Cargando…
Comparative Study of Peripheral Rim Fixation Using Jumbo Cup in Revisional Hip Arthroplasty
PURPOSE: It is challenging procedure to revise acetabular component in acetabulum with severe bone defect or deformity. The jumbo cup is good option for revisional arthroplasty in large bone defect. The purpose of this study is to compare the prognosis of revisional total hip arthroplasty using jumb...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Korean Hip Society
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5352722/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28316959 http://dx.doi.org/10.5371/hp.2017.29.1.24 |
_version_ | 1782515002753679360 |
---|---|
author | Jo, Woo-Lam Lim, Young-Wook Im, Jin-Hyung Kim, Seung-Chan Kwon, Soon-Yong Kim, Yong-Sik |
author_facet | Jo, Woo-Lam Lim, Young-Wook Im, Jin-Hyung Kim, Seung-Chan Kwon, Soon-Yong Kim, Yong-Sik |
author_sort | Jo, Woo-Lam |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: It is challenging procedure to revise acetabular component in acetabulum with severe bone defect or deformity. The jumbo cup is good option for revisional arthroplasty in large bone defect. The purpose of this study is to compare the prognosis of revisional total hip arthroplasty using jumbo cup with peripheral rim fixation and no rim fixation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included the patients who had performed acetabular revisional total hip arthroplasty from January 2002 to March 2015 in our institute. Total of 51 hips (51 patients) were included. The mean follow up period was 51 months (range, 12 to 154 months) and mean age was 60.7 years (range, 30 to 81 years). We divided into two groups (peripheral rim fixation group and no rim fixation group) by anteroposterior and lateral plain radiograph. We compared survival rate, hip center change and clinical outcomes between two groups. RESULTS: There were 37 patients in peripheral rim fixation group and 14 patients in no rim fixation group. There was one patient who had aseptic loosening necessary to re-revision in rim fixation group and 3 patients in no rim fixation group. And one patient had superficial infection in rim fixation group and one patient had periprosthetic fracture in no rim fixation group. Survival rate was higher in the peripheral rim fixation group (97.3%) than no rim fixation group (78.6%, P=0.028) CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, peripheral rim fixation might be recommended to improve short-term outcome after revision total hip arthroplasty using jumbo cup. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5352722 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Korean Hip Society |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-53527222017-03-17 Comparative Study of Peripheral Rim Fixation Using Jumbo Cup in Revisional Hip Arthroplasty Jo, Woo-Lam Lim, Young-Wook Im, Jin-Hyung Kim, Seung-Chan Kwon, Soon-Yong Kim, Yong-Sik Hip Pelvis Original Article PURPOSE: It is challenging procedure to revise acetabular component in acetabulum with severe bone defect or deformity. The jumbo cup is good option for revisional arthroplasty in large bone defect. The purpose of this study is to compare the prognosis of revisional total hip arthroplasty using jumbo cup with peripheral rim fixation and no rim fixation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We included the patients who had performed acetabular revisional total hip arthroplasty from January 2002 to March 2015 in our institute. Total of 51 hips (51 patients) were included. The mean follow up period was 51 months (range, 12 to 154 months) and mean age was 60.7 years (range, 30 to 81 years). We divided into two groups (peripheral rim fixation group and no rim fixation group) by anteroposterior and lateral plain radiograph. We compared survival rate, hip center change and clinical outcomes between two groups. RESULTS: There were 37 patients in peripheral rim fixation group and 14 patients in no rim fixation group. There was one patient who had aseptic loosening necessary to re-revision in rim fixation group and 3 patients in no rim fixation group. And one patient had superficial infection in rim fixation group and one patient had periprosthetic fracture in no rim fixation group. Survival rate was higher in the peripheral rim fixation group (97.3%) than no rim fixation group (78.6%, P=0.028) CONCLUSION: Based on our findings, peripheral rim fixation might be recommended to improve short-term outcome after revision total hip arthroplasty using jumbo cup. Korean Hip Society 2017-03 2017-03-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5352722/ /pubmed/28316959 http://dx.doi.org/10.5371/hp.2017.29.1.24 Text en Copyright © 2017 by Korean Hip Society http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Jo, Woo-Lam Lim, Young-Wook Im, Jin-Hyung Kim, Seung-Chan Kwon, Soon-Yong Kim, Yong-Sik Comparative Study of Peripheral Rim Fixation Using Jumbo Cup in Revisional Hip Arthroplasty |
title | Comparative Study of Peripheral Rim Fixation Using Jumbo Cup in Revisional Hip Arthroplasty |
title_full | Comparative Study of Peripheral Rim Fixation Using Jumbo Cup in Revisional Hip Arthroplasty |
title_fullStr | Comparative Study of Peripheral Rim Fixation Using Jumbo Cup in Revisional Hip Arthroplasty |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparative Study of Peripheral Rim Fixation Using Jumbo Cup in Revisional Hip Arthroplasty |
title_short | Comparative Study of Peripheral Rim Fixation Using Jumbo Cup in Revisional Hip Arthroplasty |
title_sort | comparative study of peripheral rim fixation using jumbo cup in revisional hip arthroplasty |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5352722/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28316959 http://dx.doi.org/10.5371/hp.2017.29.1.24 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jowoolam comparativestudyofperipheralrimfixationusingjumbocupinrevisionalhiparthroplasty AT limyoungwook comparativestudyofperipheralrimfixationusingjumbocupinrevisionalhiparthroplasty AT imjinhyung comparativestudyofperipheralrimfixationusingjumbocupinrevisionalhiparthroplasty AT kimseungchan comparativestudyofperipheralrimfixationusingjumbocupinrevisionalhiparthroplasty AT kwonsoonyong comparativestudyofperipheralrimfixationusingjumbocupinrevisionalhiparthroplasty AT kimyongsik comparativestudyofperipheralrimfixationusingjumbocupinrevisionalhiparthroplasty |