Unsatisfactory results after repeated revision of hip arthroplasty. 61 cases followed for 5 (1-10) years.

Acta Orthop Scand

University of Copenhagen, Department of Orthopedics, Rigshospitalet, Denmark.

Published: April 1992

61 cemented second revision total hip arthroplasties and 18 cemented third revision total hip arthroplasties were studied with emphasis on causes of failure, complications, risk of further revision, and clinical and radiographic results of surviving, not further revised patients. Aseptic loosening was the major reason for both second and third revisions followed by recurrent dislocations. Of 61 second revisions, 21 failed again. Postoperative dislocation was the major complication, encountered in 10/61 after second revisions and in 4/18 third revisions. 10 second revisions were reoperated on without exchange of components, but for causes related to the implant. The clinical and radiographic outcome of surviving, not further revised patients was favorable, but must be seen in the light of the high rate of further revisions. In 33 of 53 second revisions and in 5 of 13 third revisions left for evaluation, the outcome was considered unsatisfactory. We conclude that reoperations for failed arthroplasties should be the prerogative of highly experienced centers.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/17453679209154807DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

second revisions
16
third revisions
12
revision total
8
total hip
8
hip arthroplasties
8
clinical radiographic
8
surviving revised
8
revised patients
8
revisions
8
revisions second
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!