Outcome of Porous Tantalum Acetabular Components for Paprosky Type 3 and 4 Acetabular Defects
Section snippets
Materials and Methods
Between 2005 and 2010, 96 acetabular revisions using tantalum components were performed at our institution. A retrospective review of these cases showed 36 hips in 36 patients had acetabula with Paprosky type 3 or 4 defects [18]. Twenty-six hips were classified with Paprosky type 3a defects, 8 hips were classified with Paprosky type 3b defects, and two hips as Paprosky type 4 defects. We excluded minor bone defects classified as Paprosky types 1 and 2, as well as patients with less than 2 years
Results
A total of 36 revision THAs classified as having a Paprosky type 3 or 4 defects were performed using porous tantalum acetabular implants between 2005 and 2010. Of these revision cases, 24 hips had a minimum of two years of follow-up or needed revision and are reported in this study. Of the 12 patients that did not have a minimum of 2 years of follow-up, 6 patients had 12 month postoperative radiographs which showed radiographic evidence of osseointegration of the acetabular component. The other 6
Discussion
Traditional porous-coated hemispherical implants (titanium alloy and cobalt chromium alloy) provide an effective solution in most revision THAs where adequate bone stock is available to support the acetabular component and allow for bone ingrowth 11., 22., 23.. However, severe acetabular bony deficiency can compromise both the biologic potential and the ability to obtain mechanical stability needed to allow for reliable osseointegration of the acetabular component. Options available to deal
References (42)
- et al.
Trabecular metal used for major bone loss in acetabular hip revision
J Arthroplasty
(2011) - et al.
The use of a trabecular metal acetabular component and trabecular metal augment for severe acetabular defects
J Arthroplasty
(2006) - et al.
Management of severe bone loss in acetabular revision using a trabecular metal shell
J Arthroplasty
(2008) - et al.
Acetabular revision using a trabecular metal acetabular component for severe acetabular bone loss associated with a pelvic discontinuity
J Arthroplasty
(2006) - et al.
Acetabular revisions using trabecular metal cups and augments
J Arthroplasty
(2009) - et al.
The use of tantalum porous metal implants for Paprosky 3A and 3B defects
J Arthroplasty
(2007) Biological performance of tantalum
Clin Mater
(1994)- et al.
Tissue response to porous tantalum acetabular cups: a canine model
J Arthroplasty
(1999) - et al.
Radiographic evaluation of a monoblock acetabular component: a multicenter study with 2- to 5-year results
J Arthroplasty
(2005) - et al.
Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation
J Arthroplasty
(1994)
Long-term results with cementless Fitek (or Fitmore) cups
J Arthroplasty
Complications of ilioischial reconstruction rings in revision total hip arthroplasty
J Arthroplasty
Revision total hip arthroplasty with shelf bulk allografts. A long-term follow-up study
J Arthroplasty
Addressing severe bone deficiency: what a cage will not do
J Arthroplasty
Rebuilding the skeleton: the intraoperative use of trabecular metal in revision total hip arthroplasty
J Arthroplasty
Evaluation of a porous tantalum uncemented acetabular cup in revision total hip arthroplasty: clinical and radiological results of 60 hips
J Arthroplasty
Revision of failed total hip arthroplasty acetabular cups to porous tantalum components: a 5-year follow-up study
J Arthroplasty
Early results of 827 trabecular metal revision shells in acetabular revision
J Arthroplasty
Eight- to ten-year clinical and radiographic outcome of a porous tantalum monoblock acetabular component
J Arthroplasty
Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030
J Bone Joint Surg Am
The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States
J Bone Joint Surg Am
Cited by (30)
Use of dual mobility cup cemented into a tantalum acetabular shell for hip revision with large bone loss can decrease dislocation risk without increasing the risk of mechanical failure
2024, Orthopaedics and Traumatology: Surgery and ResearchPorous tantalum scaffolds: Fabrication, structure, properties, and orthopedic applications
2021, Materials and DesignStaged Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Novel Technique in Managing Native and Periprosthetic Acetabular Insufficiency
2021, Arthroplasty TodayCitation Excerpt :Arguably, the most difficult part of managing these fractures from an arthroplasty standpoint is achieving stable fixation. Biologic fixation to a porous acetabular component provides the most durable fixation, but obtaining a press fit is often not feasible [9–12]. Although cup cage constructs aim to achieve bony ingrowth spanning the defect, these constructs as well as traditional antiprotrusio cages rely on cemented fixation of the acetabular bearing [18,19].
Other metallic alloys: Tantalum-based materials for biomedical applications
2021, Structural Biomaterials: Properties, Characteristics, and SelectionTreatment options for chronic pelvic discontinuity
2018, Journal of Clinical Orthopaedics and TraumaCitation Excerpt :Trabecular metal implants have a lower revision and complication rate than other methods, as demonstrated by a recent systematic review.31 Favorable outcomes have been reported, with survivorship from 92 to 100%.12,32,33 These early to mid-term results are promising, but long-term data is still pending.
The Conflict of Interest statement associated with this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2013.12.002.