Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

, Volume 133, Issue 6, pp 773–780 | Cite as

The use of a structural free iliac crest autograft for the treatment of acetabular fractures

  • Yun-tong Zhang
  • Yang Tang
  • Xue Zhao
  • Chun-cai Zhang
  • Shuo-gui Xu
Orthopaedic Surgery

Abstract

Introduction

Bone and cartilage deficits in the posterior acetabular wall are severe complications resulting from the unsuccessful management or delayed treatment of acetabular fracture. This potentially disastrous condition cannot be treated reliably with the use of reconstruction plates and screws alone. Therefore, this technical report describes a modified anatomical reconstruction method that uses a structural iliac crest autograft and an acetabular tridimensional memory alloy fixation system (ATMFS) to treat late-stage deficits in the posterior wall of the acetabulum. This paper also describes a clinical study of 22 patients with an average of 6.3 years follow-up to evaluate the clinical outcomes of this method.

Methods

Twenty-two patients, who had an acetabular reconstruction between January 2000 and December 2011 that used a structured free iliac crest autograft to treat late-stage bone and cartilage deficits in the posterior acetabular wall were followed annually with clinical and radiographic evaluations. The average age of the patients was 36.4 years at the time of the procedure, and the average time of follow-up was 6.3 years.

Results

None of the patients in this study lost reduction after surgery, and there were no cases of implant failure. Radiographic analysis using Matta’s X-ray evaluation criteria were excellent in eleven cases, good in eight, and fair on three. The Merle D’Aubigné and Postel clinical outcomes at the final follow-up were as follows: seven cases were excellent, ten cases were good, three cases were fair and two cases were poor.

Conclusions

The use of a modified iliac crest grafting and ATMFS fixation, as a biological method to reconstruct the acetabulum anatomically may offer better congruence of the joint surface and may ensure good hip joint stability during early postoperative exercise. The medium to long-term results of this method are encouraging.

Keywords

Structural free iliac crest Autograft Acetabular fracture Acetabular three-dimensional memory fixation system 

Notes

Conflict of interest

The authors did not receive grants or outside funding in support of their research for or preparation of this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Letournel E, Judet R (1993) Fractures of the acetabulum, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moed BR, Carr SE, Gruson KI et al (2003) Computed tomographic assessment of fracture of posterior wall of the acetabulum after operative treatment. J Bone Jt Surg Am 85-A:512–522Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Moed BR, Carr SE, Watson JT (2002) Results of operative treatment of fracture of the posterior wall of the acetabulum. J Bone Jt Surg Am 84-A:752–758Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Matta JM (1996) Fractures of the acetabulum: accuracy of reduction and clinical results in patients managed operatively within 3 weeks after the injury. J Bone Jt Surg Am 78(11):1632–1645Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moed BR, Carr SE, Watson JT (2000) Open reduction and internal fixation of posterior wall fractures of the acetabulum. Clin Orthop 377:57–67PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ragnasson B, Jacobsson B (1992) Epidemiology of pelvic fractures in a Swedish county. Acta Orthop Scand 63:297–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu XW, Xu SG, Zhang CC et al (2010) Application of a shape-memory alloy internal fixator for treatment of acetabular fractures with a follow-up of two to nine years in China. Int Orthop 34(7):1033–1040PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhang CC, Xu SG, Wang JL et al (2002) Design and clinical applications of acetabular tridimensional memory alloy-fixation system. Chin J Orthop 22(2):709–713Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baumgartner MR (1999) Fractures of the posterior wall of the acetabulum. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 7:54–65Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schreurs BW, Zengerink M, Welten ML et al (2005) Bone impaction grafting and a cemented cup after acetabular fracture at 3–18 years. Clin Orthop 437:145–151PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zha GC, Sun JY, Chen L et al (2012) Late reconstruction of posterior acetabular wall fractures using iliac crest. J Trauma 72:1386–1392Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Olson SA, Bay RK, Chapman MW et al (1995) Biomechanical consequences of fracture and repair of the posterior wall of the acetabulum. J Bone Jt Surg Am 77(8):1184–1192Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu XW, Xu SG, Zhang CC et al (2010) Biomechanical study of posterior wall acetabular fracture fixation using acetabular tridimensional memory alloy-fixation system. Clin Biomech 25:312–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yun-tong Zhang
    • 1
  • Yang Tang
    • 1
  • Xue Zhao
    • 1
  • Chun-cai Zhang
    • 1
  • Shuo-gui Xu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedics, Changhai HospitalSecond Military Medical UniversityShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations