Logo of The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery (Br)
Quick search:        
          Advanced Search
Guest Access | Sign In
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - British Volume, Vol 88-B, Issue 7, 865-869.
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B7.17227  
Copyright © 2006 by British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow My Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Comba, F.
Right arrow Articles by Piccaluga, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Comba, F.
Right arrow Articles by Piccaluga, F.

Acetabular reconstruction with impacted bone allografts and cemented acetabular components

A 2- TO 13-YEAR FOLLOW-UP STUDY OF 142 ASEPTIC REVISIONS

F. Comba, MD, Orthopaedic Surgeon1; M. Buttaro, MD, Orthopaedic Surgeon1; R. Pusso, MD, Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon1; and F. Piccaluga, MD, Hip Surgery Unit Chief1

Hip Surgery Unit, Institute of Orthopaedics, "Carlos E. Ottolenghi" Italian Hospital, Potosi 4215 (1199ACK), Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Correspondence should be sent to Dr F. Comba; e-mail: cadera{at}hospitalitaliano.org.ar

We reviewed the clinical and radiological results of 131 patients who underwent acetabular revision for aseptic loosening with impacted bone allograft and a cemented acetabular component. The mean follow-up was 51.7 months (24 to 156).

The mean post-operative Merle D’Aubigné and Postel scores were 5.7 points (4 to 6) for pain, 5.2 (3 to 6) for gait and 4.5 (2 to 6) for mobility. Radiological evaluation revealed migration greater than 5 mm in four acetabular components. Radiological failure matched clinical failure. Asymptomatic radiolucent lines were observed in 31 of 426 areas assessed (7%). Further revision was required in six patients (4.5%), this was due to infection in three and mechanical failure in three. The survival rate for the reconstruction was 95.8% (95% confidence interval 92.3 to 99.1) overall, and 98%, excluding revision due to sepsis.

Our study, from an independent centre, has reproduced the results of the originators of the method.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Bone Joint Surg BrHome page
B. G. Ochs, U. Schmid, J. Rieth, A. Ateschrang, K. Weise, and U. Ochs
Acetabular bone reconstruction in revision arthroplasty: A COMPARISON OF FREEZE-DRIED, IRRADIATED AND CHEMICALLY-TREATED ALLOGRAFT VITALISED WITH AUTOLOGOUS MARROW VERSUS FROZEN NON-IRRADIATED ALLOGRAFT
J Bone Joint Surg Br, September 1, 2008; 90-B(9): 1164 - 1171.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Bone Joint Surg BrHome page
E. H. van Haaren, I. C. Heyligers, F. G. M. Alexander, and P. I. J. M. Wuisman
High rate of failure of impaction grafting in large acetabular defects
J Bone Joint Surg Br, March 1, 2007; 89-B(3): 296 - 300.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


(c) British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery All Rights Reserved
Registered charity no: 209299     Print ISSN: 0301-620X
Hip, Knee, Trauma, Upper limb, Foot & Ankle, Paediatrics, Oncology, Spine, Arthroplasty, General