W Wylde, Vikki Livesey, Christine Whitehouse, Michael R Eastaugh-Waring, Steve Bannister, Gordon C Learmonth, Ian D |
author_sort | Blom, Ashley W |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background and purpose One of the greatest problems of revision hip arthroplasty is dealing with lost bone stock. Good results have been obtained with impaction grafting of allograft bone. However, there have been problems of infection, reproducibility, antigenicity, stability, availability of bone, and cost. Thus, alternatives to allograft have been sought. BoneSave is a biphasic porous ceramic specifically designed for use in impaction grafting. BoneSave is 80% tricalcium phosphate and 20% hydroxyapatite. Previous in vitro and in vivo studies have yielded good results using mixtures of allograft and BoneSave, when compared with allograft alone. This study is the first reported human clinical trial of BoneSave in impaction grafting. Methods We performed a single-institution, multi-surgeon, prospective cohort study. 43 consecutive patients underwent revision hip arthroplasty using BoneSave and allograft to restore missing bone in the acetabulum. 9 patients had cemented acetabular components implanted and 34 uncemented. 10 patients had cemented femoral components implanted and 1 had an uncemented femoral component. 32 patients did not have their femoral component revised. Results No patients were lost to follow-up. At a mean follow-up of 24 (11–48) months, there were no re-revisions and there was no implant migration. 1 acetabular component had confluent lucent lines at the implant-graft interface. Complications were rare (1 fracture, 2 dislocations). Patient satisfaction with the procedure was high. Interpretation Short-term results indicate that impaction grafting of BoneSave and allograft is an effective method of dealing with loss of bone stock at revision hip surgery. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2823174 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2009 |
publisher | Informa Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-28231742010-02-18 Impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum at hip revision using a mix of bone chips and a biphasic porous ceramic bone graft substitute: Good outcome in 43 patients followed for a mean of 2 years Blom, Ashley W Wylde, Vikki Livesey, Christine Whitehouse, Michael R Eastaugh-Waring, Steve Bannister, Gordon C Learmonth, Ian D Acta Orthop Research Article Background and purpose One of the greatest problems of revision hip arthroplasty is dealing with lost bone stock. Good results have been obtained with impaction grafting of allograft bone. However, there have been problems of infection, reproducibility, antigenicity, stability, availability of bone, and cost. Thus, alternatives to allograft have been sought. BoneSave is a biphasic porous ceramic specifically designed for use in impaction grafting. BoneSave is 80% tricalcium phosphate and 20% hydroxyapatite. Previous in vitro and in vivo studies have yielded good results using mixtures of allograft and BoneSave, when compared with allograft alone. This study is the first reported human clinical trial of BoneSave in impaction grafting. Methods We performed a single-institution, multi-surgeon, prospective cohort study. 43 consecutive patients underwent revision hip arthroplasty using BoneSave and allograft to restore missing bone in the acetabulum. 9 patients had cemented acetabular components implanted and 34 uncemented. 10 patients had cemented femoral components implanted and 1 had an uncemented femoral component. 32 patients did not have their femoral component revised. Results No patients were lost to follow-up. At a mean follow-up of 24 (11–48) months, there were no re-revisions and there was no implant migration. 1 acetabular component had confluent lucent lines at the implant-graft interface. Complications were rare (1 fracture, 2 dislocations). Patient satisfaction with the procedure was high. Interpretation Short-term results indicate that impaction grafting of BoneSave and allograft is an effective method of dealing with loss of bone stock at revision hip surgery. Informa Healthcare 2009-04-29 2009-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC2823174/ /pubmed/19404794 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453670902884767 Text en Copyright: © Nordic Orthopedic Federation http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the source is credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Blom, Ashley W Wylde, Vikki Livesey, Christine Whitehouse, Michael R Eastaugh-Waring, Steve Bannister, Gordon C Learmonth, Ian D Impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum at hip revision using a mix of bone chips and a biphasic porous ceramic bone graft substitute: Good outcome in 43 patients followed for a mean of 2 years |
title | Impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum at hip revision using a mix of bone chips and a biphasic porous ceramic bone graft substitute: Good outcome in 43 patients followed for a mean of 2 years |
title_full | Impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum at hip revision using a mix of bone chips and a biphasic porous ceramic bone graft substitute: Good outcome in 43 patients followed for a mean of 2 years |
title_fullStr | Impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum at hip revision using a mix of bone chips and a biphasic porous ceramic bone graft substitute: Good outcome in 43 patients followed for a mean of 2 years |
title_full_unstemmed | Impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum at hip revision using a mix of bone chips and a biphasic porous ceramic bone graft substitute: Good outcome in 43 patients followed for a mean of 2 years |
title_short | Impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum at hip revision using a mix of bone chips and a biphasic porous ceramic bone graft substitute: Good outcome in 43 patients followed for a mean of 2 years |
title_sort | impaction bone grafting of the acetabulum at hip revision using a mix of bone chips and a biphasic porous ceramic bone graft substitute: good outcome in 43 patients followed for a mean of 2 years |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2823174/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19404794 http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453670902884767 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT blomashleyw impactionbonegraftingoftheacetabulumathiprevisionusingamixofbonechipsandabiphasicporousceramicbonegraftsubstitutegoodoutcomein43patientsfollowedforameanof2years AT wyldevikki impactionbonegraftingoftheacetabulumathiprevisionusingamixofbonechipsandabiphasicporousceramicbonegraftsubstitutegoodoutcomein43patientsfollowedforameanof2years AT liveseychristine impactionbonegraftingoftheacetabulumathiprevisionusingamixofbonechipsandabiphasicporousceramicbonegraftsubstitutegoodoutcomein43patientsfollowedforameanof2years AT whitehousemichaelr impactionbonegraftingoftheacetabulumathiprevisionusingamixofbonechipsandabiphasicporousceramicbonegraftsubstitutegoodoutcomein43patientsfollowedforameanof2years AT eastaughwaringsteve impactionbonegraftingoftheacetabulumathiprevisionusingamixofbonechipsandabiphasicporousceramicbonegraftsubstitutegoodoutcomein43patientsfollowedforameanof2years AT bannistergordonc impactionbonegraftingoftheacetabulumathiprevisionusingamixofbonechipsandabiphasicporousceramicbonegraftsubstitutegoodoutcomein43patientsfollowedforameanof2years AT learmonthiand impactionbonegraftingoftheacetabulumathiprevisionusingamixofbonechipsandabiphasicporousceramicbonegraftsubstitutegoodoutcomein43patientsfollowedforameanof2years |