Advertisement

International Orthopaedics

, Volume 43, Issue 1, pp 77–83 | Cite as

Total hip arthroplasty with a monoblock conical stem and subtrochanteric transverse shortening osteotomy in Crowe type IV dysplastic hips

  • Guido Grappiolo
  • Francesco La Camera
  • Antonello Della Rocca
  • Giuseppe Mazziotta
  • Giuseppe Santoro
  • Mattia LoppiniEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

Purpose

This series assessed the clinical and radiographic outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) with femoral shortening osteotomy for the management of patients with Crowe type IV hip dysplasia.

Methods

Only patients with Crowe type IV hip dysplasia who underwent primary THA combined with a subtrochanteric transverse osteotomy with an uncemented monoblock conical stem were included. The clinical and radiographic evaluations were performed before and immediately after surgery, and at last follow-up. The hip function was assessed with the Harris Hip Score (HHS).

Results

Seventy-four patients (102 hips) with a mean age of 53.9 (range, 20–83) were evaluated at an average follow-up of 11.3 years (range, 5–25). Stem revision occurred in two (1.9%) cases, with a survivorship of 95.9% (95%IC, 91.9–99.9%) at ten years. The average HHS increased from 44 (range, 15–78) pre-operatively to 90.3 (range, 62–100) at last follow-up (p < 0.001). Osteotomy site non-union and early dislocation were observed in 3.9 and 3.8%, respectively. No cases of nerve palsy were reported.

Conclusions

THA with a monoblock conical stem associated with subtrochanteric transverse osteotomy provides good long-term survival, clinical and radiographic results. It may be considered an effective management of patients with Crowe IV hip dysplasia.

Keywords

Crowe type IV dislocation Total hip arthroplasty Monoblock conical stem Transverse femoral shortening 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Guido Grappiolo received honoraria for speaking at symposia, financial support for attending symposia and educational programs from Zimmer Biomet, and royalties from Zimmer Biomet and Innomed. Giuseppe Mazziotta, Giuseppe Santoro, Mattia Loppini and Antonello Della Rocca received financial support for attending symposia and educational programs from Zimmer Biomet. Francesco La Camera has no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This was a retrospective and observational study with medical records of patients included in a registry of orthopaedic surgical procedures. The study protocol for the development of this registry was approved by the Ethical Committee of Humanitas Research Hospital (approval number 618/17) and in strict accordance with the Helsinki Declaration.

Informed consent

All individual participants signed a written informed consent before the surgical procedure and a written informed consent to be included in the registry of orthopaedic surgical procedures.

References

  1. 1.
    Rogers BA, Garbedian S, Kuchinad RA, Backstein D, Safir O, Gross AE (2012) Total hip arthroplasty for adult hip dysplasia. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94:1809–1821.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.K.00779 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grappiolo G, Spotorno L, Burastero G (2007) Evolution of surgical techniques for the treatment of angular and torsional deviation in DDH: 20 years experience. Hip Int 17(Suppl 5):S105–S110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Free SA, Delp SL (1996) Trochanteric transfer in total hip replacement: effects on the moment arms and force-generating capacities of the hip abductors. J Orthop Res 14:245–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ahmed E, Ibrahim el G, Ayman B (2015) Total hip arthroplasty with subtrochanteric osteotomy in neglected dysplastic hip. Int Orthop 39:27–33.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2554-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li X, Lu Y, Sun J, Lin X, Tang T (2017) Treatment of Crowe type-IV hip dysplasia using cementless total hip arthroplasty and double chevron subtrochanteric shortening osteotomy: a 5- to 10-year follow-up study. J Arthroplast 32:475–479.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.07.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tozun IR, Akgul T, Sensoy V, Kilicoglu OI (2016) The results of monoblock stem with step-cut femoral shortening osteotomy for developmentally dislocated hips. Hip Int 26:270–277.  https://doi.org/10.5301/hipint.5000338 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Takao M, Ohzono K, Nishii T, Miki H, Nakamura N, Sugano N (2011) Cementless modular total hip arthroplasty with subtrochanteric shortening osteotomy for hips with developmental dysplasia. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:548–555.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.01619 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ozden VE, Dikmen G, Beksac B, Tozun IR (2017) Tapered stems one-third proximally coated have higher complication rates than cylindrical two-third coated stems in patients with high hip dislocation undergoing total hip arthroplasty with step-cut shortening osteotomy. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 103:569–577.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2017.01.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Akiyama H, Kawanabe K, Yamamoto K, Kuroda Y, So K, Goto K et al (2011) Cemented total hip arthroplasty with subtrochanteric femoral shortening transverse osteotomy for severely dislocated hips: outcome with a 3- to 10-year follow-up period. J Orthop Sci 16:270–277.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-011-0049-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhu J, Shen C, Chen X, Cui Y, Peng J, Cai G (2015) Total hip arthroplasty with a non-modular conical stem and transverse subtrochanteric osteotomy in treatment of high dislocated hips. J Arthroplast 30:611–614.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2014.11.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zini R, Longo UG, de Benedetto M, Loppini M, Carraro A, Maffulli N et al (2013) Arthroscopic management of primary synovial chondromatosis of the hip. Arthroscopy 29:420–426.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2012.10.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Makita H, Inaba Y, Hirakawa K, Saito T (2007) Results on total hip arthroplasties with femoral shortening for Crowe’s group IV dislocated hips. J Arthroplast 22:32–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Grappiolo G, Loppini M, Longo UG, Traverso F, Mazziotta G, Denaro V (2015) Trabecular metal augments for the management of Paprosky type III defects without pelvic discontinuity. J Arthroplast 30:1024–1029.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2015.01.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    DeLee JG, Charnley J (1976) Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 121:20–32Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC (1979) “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–27Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim YH, Kim JS, Oh SH, Kim JM (2003) Comparison of porous-coated titanium femoral stems with and without hydroxyapatite coating. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:1682–1688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Brooker AF, Bowerman JW, Robinson RA, Riley LH Jr (1973) Ectopic ossification following total hip replacement. Incidence and a method of classification J Bone Joint Surg Am 55:1629–1632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Loppini M, Longo UG, Caldarella E, Rocca AD, Denaro V, Grappiolo G (2017) Femur first surgical technique: a smart non-computer-based procedure to achieve the combined anteversion in primary total hip arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 18:331.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1688-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Traina F, De Fine M, Biondi F, Tassinari E, Galvani A, Toni A (2009) The influence of the centre of rotation on implant survival using a modular stem hip prosthesis. Int Orthop 33:1513–1518.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-008-0710-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Oe K, Iida H, Kawamura H, Ueda N, Nakamura T, Okamoto N et al (2016) Long-term results of acetabular reconstruction using three bulk bone graft techniques in cemented total hip arthroplasty for developmental dysplasia. Int Orthop 40:1949–1954.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-3039-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Liu S, Zuo J, Li Z, Yang Y, Liu T, Xiao J et al (2017) Study of three-dimensional morphology of the proximal femur in developmental adult dysplasia of the hip suggests that the on-shelf modular prosthesis may not be an ideal choice for patients with Crowe type IV hips. Int Orthop 41:707–713.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3248-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Catma MF, Unlu S, Ozturk A, Aksekili AM, Ersan O, Ates Y (2016) Femoral shortening osteotomy in total hip arthroplasty for severe dysplasia: a comparison of two fixation techniques. Int Orthop 40:2271–2276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hasegawa Y, Iwase T, Kanoh T, Seki T, Matsuoka A (2012) Total hip arthroplasty for Crowe type developmental dysplasia. J Arthroplast 27:1629–1635.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2012.02.026 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rojas J, Bautista M, Bonilla G, Amado O, Huerfano E, Monsalvo D et al (2018) A retrospective study on the relationship between altered native acetabular angle and vertical implant malpositioning. Int Orthop 42:769–775.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3584-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ohishi M, Nakashima Y, Yamamoto T, Motomura G, Fukushi JI, Hamai S et al (2016) Cementless total hip arthroplasty for patients previously treated with femoral osteotomy for hip dysplasia: the incidence of periprosthetic fracture. Int Orthop 40:1601–1606.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2992-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Hip Diseases and Joint Replacement Surgery UnitHumanitas Clinical and Research CenterMilanItaly
  2. 2.Department of Biomedical SciencesHumanitas UniversityMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations