35-201
Aloinjerto triturado en revisión acetabular: 3-7 años de seguimiento
Morsellized bone allograft in acetabular revision: 3 to 7-year of follow-up
E. GARCIA CIMBRELO DEPARTAMENTO DE ORTOPEDIA. HOSPITAL "LA PAZ", MADRID.
Recepción:
15/09/2008
Aceptación:
15/09/2008
Publicación:
15/09/2008
Métricas
51
Visualizaciones
Compartir
Compartir
Resumen (ES)
We assessed 96 cases of revision surgery in cementless
and cemented cups using morsellized allograft according
to bone defect. A cementless porous hemispherical cup was
used in acetabula with less than 30% bone defect (42 cups) while
a cemented cup was used in hips with a defect greaterthan 30%
(54 cups). The mean follow-up was 5.6 years. There were no further
revised cups and no cup migration. Radiolucent lines were
uncommon in both groups. Although graft remodelling was difficult
to evaluate, only 8 hips showed minor resorption. Middleterm
results are favorable with impacted allograft and cementless
porous cup in acetabular bone defects of less than 30% and
with impacted allograft and cemented all-polyethylene cup in
defects greater than 30%.
and cemented cups using morsellized allograft according
to bone defect. A cementless porous hemispherical cup was
used in acetabula with less than 30% bone defect (42 cups) while
a cemented cup was used in hips with a defect greaterthan 30%
(54 cups). The mean follow-up was 5.6 years. There were no further
revised cups and no cup migration. Radiolucent lines were
uncommon in both groups. Although graft remodelling was difficult
to evaluate, only 8 hips showed minor resorption. Middleterm
results are favorable with impacted allograft and cementless
porous cup in acetabular bone defects of less than 30% and
with impacted allograft and cemented all-polyethylene cup in
defects greater than 30%.
Palabras clave (ES):
Cadera
Prótesis
Artroplastia
Recambio
Revisión
Aloinjerto
Injerto
Reconstrucción
Acetábulo
Cotilo
Resultados
Aflojamiento
Resumen (EN)
We assessed 96 cases of revision surgery in cementless
and cemented cups using morsellized allograft according
to bone defect. A cementless porous hemispherical cup was
used in acetabula with less than 30% bone defect (42 cups) while
a cemented cup was used in hips with a defect greaterthan 30%
(54 cups). The mean follow-up was 5.6 years. There were no further
revised cups and no cup migration. Radiolucent lines were
uncommon in both groups. Although graft remodelling was difficult
to evaluate, only 8 hips showed minor resorption. Middleterm
results are favorable with impacted allograft and cementless
porous cup in acetabular bone defects of less than 30% and
with impacted allograft and cemented all-polyethylene cup in
defects greater than 30%.
and cemented cups using morsellized allograft according
to bone defect. A cementless porous hemispherical cup was
used in acetabula with less than 30% bone defect (42 cups) while
a cemented cup was used in hips with a defect greaterthan 30%
(54 cups). The mean follow-up was 5.6 years. There were no further
revised cups and no cup migration. Radiolucent lines were
uncommon in both groups. Although graft remodelling was difficult
to evaluate, only 8 hips showed minor resorption. Middleterm
results are favorable with impacted allograft and cementless
porous cup in acetabular bone defects of less than 30% and
with impacted allograft and cemented all-polyethylene cup in
defects greater than 30%.
Explorar
Artículos
Volúmenes
Sobre la revista
Más leídos
Surgiceloma como complicación de tenodesis extraarticular de Lemaire modificada asociada a ligamentoplastia del cruzado anterior
Revista Española de Cirugía Osteoarticular
Uso de placa puente dorsal: una alternativa en fracturas de muñeca catastróficas
Revista Española de Cirugía Osteoarticular
No todo es "cut-out": reclasificación de las complicaciones mecánicas del tornillo cefálico del clavo intramedular.
Revista Española de Cirugía Osteoarticular
Solución límite para recambio de prótesis total de cadera con cotilo osteointegrado: presentación de casos
Revista Española de Cirugía Osteoarticular
Radioterapia a bajas dosis en artrosis: ¿una opción terapéutica real o un efecto placebo sofisticado?
Revista Española de Cirugía Osteoarticular