Abstract
In the last years, the number of total hip arthroplasty is increased both in young patients and elderly with a poor bone quality due to extension of surgical indications. According to this trend, also revision surgery showed a growth of its number, especially in elderly patients, because of implant loosening, failed osseointegration of prosthetic components, errors in biomechanical restoration and infections. The aim of this study is to analyze life quality improvement through evaluation of articular functionality and postoperative pain, and to examine osseointegration of implant components with periprosthetic bone. During total hip arthroplasty revision, the orthopedic surgeon often has to face complex cases, especially in elderly patients with a preexisting status of poor bone quality and sarcopenia. In these cases, a correct planning and a surgical procedure well-executed are able to ensure a good outcome that led to pain relief and functional recovery. Furthermore anti-osteoporotic therapy surely represents a useful resource both in primary total hip arthroplasty and in revisions, mainly for elderly patients with a poor bone quality.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
References
Learmonth ID, Young C, Rorabeck C (2007) The operation of the century: total hip replacement. Lancet 370(9597):1508–1519
Kurtz S, Mowat F, Ong K et al (2005) Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(7):1487–1497
Day JC (1996) Population projections of the United States by age, sex, race and hispanic origin: 1995 to 2050. US Bureau of the Census, Current Population Reports. Series P25–1130. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E et al (2009) The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. JBJS Am 91:128–133
Gaiani L, Bertelli R, Palmonari M et al (2009) Total hip arthroplasty revision in elderly people with cement and Burch-Schneider anti-protusio cage. MusculoskeletSurg 93:15–19
Strehle J, DelNotaro C, Orler R et al (2000) The outcome of revision hip arthroplasty in patients older than age 80 years. Complications and social outcome of different risk groups. J Arthroplasty 15:690–697
Farhan AS, Hoey KA (2010) Integrative physiology of the aging bone: insight from animal and cellular models. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1211:95–106
Tarantino U, Iundusi R, Lecce D et al (2011) Osteosynthesis of fragility fractures. Aging Clin Exp Res 23(2 suppl):54–56
Kowalczewski JB, Rutkowska-Sak L, Marczak D et al (2013) Bone graft incorporation after revision hip arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, seventy eight revisions using bone allografts with or without metal reinforcements. Int Orthop 37(4):595–598
Lachiewicz PF, Soileau ES (2010) Tantalum components in difficult acetabular revisions. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468(2):454–458
Korda M, Blunn G, Goodship A et al (2008) Use of mesenchymal stem cells to enhance bone formation around revision hip replacements. J Orthop Res 26(6):880–885
Goldhahn J, Little D, Mitchell P et al (2010) Evidence for anti-osteoporosis therapy in acute fracture situations—recommendations of a multidisciplinary workshop of the International Society for Fracture Repair. Bone 46(2):267–271
Tsiridis E, Gamie Z, Conaghan PG et al (2007) Biological options to enhance periprosthetic bone mass. Injury 38(6):704–713
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gasbarra, E., Perrone, F.L., Celi, M. et al. Total hip arthroplasty revision in elderly patients. Aging Clin Exp Res 25 (Suppl 1), 61–63 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-013-0109-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-013-0109-7