ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative femoral fractures are well-known but often overlooked complications in total hip arthroplasty (THA). We examined outcomes of cerclage cabling for intraoperative calcar cracks in THA with cementless tapered wedge stems. METHODS: In total, 4928 primary THAs were performed using broach-only, tapered wedge stems between January 2007 and November 2017 in a single institution. Of these, we identified 71 intraoperative calcar cracks (69 patients) managed by 2-mm cerclage cables. Clinical outcomes, amount of stem subsidence, and implant survivorship of the calcar crack group (68 THAs) were compared with those of the matched control group (68 THAs) without intraoperative fractures. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify potential risk factors for stem subsidence >3 mm. RESULTS: The mean stem subsidence was greater in the calcar crack group (2.0 vs 1.2 mm, P = .021), whereas revision-free survivorships of THA were similar between groups at 6 years (98.5% vs 98.4%; log-rank, P = .987). In the calcar crack group, a Dorr type C femur and the absence of cabling proximal to the lesser trochanter (LT) were identified as independent risk factors for stem subsidence >3 mm. For the subgroup with 42 calcar cracks managed by a single cable applied proximal to the LT, revision-free survivorship of THA was 100% at 6 years. There was no complete radiolucency to indicate aseptic stem loosening in either group. CONCLUSION: The application of a single cable proximal to the LT of the femur for intraoperative calcar cracks demonstrated 100% revision-free survivorship with lower stem subsidence in THA with tapered wedge stems.
Subject(s)
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip , Hip Prosthesis , Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip/adverse effects , Femur/surgery , Hip Prosthesis/adverse effects , Humans , Prosthesis Design , Reoperation , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the surgical methods according to the status of tunnels at the time of revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) and to evaluate clinical outcomes of revision ACLR in patients who underwent primary ACLR with the anatomic 4-tunnel double-bundle (DB) technique. METHODS: A total of 487 patients who underwent primary anatomic DB ACLR from April 2010 to July 2016 were retrospectively reviewed, and among those knees, the patients who underwent revision ACLR were included in the study. The patients with concomitant posterior cruciate ligament injuries were excluded. Forty patients (40 knees) were identified and enrolled. The surgical methods were reviewed. The range of motion, objective laxity using KT-2000, Lysholm score, Hospital for Special Surgery score, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, and Tegner score after revision ACLR were compared with those after primary ACLR in the same patient using paired t-test with Bonferroni correction. RESULTS: The timing of reinjury after primary ACLR and mean interval between primary and revision ACLR were 18 months (range 1.5-80 months) and 24 months (range 4-82 months), respectively. Among 40 patients, 38 patients (95%) underwent 1-stage revision with the DB technique using pre-existing tunnels without compromised positioning of the grafts, and the other 2 patients (5%) underwent 2-stage revision. The postrevision range of motion, KT-2000, Lysholm score, Hospital for Special Surgery score, International Knee Documentation Committee subjective score, and Tegner score were 137 ± 7°, 2.4 ± 1.2 mm, 91.4 ± 5.8, 98.9 ± 2.2, 78.6 ± 11.5, and 5.5 ± 1.2, respectively, and did not show any differences from those after primary ACLR. CONCLUSIONS: In the revision setting after primary anatomic DB ACLR, most of the cases could be managed with 1-stage revision with DB technique using pre-existing tunnels, and the objective laxity and clinical scores after revision DB ACLR were comparable with those after primary DB ACLR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Case series, Level IV.
