Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to investigate the mid-term results of 32 acetabular reconstructions performed using a Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device and bone graft between June 1997 and January 2009.
Methods
The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 71.4 years (range 55–85). Patients were followed-up for a mean of 7.5 years (range 2.1–13.7). The acetabular bone defects according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons system was type III for 29 hips and type IV for three hips. Bulk allografts were performed in 30 hips and morselised autografts (iliac bone) were performed in two hips. Clinical evaluations were made according to the criteria of Postel/Merle d’Aubigné.
Results
The mean pre-operative Postel/Merle d’Aubigné hip score was 7.0±2.9, and the final follow-up hip score was 12.6±2.8. Six hips showed radiographic loosening, and two hips required further revision. A Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the five-year and ten-year survival rates were 96.9% and 92.3%, respectively, using further revision of the acetabular device as an end point.
Conclusion
Acetabular reconstruction using a Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device and bone graft gives satisfactory mid-term results.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Caton J, Prudhon JL (2011) Over 25 years survival after Charnley's total hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 35:185–188
Aldinger PR, Jung AW, Breusch SJ, Ewerbeck V, Parsch D (2009) Survival of the cementless Spotorno stem in the second decade. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:2297–2304
Suckel A, Geiger F, Kinzl L, Wulker N, Garbrecht M (2009) Long-term results for the uncemented Zweymuller/Alloclassic hip endoprosthesis. A 15-year minimum follow-up of 320 hip operations. J Arthroplasty 24:846–853
Kerboull M, Hamadouche M, Kerboull L (2000) The Kerboull acetabular reinforcement device in major acetabular reconstructions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 378:155–168
Vargas B, Caton J (2009) Acetabular revision with freeze-dried irradiated and chemically treated allograft: a minimum 5-year follow-up of 17 cases. Int Orthop 33:35–39
Tanaka C, Shikata J, Ikenaga M, Takahashi M (2003) Acetabular reconstruction using a Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device and hydroxyapatite granules: a 3- to 8-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty 18:719–725
Kawanabe K, Akiyama H, Onishi E, Nakamura T (2007) Revision total hip replacement using the Kerboull acetabular reinforcement device with morsellised or bulk graft: results at a mean follow-up of 8.7 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89:26–31
Okano K, Miyata N, Enomoto H, Osaki M, Shindo H (2010) Revision with impacted bone allografts and the Kerboull cross plate for massive bone defect of the acetabulum. J Arthroplasty 25:594–599
Baba T, Shitoto K (2010) Revision of total hip arthroplasty using the Kerboull and KT plates. Int Orthop 34:341–347
D'Antonio JA, Capello WN, Borden LS, Bargar WL, Bierbaum BF, Boettcher WG, Steinberg ME, Stulberg SD, Wedge JH (1989) Classification and management of acetabular abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 243:126–137
Merle D'Aubigné R, Postel M (1954) Functional result of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 36:451–475
Peters CL, Curtain M, Samuelson KM (1995) Acetabular revision with the Burch-Schnieder antiprotrusio cage and cancellous allograft bone. J Arthroplasty 10:307–312
DeLee JG, Charnley J (1976) Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 121:20–32
Garbuz D, Morsi E, Gross AE (1996) Revision of the acetabular component of a total hip arthroplasty with a massive structural allograft. Study with a minimum five year follow up. J Bone Jt Surg Am 78:693–697
Tägil M (2000) The morselized and impacted bone graft. Animal experiments on proteins, impaction and load. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 290:1–40
Lunn JV, Kearns SS, Quinlan W, Murray P, Byrne JO (2005) Impaction allografting and the Kerboull acetabular reinforcement device: 35 hips followed for 3–7 years. Acta Orthop 76:296–302
Van der Linde M, Tonino A (2001) Acetabular revision with impacted grafting and a reinforcement ring: 42 patients followed for a mean of 10 years. Acta Orthop Scand 72:221–227
Zehntner MK, Ganz R (1994) Midterm results (5.5-10 years) of acetabular allograft reconstruction with the acetabular reinforcement ring during total hip revision. J Arthroplasty 9:469–479
Schreurs BW, Luttjeboer J, Thien TM, De Waal Malefijt MC, Buma P, Veth RP, Slooff TJ (2009) Acetabular revision with impacted morselized cancellous bone graft and a cemented cup in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. A concise follow-up, at eight to nineteen years, of a previous report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:646–651
Comba F, Buttaro M, Pusso R, Piccaluga F (2009) Acetabular revision surgery with impacted bone allografts and cemented cups in patients younger than 55 years. Int Orthop 33:611–616
Hooten JP Jr, Engh CA Jr, Engh CA (1994) Failure of structural acetabular allografts in cementless revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 76:419–422
Lee BP, Cabanela ME, Wallrichs SL, Ilstrup DM (1997) Bone-graft augmentation for acetabular deficiencies in total hip arthroplasty. Results long-term follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplast 12:503–510
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hori, J., Yasunaga, Y., Yamasaki, T. et al. Mid-term results of acetabular reconstruction using a Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 36, 23–26 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-011-1248-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-011-1248-0