• Something wrong with this record ?

Naše zkušenosti s povrchovou náhradou kyčelního kloubu ICON
[Our Experience with ICON Hip Resurfacing System]

T. Trč, E. Šťastný, Z. Kopečný, P. Kos, J. Přidal, V. Havlas

. 2022 ; 89 (5) : 323-331. [pub] -

Language Czech Country Czech Republic

Document type English Abstract, Journal Article

Digital library NLK
Source

E-resources Online

NLK Free Medical Journals from 2006

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY Our study aimed to assess the mid-term outcomes and complications with the ICON hip resurfacing system and to carry out a detailed analysis of pitfalls and risks associated with pairing the bearing surfaces of metal-on-metal hip implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 52 hip joints were assessed in 43 patients who received the ICON hip resurfacing system at our department between 2009 and 2013. The cohort included 34 men and 9 women. Their age at the time of primary surgery ranged from 34 to 67 years, with the mean age of 51.8 years. The mean follow-up was 7.6 years. The evaluation focused on the position and osseointegration of both components, bone remodelling around the implant, and signs of potential aseptic loosening. The functional status of the hip was assessed by Harris Hip Score. RESULTS The primary stability of both components was always good, there were no femoral neck fractures reported in our cohort. All the acetabular components were stable, showing appropriate osseointegration, with no radiolucent zones or signs of osteolysis around them. There was not a single case of the femoral component stem being in a biomechanically disadvantageous varus position. In zone I and III according to Beaulé, cancellous bone osteolysis developed in two patients. The narrowing of the femoral neck below the end of the femoral component, compared to postoperative X-rays, achieved the mean value of 1.3% according to Grammatopolouse. The HHS increased from 64 to 95.5 points. An excellent outcome was observed in 48 joints, whereas the outcome of the remaining 4 joints was very good. The mean survival rate of the resurfacing hip implant calculated using the Kaplan-Meier analysis achieved 100%. The cobalt and chromium levels in the blood of patients did not exceed the reference physiological value. DISCUSSION The resurfacing system enables to preserve the bone tissue of the metaphysis and a part of the femoral head. The reduced mechanical endurance of the peripheral part of femoral components smaller in size caused by implant malposition resulted in fatal consequences in the ASR system. Greater range of motion conditioned by the design of the resurfacing system led to a mechanical wear, with a significant increase in the concentration of metal particles in the effective joint space. The elevated levels of cobalt and chromium ions in some patients induced delayed-type hypersensitivity with subsequent development of aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis associated lesions presented as peri-acetabular changes (pseudotumors to osteolysis) with subsequent failure of implant fixation. We have not observed this complication in the ICON system as yet. In patients suffering from hip pain after the resurfacing hip arthroplasty and simultaneous high chromium and cobalt blood levels, pelvic CT/MRI is indicated with reduction of artefacts around the metal material. Surgical treatment of soft tissue affections, bone defects and reimplantation using conventional or revisioncementless components is a possible treatment option. CONCLUSIONS The ideal patient indicated for hip resurfacing is a physically active man under 60 years of age (with a femoral head size of 54-60 mm), with primary or secondary osteoarthritis, no joint deformity, with a good quality bone tissue in the femoral neck and head region. As for the functional performance, the resurfacing system allows the patients a large range of motion with very good joint stability immediately after surgery. Despite that, the metal-on-metal tribological pairing must be approached with caution. The risk of developing lesions associated with ALVAL is unpredictable. In our cohort of patients with ICON hip resurfacing system, mostly excellent outcomes with minimum complications were reported provided the indication criteria and the correct surgical procedure had been complied with. Key words: hip resurfacing system, metal articulating surfaces, adverse reaction to metal particles, aseptic lymphocytedominated vasculitis associated lesions, pseudotumor.

Our Experience with ICON Hip Resurfacing System

000      
00000naa a2200000 a 4500
001      
bmc22026959
003      
CZ-PrNML
005      
20230504090311.0
007      
ta
008      
221108s2022 xr ad f 000 0|cze||
009      
AR
035    __
$a (PubMed)36322031
040    __
$a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
041    0_
$a cze $b eng
044    __
$a xr
100    1_
$a Trč, Tomáš, $u Klinika dětské a dospělé ortopedie a traumatologie 2. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice v Motole, Praha $d 1955- $7 nlk19990073953
245    10
$a Naše zkušenosti s povrchovou náhradou kyčelního kloubu ICON / $c T. Trč, E. Šťastný, Z. Kopečný, P. Kos, J. Přidal, V. Havlas
246    31
$a Our Experience with ICON Hip Resurfacing System
520    9_
$a PURPOSE OF THE STUDY Our study aimed to assess the mid-term outcomes and complications with the ICON hip resurfacing system and to carry out a detailed analysis of pitfalls and risks associated with pairing the bearing surfaces of metal-on-metal hip implants. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 52 hip joints were assessed in 43 patients who received the ICON hip resurfacing system at our department between 2009 and 2013. The cohort included 34 men and 9 women. Their age at the time of primary surgery ranged from 34 to 67 years, with the mean age of 51.8 years. The mean follow-up was 7.6 years. The evaluation focused on the position and osseointegration of both components, bone remodelling around the implant, and signs of potential aseptic loosening. The functional status of the hip was assessed by Harris Hip Score. RESULTS The primary stability of both components was always good, there were no femoral neck fractures reported in our cohort. All the acetabular components were stable, showing appropriate osseointegration, with no radiolucent zones or signs of osteolysis around them. There was not a single case of the femoral component stem being in a biomechanically disadvantageous varus position. In zone I and III according to Beaulé, cancellous bone osteolysis developed in two patients. The narrowing of the femoral neck below the end of the femoral component, compared to postoperative X-rays, achieved the mean value of 1.3% according to Grammatopolouse. The HHS increased from 64 to 95.5 points. An excellent outcome was observed in 48 joints, whereas the outcome of the remaining 4 joints was very good. The mean survival rate of the resurfacing hip implant calculated using the Kaplan-Meier analysis achieved 100%. The cobalt and chromium levels in the blood of patients did not exceed the reference physiological value. DISCUSSION The resurfacing system enables to preserve the bone tissue of the metaphysis and a part of the femoral head. The reduced mechanical endurance of the peripheral part of femoral components smaller in size caused by implant malposition resulted in fatal consequences in the ASR system. Greater range of motion conditioned by the design of the resurfacing system led to a mechanical wear, with a significant increase in the concentration of metal particles in the effective joint space. The elevated levels of cobalt and chromium ions in some patients induced delayed-type hypersensitivity with subsequent development of aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis associated lesions presented as peri-acetabular changes (pseudotumors to osteolysis) with subsequent failure of implant fixation. We have not observed this complication in the ICON system as yet. In patients suffering from hip pain after the resurfacing hip arthroplasty and simultaneous high chromium and cobalt blood levels, pelvic CT/MRI is indicated with reduction of artefacts around the metal material. Surgical treatment of soft tissue affections, bone defects and reimplantation using conventional or revisioncementless components is a possible treatment option. CONCLUSIONS The ideal patient indicated for hip resurfacing is a physically active man under 60 years of age (with a femoral head size of 54-60 mm), with primary or secondary osteoarthritis, no joint deformity, with a good quality bone tissue in the femoral neck and head region. As for the functional performance, the resurfacing system allows the patients a large range of motion with very good joint stability immediately after surgery. Despite that, the metal-on-metal tribological pairing must be approached with caution. The risk of developing lesions associated with ALVAL is unpredictable. In our cohort of patients with ICON hip resurfacing system, mostly excellent outcomes with minimum complications were reported provided the indication criteria and the correct surgical procedure had been complied with. Key words: hip resurfacing system, metal articulating surfaces, adverse reaction to metal particles, aseptic lymphocytedominated vasculitis associated lesions, pseudotumor.
650    _2
$a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
650    _2
$a lidé $7 D006801
650    _2
$a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
650    _2
$a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
650    _2
$a dospělí $7 D000328
650    _2
$a senioři $7 D000368
650    12
$a náhrada kyčelního kloubu $x metody $7 D019644
650    12
$a osteolýza $x etiologie $x chirurgie $7 D010014
650    _2
$a selhání protézy $7 D011475
650    12
$a kyčelní protézy $x škodlivé účinky $7 D006622
650    _2
$a kyčelní kloub $x diagnostické zobrazování $x chirurgie $7 D006621
650    _2
$a kobalt $7 D003035
650    _2
$a kovy $7 D008670
650    _2
$a chrom $7 D002857
650    12
$a vaskulitida $x komplikace $x chirurgie $7 D014657
650    _2
$a protézy - design $7 D011474
650    _2
$a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
650    _2
$a reoperace $7 D012086
655    _2
$a anglický abstrakt $7 D004740
655    _2
$a časopisecké články $7 D016428
700    1_
$a Šťastný, Eduard $u Klinika dětské a dospělé ortopedie a traumatologie 2. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice v Motole, Praha $7 xx0105243
700    1_
$a Kopečný, Zdeněk, $u Klinika dětské a dospělé ortopedie a traumatologie 2. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice v Motole, Praha $d 1961- $7 _BN004750
700    1_
$a Kos, Petr $u Klinika dětské a dospělé ortopedie a traumatologie 2. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice v Motole, Praha $7 xx0135447
700    1_
$a Přidal, Jaromír $u Klinika dětské a dospělé ortopedie a traumatologie 2. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice v Motole, Praha $7 xx0227521
700    1_
$a Havlas, Vojtěch, $u Klinika dětské a dospělé ortopedie a traumatologie 2. lékařské fakulty Univerzity Karlovy a Fakultní nemocnice v Motole, Praha $d 1971- $7 xx0065575
773    0_
$w MED00011021 $t Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Cechoslovaca $x 0001-5415 $g Roč. 89, č. 5 (2022), s. 323-331
856    41
$u https://achot.cz/pdfs/ach/2022/05/01.pdf $y plný text volně přístupný
910    __
$a ABA008 $b A 8 $c 507 $y p $z 0
990    __
$a 20221108 $b ABA008
991    __
$a 20230504090308 $b ABA008
999    __
$a ok $b bmc $g 1892774 $s 1178266
BAS    __
$a 3
BAS    __
$a PreBMC
BMC    __
$a 2022 $b 89 $c 5 $d 323-331 $e - $i 0001-5415 $m Acta chirurgiae orthopaedicae et traumatologiae Čechoslovaca $n Acta chir. orthop. traumatol. Čechoslovaca $x MED00011021
LZP    __
$b NLK198 $a Pubmed-20221108

Find record

Citation metrics

Loading data ...

Archiving options

Loading data ...