• J Arthroplasty · Apr 2020

    Outcomes of Acetabular Reconstructions for the Management of Chronic Pelvic Discontinuity: A Systematic Review.

    • Michael-Alexander Malahias, Qian-Li Ma, Alex Gu, Sarah E Ward, Michael M Alexiades, and Peter K Sculco.
    • The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY.
    • J Arthroplasty. 2020 Apr 1; 35 (4): 1145-1153.e2.

    BackgroundA number of articles have been published reporting on the clinical outcomes of various acetabular reconstructions for the management of chronic pelvic discontinuity (PD). However, no systematic review of the literature has been published to date comparing the outcome and complications of different approaches to reconstruction.MethodsThe US National Library of Medicine (PubMed/MEDLINE) and EMBASE were queried for publications from January 1980 to January 2019 using keywords pertinent to total hip arthroplasty, PD, acetabular dissociation, clinical or functional outcomes, and revision total hip arthroplasty or postoperative complications.ResultsOverall, 18 articles were included in this analysis (569 cases with chronic PD). The overall survival rate of the acetabular components used for the treatment of chronic PD was 84.7% (482 of 569 cases) at mid-term follow-up, whereas the most common reasons for revision were aseptic loosening (54 of 569 hips; 9.5%), dislocations (45 of 569 hips; 7.9%), periprosthetic joint infection (30 of 569 hips; 5.3%), and periprosthetic fractures (11 of 569 hips; 1.9%). Both pelvic distraction technique (combined with highly porous shells) and custom triflanges resulted in less than 5% failure rates (96.2% and 95.8%, respectively) at final follow-up. Also, highly effective in the treatment of PD were cup-cages and highly porous shells with and/or without augments with 92% survivorship free of revision for aseptic loosening for both reconstruction methods. Inferior outcomes were reported for conventional cementless shells combined with acetabular plates (72.7%) as well as ilioischial cages and reconstruction rings (66.7% and 60.6% survivorship, respectively).ConclusionThe current literature contains moderate quality evidence in support of the use of custom triflange implants and pelvic distraction techniques for the treatment of chronic PD, with a less than 5% all-cause revision rate and low complication rates at mean mid-term follow-up. Cup-cages and highly porous shells with or without augments could also be considered for the treatment of PD because both resulted in greater than 90% survival rates. Finally, there is still no consensus regarding the impact of different types of acetabular reconstruction methods on optimizing the healing potential of PD, and further studies are required in this area to better understand the influence of PD healing on construct survivorship and functional outcomes with each reconstruction method.Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…