Objective To investigate the effectiveness of slope-reducing tibial osteotomy and anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) revision in the treatment of patients with primary ACL reconstruction failure and abnormally increased posterior tibial slope (PTS). Methods The clinical data of 9 patients with primary ACL reconstruction failure and abnormally increased PTS (≥17°) who met the selection criteria between January 2018 and January 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 8 males and 1 female; the age ranged from 21 to 42 years, with a median age of 30 years. Lachman test was positive in 9 patients. Pivot-shift test was negative in 6 cases, degree Ⅰ positive in 2 cases, and degree Ⅱ positive in 1 case. The PTS was (17.78±1.09)° and the anterior tibial translation (ATT) was (11.58±1.47) mm. The International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC) score was 51.0±3.8, Lysholm score was 49.7±4.6, and Tegner score was 3.7±0.7. The time from primary reconstruction to revision was 12-33 months, with an average of 19.6 months. Slope-reducing tibial osteotomy and ACL revision were performed. The improvement of knee function was evaluated by IKDC score, Lysholm score, and Tegner score; Lachman test and Pivot-shift test were used to evaluate the stability of knee joint. PTS and ATT were measured to observe the morphological changes of knee joint. Results All the incisions healed by first intention, and there was no complication such as incision infection, fat liquefaction, necrosis, deep vein thrombosis of lower extremities, and neurovascular injury. All 9 patients were followed up 12-36 months, with an average of 25.8 months. At last follow-up, Lachman test and pivot-shift test were negative. IKDC score was 85.0±4.0, Lysholm score was 87.7±2.8, Tegner score was 6.8±0.7, PTS reduced to (9.89±0.60)°, and ATT shortened to (0.91±0.29) mm, which were significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05). ConclusionSlope-reducing tibial osteotomy and ACL revision in the treatment of patients with primary ACL reconstruction failure and abnormally increased PTS has a satisfactory short-term effectiveness. It can improve the stability of knee joint and maintain the normal shape of knee joint.
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of acetabulum reinforcement ring (Cage) with allograft bone for reconstructing acetabular defects in hip revision. Methods Between February 2006 and August 2010, 14 patients (14 hips) with serious acetabular bone defects after total hip arthroplasty underwent acetabular reconstruction by using Cage with allograft bone. There were 6 males and 8 females with a mean age of 59.2 years (range, 45-76 years). The mean time between first replacement and revision was 7.2 years (range, 5-12 years). The revision causes included infection in 8 cases, osteolysis and aseptic loosening in 6 cases. The hip function Harris score was 37.7 ± 5.3. According to America Association of Orthopedic Surgeon (AAOS) standard, the acetabular defect was classified as type III in 8 cases and as type IV in 6 cases. Results All incisions healed by first intention, and no complication occurred. The patients were followed up 14-62 months (mean, 44 months). The pain was relieved or disappeared. At last follow-up, the Harris score was 89.7 ± 3.2, showing significant difference when compared with preoperative score (t= — 44.40, P=0.04). No loosening of the acetabular component or osteolysis was found in 14 hips. No absorption or collapse of the allograft was observed in all patients. Conclusion Cage with allograft bone is a useful method of reconstructing acetabular bone defects in hip revision. Further follow-up is needed to assess the long-term effectiveness.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical and radiological effectiveness of oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) and posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) in the treatment of Cage dislodgement after lumbar surgery.MethodsThe clinical data of 40 patients who underwent revision surgery due to Cage dislodgement after lumbar surgery betweem April 2013 and March 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 18 patients underwent OLIF (OLIF group) and 22 patients underwent PLIF (PLIF group) for revision. There was no significant difference between the two groups in age, gender, body mass index, intervals between primary surgery and revision surgery, number of primary fused levels, disc spaces of Cage dislodgement, and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), the segmental lordosis (SL) and disc height (DH) of the disc space of Cage dislodgement, and the lumbar lordosis (LL) before revision (P>0.05). The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, and complications of the two groups were recorded and compared. The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain were evaluated at 3 days, 3, 6, and 12 months after operation, and the ODI scores were evaluated at 3, 6, and 12 months after operation. The SL and DH of the disc space of Cage dislodgement and LL were measured at 12 months after operation and compared with those before operation. CT examination was performed at 12 months after operation, and the fusion of the disc space implanted with new Cage was judged by Bridwell grading standard.ResultsThe intraoperative blood loss in the OLIF group was significantly less than that in the PLIF group (t=?12.425, P=0.000); there was no significant difference between the two groups in the operation time and hospital stay (P>0.05). Both groups were followed up 12-30 months, with an average of 18 months. In the OLIF group, 2 patients (11.1%) had thigh numbness and 1 patient (5.6%) had hip flexor weakness after operation; 2 patients (9.1%) in the PLIF group had intraoperative dural sac tear. The other patients’ incisions healed by first intention without early postoperative complications. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications between the two groups (χ2=0.519, P=0.642). The VAS scores of low back pain and leg pain, and the ODI score of the two groups at each time point after operation were significantly improved when compared with those before operation (P<0.05); there was no significant difference between the two groups at each time point after operation (P>0.05). At 12 months after operation, SL, LL, and DH in the two groups were significantly increased when compared with preoperative ones (P<0.05); SL and DH in the OLIF group were significantly improved when compared with those in the PLIF group (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in LL between the two groups (P>0.05). CT examination at 12 months after operation showed that all the operated disc spaces achieved bony fusion. According to the Bridwell grading standard, 12 cases were grade Ⅰ and 6 cases were grade Ⅱ in the OLIF group, and 13 cases were grade Ⅰ and 9 cases were grade Ⅱ in the PLIF group; there was no significant difference between the two groups (Z=–0.486, P=0.627). During follow-up, neither re-displacement or sinking of Cage, nor loosening or fracture of internal fixation occurred.ConclusionOLIF and PLIF can achieve similar effectiveness in the treatment of Cage dislodgement after lumbar surgery. OLIF can further reduce intraoperative blood loss and restore the SL and DH of the disc space of Cage dislodgement better.
【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the outcome of two-stage revision for prostheses infection in patients with bone tumor after knee prosthetic replacement. Methods Between August 2003 and August 2010, 22 patients with prostheses infection, who underwent knee prosthetic replacement in limb salvage treatment because of bone tumor, received two-stage revision. There were 11 males and 11 females with an average age of 29.6 years (range, 15-55 years). Prosthetic infection occurred after primary replacement in 20 patients and after revision surgery in 2 patients from 15 days to 89 months after operation. According to Coventry and Fitzgerald classification, type I was found in 3 cases, type II in 15 cases, and type III in 4 cases. The time from infection to admission was 5-47 months (mean, 10.2 months). The results of bacterial culture were positive in 9 cases and negative in 13 cases. Two patients had fever and leukocytosis. In one-stage, the implants and infected tissue were removed, and an antibiotic cement spacer with an intramedullary nail was implanted. In two-stage, a new endoprosthesis was inserted after infection was controlled. Results The C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate before one-stage debridement were significantly higher than those before two-stage revision (P lt; 0.05). All patients were followed up 5-63 months (mean, 23.6 months). Infection was controlled after one-stage debridement in 18 cases (81.8%); two-stage revision was performed in 17 cases, and 1 case refused to receive two-stage revision. Of 17 patients, 1 patient was amputated because of infection at 5 months after revision. Four patients (18.2%) underwent amputation because of failure to control infection after one-stage debridement. The limb salvage rate was 77.3% (17/22). One case of renal cell carcinoma with bone metastasis died of original disease after 1 year and 6 months of operation. The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS 93) score was 69.4 ± 12.7 at last follow-up. Conclusion Two-stage revision should be performed in time and it has good results in the treatment of prostheses infection in patients with bone sarcomas after knee prosthetic replacement.
Objective To investigate the effectiveness of acetabular revision using jumbo cementless cups. Methods Between May 1996 and May 2011, 35 patients (35 hips) underwent an acetabular revision with jumbo cementless cups, and the clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. There were 12 males and 23 females, with an average age of 64.8 years (range, 47-79 years). The time from hip arthroplaty to revision was 1-15 years (mean, 9.7 years). The causes for revision were aseptic loosening in 32 cases, femoral periprosthetic fracture (Vancouver type B3) in 2 cases, and low toxicity infection in 1 case. According to the classification of acetabular bony deficiencies of the American Association of Orthopedic Surgeon (AAOS), 6 cases were classified as type I, 9 cases as type II, and 20 cases as type III; according to the classification proposed by Paprosky, 5 cases were rated as type II A, 9 cases as type II B, 13 cases as type II C, and 8 cases as type III A. The primary hip arthroplasty cups had an outside diameter of 46-52 mm (mean, 49.6 mm), and the revision cups had an outside diameter of 56-68 mm (mean, 60.4 mm). Harris score was used for hip function evaluation, and X-ray films were taken for imaging evaluation. Results Healing of incision by first intention was obtained in all patients; without infection or neurovascular injury. Prosthetic dislocation was observed in 1 case at 20 days after operation, and was cured after expectant treatment. One patient died at 6 years after operation, and the other 34 patients were followed up 2-14 years (mean, 8.4 years). The Harris score was significantly increased from 46.4 ± 13.4 at preoperation to 90.4 ± 3.6 at last follow-up (t=18.76, P=0.00). The distance between acetabular rotation centre and teardrop line was significantly decreased, and the distance between acetabular rotation centre and lateral teardrop was significantly increased when compared with preoperative ones (P lt; 0.05). Only 1 patient received second revision for aseptic loosening after 10 years; no continuous radiolucent line, prosthetic dislocation, and osteolysis was found, and bony ingrowth was shown in the other patients. Conclusion Jumbo cementless cup for acetabular revision can achieve good effectiveness for having the advantages of simple operation, less bone grafts, and good recovery of the acetabular rotation centre.
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.
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.
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 evaluate the effectiveness of cemented polyethylene liner technique in hip revision.MethodsBased on inclusion criteria, the clinical data of 26 patients who were undergone hip revision between January 2011 and December 2013, were retrospectively reviewed. Among them, 14 cases were treated with isolated liner exchange (group A) and 12 cases were treated with cemented polyethylene liner technique (group B). There was no significant difference in gender, age, the time from primary total hip arthroplasty to revision, and the preoperative Harris score between 2 groups (P>0.05). The post-operative Harris score and complications were compared between 2 groups, and X-ray findings of the hip joint were recorded to review the position of hip components.ResultsAll patients were followed up 4.4-6.4 years (mean, 5.4 years). Except for two femoral fractures during the revision (1 in each group), there was no other complication in 2 groups. The hip pain relieved and the lame gait corrected in 2 groups. The hip’s function of 2 groups improved gradually after operation, with a better Harris score at 3 months and the best at last follow-up, compared with preoperative scores (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in Harris score at difference time points after operation between 2 group (P>0.05). X-ray films showed no dislocation, aseptic loosening, and other interface related complication.ConclusionFor the cases without the chance to do change liner, cemented polyethylene liner technique has a good effectiveness. But restrict patient selection should be considered before hip revision.