Loosening After Acetabular Revision: Comparison of Trabecular Metal and Reinforcement Rings. A Systematic Review

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Nicholas A. Beckmann ; Stefan Weiss ; Matthias C.M. Klotz ; Matthias Gondan ; Sebastian Jaeger ; Rudi G. Bitsch
• 关键词：revision hip arthroplasty ; trabecular metal ; revision rings ; acetabular revision
• 刊名：The Journal of Arthroplasty
• 出版年：January, 2014
• 年：2014
• 卷：29
• 期：1
• 页码：229-235
• 全文大小：752 K

文摘

The best method of revision acetabular arthroplasty remains unclear. Consequently, we reviewed the literature on the treatment of revision acetabular arthroplasty using revision rings (1541 cases; mean follow-up (FU) 5.7 years) and Trabecular Metal, or TM, implants (1959 cases; mean FU 3.7 years) to determine if a difference with regard to revision failure could be determined. Failure rates of the respective implants were compared statistically using a logistic regression model with adjustment for discrepancies in FU time. In our study, TM shows statistically significant decreased loosening rates relative to revision rings for all grades including severe acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity. The severe defects appear to benefit the most from TM.