Loosening After Acetabular Revision: Comparison of Trabecular Metal and Reinforcement Rings. A Systematic Review

Beckmann, Nicholas A.; Weiß, Stefan; Klotz, Matthias; Gondan, Matthias; Jaeger, Sebastian; Bitsch, Rudi G.

doi:10.1016/j.arth.2013.04.035

Cited by 85 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The limited number of cases did not indicate that the infection rate or overall revision rates varied. These findings are similar to clinical results we found in revision hip arthroplasty [7]. However, for further validation, a longer follow up period in these patients who undergo knee revision surgery with TM components is still required.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…In a previous publication on revision total hip arthroplasty comparing TM augments with revision rings, we showed a significantly decreased loosening rate of TM components [7]. We therefore conducted a metaregression analysis of the available literature on revision TKA with TM components or structural allografts utilizing the criteria outlined above, and compared the rate of failure due to lack of fixation of the TM graft and bulk allograft to the host bone as well as the infection and overall revision rates.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Treatment of Severe Bone Defects During Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Structural Allografts and Porous Metal Cones—A Systematic Review

Beckmann

Mueller

Gondan

et al. 2015

The Journal of Arthroplasty

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aseptic loosening and focal osteolysis are the most common reasons for knee arthroplasty failure. The best treatment remains unclear. We reviewed the literature on the treatment of revision knee arthroplasty using bony structural allografts (476 cases) and porous metal cones (223 cases) to determine if a difference in the revision failure rates was discernable. The failure rates were compared using a logistic regression model with adjustment for discrepancies in FU time and number of grafts used (femoral, tibial, or both). In this analysis, the porous implant shows a significantly decreased loosening rate in AORI 2 and 3 defects. The overall failure rate was also substantially lower in the porous metal group than the structural allograft group; little difference in the infection rates was noted.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Treatment of Severe Bone Defects During Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Structural Allografts and Porous Metal Cones—A Systematic Review

Beckmann

Mueller

Gondan

et al. 2015

The Journal of Arthroplasty

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These tantalum implants are clearly beneficial compared to previously used roof reinforcement rings and cages in the presence of a large acetabular defect [24,25].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Systematic literature reviews show revision rates for TM compared with revision rings were significantly reduced [25].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acetabular revision arthroplasty using trabecular titanium implants

Šteňo

Kokavec

Nečas

2014

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The aim of this study was to evaluate early results of acetabular revisions of total hip replacement using fully cementless trabecular titanium (TT) acetabular modular implants (Delta Trabecular Titanium, Limacorporate, Udine, Italy). Methods Between March 2009 and May 2012 TT was used in 81 revisions. The mean age at the time of revision was 68 years (32-84 years). There were nine patients revised for type 1, 11 for type 2A, 27 for type 2B, six for type 2C, 15 for type 3A and 13 for type 3B acetabular defects according to the Paprosky classification. Frozen morselised bone allografts were used in 53 cases and bulk structural allografts in three cases. Clinical evaluations were made using a modified functional Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score. The mean follow-up period was 38.14 months (24-62 months). Results The mean pre-operative Merle d'Aubigné-Postel functional score was 4.7 and 9.8 at the time of last followup. There was one revision due to instability of the acetabular component. A cage system-Delta Revision TT-was successfully used in this case. Three cases with Paprosky type 3B defect showed cranial migration of the acetabular component by 6 mm, but stabilised after six months. No dislocations associated with acetabular surgery have occurred in the cohort. There have been no dissociations of the modular component. A fatigue fracture of the hemispherical module occurred in the revised case. No other hardware mechanical failures have been recorded. Conclusions TT cups, hemispherical modules and augments facilitate reliable and reproducible biological fixation in acetabular revision surgery with excellent results. Extended follow-up is necessary to evaluate the long-term performance of TT modular implants.

show abstract

“…It is estimated that in the US alone, primary total hip arthroplasty procedures are going to increase by 174% with consequent increase of revision procedures by 137% by the year 2030 (1,2). The most common causes of a failing total hip replacement are due to osteolysis, aseptic loosening, infection or instability (3).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Highly porous metal shells and augments in revision hip surgery: Big hopes for big holes

Daivajna

Duncan

Masri

et al. 2015

Seminars in Arthroplasty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Loosening After Acetabular Revision: Comparison of Trabecular Metal and Reinforcement Rings. A Systematic Review

Cited by 85 publications

References 57 publications

Treatment of Severe Bone Defects During Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Structural Allografts and Porous Metal Cones—A Systematic Review

Treatment of Severe Bone Defects During Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Structural Allografts and Porous Metal Cones—A Systematic Review

Acetabular revision arthroplasty using trabecular titanium implants

Highly porous metal shells and augments in revision hip surgery: Big hopes for big holes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About