Objective To review progress of clinical application ofmorselized bone and to investigate relative exploration on it.Methods The recent articles on morselized bone in the field of clinicand experimental research were extensively reviewed, and relative examination of morselized bone referring to method and mechanism were investigated carefully.Results Morselized bone worked well clinically, especially inrevision ofartificial total hip joint, and it was proved effective with lots of advantages.Conclusion Morselized bone functions well clinically. Although its mechanism requires a further research, it still has a promising value in clinical application.
ObjectiveTo investigate the feasibility and effectiveness of proximal tibial hemiprosthesis replacement in the first stage and prosthesis revision in the second stage in reducing the risk of length discrepancy of limbs in children with proximal tibial osteosarcoma.MethodsBetween 2009 and 2013, 3 children with conventional osteosarcoma at the proximal tibia (stage ⅡB) were treated. There were 2 boys and 1 girl. They were 12, 13, and 13 years old, respectively. After 4 courses of preoperative chemotherapy, the proximal tumor segmental resection and proximal tibial hemiprosthesis replacement were performed. Then the patients underwent prosthetic revision in the second stage when they were 20, 17, and 17 years old, respectively.ResultsAll patients successfully completed two stages of operations. The length discrepancy of lower limb after the second stage operation were 19, 7, and 21 mm, respectively. Three patients were followed up 13, 3, and 27 months after the second stage operation, and the lower extremities functions were satisfactory. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score was 26, 27, and 25, respectively.ConclusionThe proximal tibial hemiprosthesis replacement in the first stage combined with prosthesis revision in the second stage for treating the proximal tibia osteosarcoma in children can keep the distal femur growth ability, reduce the length discreapancy of lower limb, and obtain satisfactory stability and good function.
ObjectiveTo investigate revision reasons and prosthesis selection of Crowe Ⅳ developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) after total hip arthroplasty (THA). MethodsA clinical data of 14 patients (15 hips) with Crowe Ⅳ DDH, who underwent a revision hip arthroplasty between January 2008 and May 2018, was retrospectively reviewed. There were 1 male (1 hip) and 13 females (14 hips). The age ranged from 27 to 63 years (mean, 45.0 years). There were 7 cases of left hip, 6 cases of right hip, and 1 case of bilateral hips. The prosthetic interfaces of primary THA were metal-on-polyethylene (MOP) in 9 hips, ceramic-on-ceramic (COC) in 4 hips, ceramic-on-polyethylene (COP) in 1 hip, and ceramic-on-metal in 1 hip. The time from primary THA to revision was 3-204 months (mean, 65.0 months). The causes of revision included aseptic loosening in 7 hips, dislocation in 3 hips, periprosthetic joint infection in 2 hips, osteolysis in 1 hip, nonunion of osteotomy in 1 hip, and a small-angle of femoral anteversion in 1 hip. Preoperative Harris score was 54.1±17.8 and the range of motion (ROM) of flexion was (92.7±20.2)°. Preoperative X-ray films showed the acetabular bone defect in 11 hips and osteolysis of femoral side in 4 hips. During the revision, the prostheses with COP and COC interfaces were used in 5 hips and 10 hips, respectively. Both acetabular and femoral revisions were performed in 11 hips and only femoral revision was performed in 4 hips.ResultsThe mean operation time was 3.7 hours (range, 1.5-6.0 hours). The mean intraoperative blood loss was 940.0 mL (range, 200-2 000 mL). All patients were followed up 16-142 months (mean, 73.9 months). Postoperative X-ray films showed no difference in inclination and anteversion between primary THA and revision (P>0.05). The height of rotation center and offset after revision were higher than those after primary THA, and the difference in offset was significant (P<0.05). At last follow-up, the Harris score and ROM of flexion were 85.0±7.3 and (115.0±17.0)°, respectively, which were significantly higher when compared with those before revision (t=8.909, P=0.000; t=4.911, P=0.000). Three hips underwent a re-revision operation. All protheses were fixed well and no radiolucent line, loosening, or subsidence was observed at last follow-up.ConclusionThe most common reason for revision in patients with Crowe Ⅳ DDH after THA was aseptic loosening. Due to high activity demand of this population, the prosthesis with MOP interface should be prevented and the prosthesis with COC interface could be alternative. Metal block, cup-cage, and reinforcement ring were reasonable solutions for reconstruction of acetabulum with severe bone defects and have satisfactory effectiveness. S-ROM prosthesis should be the preferred stem for neither primary THA or revision.
ObjectiveTo investigate the influence of buried thread nasal augmentation on dorsal soft tissue of nose and revision rhinoplasty. Methods A clinical data of 29 patients requesting revision rhinoplasty after buried thread nasal augmentation, who were admitted between July 2017 and July 2019 and met the selection criteria, was retrospectively analyzed. All patients were female with an average age of 26.8 years (range, 18-43 years). The patiens were admitted to the hospital at 3-48 months after buried thread nasal augmentation (median, 15 months). Among them, there were 18 cases of insufficient nasal tip projection, 22 cases of insufficient nasal root projection, 7 cases of threads ectasia, 5 cases of threads exposure, 3 cases of infection, and 10 cases with two or more conditions. There were 9 cases of combined short nose deformity, 1 case of spherical hypertrophy of the nasal tip, 3 cases of deviation of the nasal columella, 3 cases of excessive width of the nasal base, and 1 case of nasal hump. Three infected patients only underwent threads removal and debridement. The rest patients underwent revision rhinoplasty, and the dorsum of the nose was made with polytetrafluoroethylene expansion; the tip of the nose was reshaped by taking autologous rib cartilage and alar cartilage in 16 cases, and by taking autologous septal cartilage and alar cartilage in another 10 cases. The threads and surrounding tissue specimens removed during operation were subjected to histologic observation. Nasal length and nasal tip projection were measured after revision rhinoplasty and the ratio was calculated to evaluate the nasal morphology; patient satisfaction was evaluated using the Likert 5-grade scale. ResultsPatients were followed up 12-48 months (mean, 18 months). Inflammation was controlled in 3 patients with infections caused by buried thread nasal augmentation. The remaining 26 patients had satisfactory results immediately after revision rhinoplasty. Before revision rhinoplasty and at 7 days and 6 months after revision rhinoplasty, the nasal length was (4.11±0.34), (4.36±0.25), and (4.33±0.22) cm, respectively; the nasal tip projection was (2.34±0.25), (2.81±0.18), and (2.76±0.15) cm, respectively; and the nasal tip projection/nasal length ratio was 0.57±0.08, 0.65±0.05, and 0.64±0.04, respectively. There were significant differences in the nasal length and the nasal tip projection between time points (P<0.05). There was a significant difference in the nasal tip projection/nasal length ratio between pre- and post-operation (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference between 7 days and 6 months after operation (P>0.05). The Likert score for satisfaction ranged from 1.5 to 5.0 (mean, 4.05). During follow-up period of 26 patients, no nasal prosthesis was exposed, and the shape of the nose was stable, and the nasal skin of 5 patients with exposed threads could be seen with different degrees of scarring; there was no infection, cartilage resorption, and no cartilage deformation, displacement, or exposure. Histological observation showed that absorbable threads were not only absorbed after implantation, but also with the prolongation of time, the inflammatory changes in the surrounding tissues caused by decomposition and absorption of the threads showed a gradual aggravation of the first, the heaviest inflammatory reaction in 6 to 12 months, and then gradually reduce the trend. Conclusion After implantation of the absorbable thread into the subcutaneous tissue of the nasal dorsum, the nature of the thread is different from the body’s own tissue, which will affect the soft tissue compliance of the nasal dorsum. The degradation and absorption of the thread will stimulate the infiltration of inflammatory cells and the proliferation of fibroblasts in the surrounding tissue and then form scar tissue, which will affect the design and effect of revision rhinoplasty.
Revision of anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction is more challenging than primary ACL reconstruction and often yields less favorable outcomes. The European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery and Arthroscopy (ESSKA) has established a consensus regarding preoperative diagnosis, assessment, and selection criteria for ACL revision surgery. This consensus addresses 18 key issues that are most pertinent to clinical practice, providing guiding recommendations aimed at improving the prognosis of ACL revisions.
Objective To summarize the advances of total femur replacement in recent years. Methods The literature related to total femur replacement was reviewed, and the indications, techniques, prosthesis design, complications, rehabilitation, and function were summarized. Results The indication of total femur replacement is a wide involvement of the femur, skip lesions and a huge bone defect in revision. Watson-Jone is the main incision in the proximal, and then the full length of the thigh to the patella. Vascular and nerve bundle, abduction muscles are well protected, and combined or costumed prosthesis are replaced. The prosthesis design progresses, showing a diversified prostheses. Complication is frequent and varied. Rehabilitation in early stage is physical therapy, weight training is evolutionary. The main function evaluation system is Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score. Conclusion Total femur replacement is effective in limb salvage. Large sample size and long-term follow-up study should be carried out to unify indications and functional exercise standards and reduce postoperative complications.
Objective To explore the short-term effectiveness of hip revision surgery guided by artificial intelligence preoperative planning (AIHIP) system. Methods The clinical data of 22 patients (23 hips) who were admitted between June 2019 and March 2023 and met the selection criteria were retrospectively analyzed. There were 12 males and 10 females with an average age of 69.7 years (range, 44-90 years). There were 19 hips in the first revision, 3 hips in the second revision, and 1 hip in the third revision. The causes of revision included 12 hips with prosthesis loosening, 4 hips with acetabular cup loosening, 3 hips with osteolysis, 2 hips with acetabular dislocation, 1 hip with postoperative infection, and 1 hip with prosthesis wear. There were 6 hips in stage ⅡA, 9 hips in stage ⅡB, 4 hips in stage ⅡC, 3 hips in stage ⅢA, and 1 hip in stage ⅢB according to Paprosky staging of acetabular bone defect. The replacement of prosthesis type, operation time, hospitalization stay, ground active condition, and postoperative infection, fracture, prosthesis loosening, and other adverse events were recorded. The function of the affected limb was evaluated by Harris score before operation, at 1 week and 6 months after operation, and the range of motion of the hip joint was compared before operation and at 6 months after operation. Results The operation time was 85-510 minutes, with an average of 241.8 minutes; the hospitalization stay was 7-35 days, with an average of 15.2 days; the time of disassociation from the walker was 2-108 days, with an average of 42.2 days. All the 22 patients were followed up 8-53 months (mean, 21.7 months). No adverse events such as prosthesis loosening or infection occurred in the rest of the patients, except for postoperative hematoma of the thigh in 1 patient and dislocation of the hip in 1 hip. The matching degree of acetabular cup was completely matched in 22 hips and mismatched in 1 hip (+2), the matching rate was 95.65%. The matching degree of femoral stem was completely matched in 22 hips and generally matched in 1 hip (−1), and the matching rate was 100%. The Harris scores were 55.3±9.8 and 89.6±7.2 at 1 week and 6 months after operation, respectively, which significantly improved when compared with before operation (33.0±8.6, P<0.05), and further improved at 6 months after operation than at 1 week after operation (P<0.05). The function of hip joint was evaluated by Harris score at 6 months after operation, and 21 hips were good and 2 hips were moderate, which could meet the needs of daily life. The range of motion of hip joint was (111.09±10.11)° at 6 months after operation, which was significantly different from (79.13±18.50)° before operation (t=−7.269, P<0.001). Conclusion AIHIP system can improve the accuracy of revision surgery, reduce the difficulty of surgery, and achieve good postoperative recovery and satisfactory short-term effectiveness.
Objective To explore the effectiveness and failure causes of large-head metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty (large-head MoM THA). Methods Between March 2007 and May 2010, 159 patients (183 hips) underwent large-head MoM THA, and the clinical data were analyzed. There were 50 females (54 hips) and 109 males (129 hips) with an average age of 50 years (range, 20-78 years). Single hip was involved in 135 cases (left hip in 69 cases and right hip in 66 cases) and double hips in 24 cases. The causes included femoral head necrosis in 74 cases (93 hips), Legg-Calve-Perthes in 1 case (1 hip), osteoarthritis in 18 cases (19 hips), developmental dysplasia of the hip in 17 cases (18 hips), osteoarthritis after hip septic infection in 8 cases (8 hips), traumatic arthritis of the hip in 6 cases (6 hips), femoral neck fracture in 17 cases (17 hips), ankylosing spondylitis in 8 cases (11 hips), rheumatoid arthritis of hip in 9 cases (9 hips), and adult onset Still’s disease in 1 case (1 hip). Before operation, visual analogue scale (VAS) was 6.59±0.87; Harris score was 45.99±8.07. Results Healing of incisions by first intention was achieved, and no operative complication occurred. The patients were followed up 1.2-8.2 years (mean, 6.1 years). Implant failure was observed in 15 cases (17 hips), and the 5-year survival rate of large-head MoM THA was 91.80% (168/183). The causes of implant failure after THA were inflammatory pseudotumor in 4 cases (4 hips), acetabular aseptic loosening in 3 cases (3 hips), osteolysis in 4 cases (5 hips), acetabular aseptic loosening combined with inflammatory pseudotumor in 3 cases (3 hips), and functional disused in 1 case (2 hips). Of them, 9 cases (11 hips) did not receive revision surgery for various reasons, while 6 cases (6 hips) underwent revision surgery at 1.2-5.4 years (mean 3.7 years) after large-head MoM THA. At last follow-up, VAS and Harris score were 1.72±1.48 and 81.37±10.75 respectively, showing significant differences when compared with preoperative scores (t=–35.547，P=0.000；t=33.823，P=0.000). The function was excellent in 44 hips, good in 89 hips, fair in 33 hips, and poor in 17 hips. Conclusion Large-head MoM THA has a high revision rate during mid- and long-term follow-up because of inflammatory pseudotumor, acetabular aseptic loosening, and osteolysis. Early revision can effectively improve the function of the hip and improve patients’quality of life.
Objective To review research advances of revision surgery after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with Crowe type Ⅳ developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). Methods The recent literature on revision surgery after primary THA in patients with Crowe type Ⅳ DDH was reviewed. The reasons for revision surgery were analyzed and the difficulties of revision surgery, the management methods, and the related prosthesis choices were summarized. Results Patients with Crowe type Ⅳ DDH have small anteroposterior diameter of the acetabulum, large variation in acetabular and femoral anteversion angles, severe soft tissue contractures, which make both THA and revision surgery more difficult. There are many reasons for patients undergoing revision surgery after primary THA, mainly due to aseptic loosening of the prosthesis. Therefore, it is necessary to restore anatomical structures in primary THA, as much as possible and reduce the generation of wear particles to avoid postoperative loosening of the prosthesis. Due to the anatomical characteristics of Crowe type Ⅳ DDH, the patients have acetabular and femoral bone defects, and the repair and reconstruction of bone defects become the key to revision surgery. The acetabular side is usually reconstructed with the appropriate acetabular cup or combined metal block, Cage, or custom component depending on the extent of the bone defect, while the femoral side is preferred to the S-ROM prosthesis. In addition, the prosthetic interface should be ceramic-ceramic or ceramic-highly cross-linked polyethylene wherever possible. Conclusion The reasons leading to revision surgery after primary THA in patients with Crowe type Ⅳ DDH and the surgical difficulties have been clarified, and a large number of clinical studies have proposed corresponding revision modalities based on which good early- and mid-term outcomes have been obtained, but further follow-up is needed to clarify the long-term outcomes. With technological advances and the development of new materials, personalized prostheses for these patients are expected to become a reality.
ObjectiveTo explore the clinical outcomes of acetabular revision using a metal reconstruction cage. MethodsBetween October 2006 and October 2013, 16 patients (16 hips) underwent acetabular revision with a metal reconstruction cage. There were 4 males and 12 females, with the mean age of 62.7 years (range, 49-78 years). The time from total hip arthroplasty to revision was 3-15 years (mean, 8.2 years). The causes for revision were aseptic acetabular loosening in 15 cases, and femoral periprosthetic fracture (Vancouver type B3) in 1 case. According to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) classification, there were 12 cases of type III and 4 cases of type IV; according to the Paprosky classification, there were 12 cases of type IIIA and 4 cases of type IIIB. Harris score was used for hip function evaluation, and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain in the thigh. X-ray films were taken for imaging evaluation. ResultsHealing of incision by first intention was obtained in all patients. Deep venous thrombosis occurred in 1 patient, and was cured after anticoagulation therapy. No complications of infection, neurovascular injury, and prosthetic dislocation were found. Sixteen patients were followed up 6.8 years on average (range, 2-9 years). The Harris score was significantly increased from preoperative 42.44±4.66 to 91.88±3.28 at last follow-up (t=–106.30, P=0.00). Two patients had mild pain in the thigh, but pain disappeared at 1 year after operation. At immediate after operation, the abduction angle was 37-54° (mean, 42.9°). The distance between acetabular rotation centre and teardrop line was (33.67±12.19) mm for preoperative value and was (20.67±9.63) mm for postoperative value, showing significant difference (t=–9.60, P=0.00). The distance between acetabular rotation centre and lateral teardrop was (34.98±12.30) mm for preoperative value and was (40.04±6.61) mm for postoperative value, showing significant difference (t=–3.15, P=0.00). X-ray film results showed bony fusion at the osteotomy sites at 4 to 12 months after operation. No continuous radiolucent line, prosthetic dislocation, or osteolysis was found, and bony ingrowth was observed in all patients. No patient received re-revision due to prosthetic loosening. ConclusionThe metal reconstruction cage for acetabular revision can achieve good effectiveness for patients with serious bone defect.