Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Bone integration in acetabular revision hip arthroplasty using equine-derived bone grafts: a retrospective study

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

During the last decade, total hip arthroplasty has become a common procedure performed in young patients, as well as elderly ones. This has led to an increase in total hip arthroplasty revisions. Loosening of primary components with associated bone loss represents the major cause of total hip arthroplasty revision. This study evaluates the safety and performance of an enzyme-deantigenic equine-derived bone graft material in acetabular defect reconstruction.

Methods

Records of 55 patients who were treated for Paprosky type II or III acetabular bone defects with arthroplasty revisions using equine-derived bone and followed for an average of 34 months (range from 24 to 48 months) were analyzed.

Results

Of the 55 revisions, 49 (89%) were regarded as successful, showing good osteointegration without signs of mobilization. Failures included six cases (11%) of mobilization: five cases of aseptic mobilization (9.1% of revisions, 83% of failures) and one case of septic mobilization (1.9% of revisions, 17% of failures). These results are consistent with those of studies having a similar follow-up period for allografts used in combination with trabecular metal components.

Conclusions

Results of the present study suggest that enzyme-treated equine-derived bone grafts may be a valid alternative to autogenous and homologous bone grafts in total hip arthroplasty revision.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sadoghi P, Liebensteiner M, Agreiter M, Leithner A, Bohler N, Labek G (2013) Revision surgery after total joint arthroplasty: a complication-based analysis using worldwide arthroplasty registers. J Arthroplasty 28(8):1329–1332

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Beswick A, Blom AW (2011) Bone graft substitutes in hip revision surgery: a comprehensive overview. Injury 42(Suppl 2):S40–S46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM (1994) Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty 9(1):33–44

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Goldberg VM (2000) Selection of bone grafts for revision total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 381:68–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Shibuya N, Jupiter DC (2015) Bone graft substitute: allograft and xenograft. Clin Podiatr Med Surg 32(1):21–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Pistilli R, Signorini L, Pisacane A, Lizio G, Felice P (2013) Case of severe bone atrophy of the posterior maxilla rehabilitated with blocks of equine origin bone: histological results. Implant Dent 22(1):8–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Di Stefano DA, Greco GB, Riboli F (2016) Guided Bone Regeneration of an Atrophic Mandible with a Heterologous Bone Block. Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr 9(1):88–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mattioli B, Iacoviello P, Aldiano C, Verrina G (2018) Subcranial Le Fort III advancement with equine-derived bone grafts to correct syndromic midfacial hypoplasia: a case report. J Maxillofac Oral Surg 17(3):296–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Santini S, Barbera P, Modena M, Schiavon R, Bonato M (2011) Equine-derived bone substitutes in orthopedics and traumatology: authors' experience. Minerva Chir 66(1):63–72

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Sonmez MM, Armagan R, Ugurlar M, Eren T (2017) Allografts versus Equine Xenografts in Calcaneal Fracture Repair. J Foot Ankle Surg 56(3):510–513

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Iorio R, Pagnottelli M, Vadalà A et al (2013) Open-wedge high tibial osteotomy: comparison between manual and computer-assisted techniques. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-011-1785-5

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Russo R, Maiotti M, Taverna E, Rao C (2018) Arthroscopic bone graft procedure combined with arthroscopic subscapularis augmentation for recurrent anterior instability with glenoid bone defect. Arthrosc Tech 7(6):e623–e632

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Russo R, Maiotti M, Taverna E (2018) Arthroscopic bone graft procedure combined with arthroscopic subscapularis augmentation (ASA) for recurrent anterior instability with glenoid bone defect: a cadaver study. J Exp Orthop 5(1):5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Da Rin F (2017) Treating a recalcitrant non-union of the radius using autogenous bone, equine bone paste, equine demineralized bone matrix, platelet rich plasma and bone marrow aspirate. A case report. J Orthop Case Rep 7(6):31–5

    Google Scholar 

  15. Goswami K, Parvizi J, Maxwell Courtney P (2018) Current recommendations for the diagnosis of acute and chronic PJI for hip and knee-cell counts, alpha-defensin, leukocyte esterase, next-generation sequencing. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 11:428. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-018-9513-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. DeLee JG, Charnley J (1976) Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 121:20–32

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sutherland CJ, Wilde AH, Borden LS, Marks KE (1982) A ten-year follow-up of one hundred consecutive Muller curved-stem total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64(7):970–982

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Callaghan JJ, Salvati EA, Pellicci PM, Wilson PD Jr, Ranawat CS (1985) Results of revision for mechanical failure after cemented total hip replacement, 1979 to 1982 A two to five-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67(7):1074–1085

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Yoshino K, Tsukeoka T, Tsuneizumi Y, Lee TH, Nakamura J, Suzuki M et al (2017) Revision total hip arthroplasty using a cementless cup supporter and iliac autograft: a minimum of 15-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 32(11):3495–3501

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim Y, Tanaka C, Kanoe H (2015) Long-term outcome of acetabular reconstruction using a Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device with hydroxyapetite granule and structural autograft for AAOS type II and III acetabular defects. J Arthroplasty 30(10):1810–1814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hinsenkamp M, Muylle L, Eastlund T, Fehily D, Noel L, Strong DM (2012) Adverse reactions and events related to musculoskeletal allografts: reviewed by the World Health Organisation Project NOTIFY. Int Orthop 36(3):633–641

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Fillingham Y, Jacobs J (2016) Bone grafts and their substitutes. Bone Joint J 98-B(1 Suppl A):6–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Liu Q, Huang S, Matinlinna JP, Chen Z, Pan H (2013) Insight into biological apatite: physiochemical properties and preparation approaches. Biomed Res Int 2013:929748

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Cusinato R, Pacenti M, Martello T, Fattori P, Morroni M, Palu G (2016) Effectiveness of hydrogen peroxide and electron-beam irradiation treatment for removal and inactivation of viruses in equine-derived xenografts. J Virol Methods 232:39–46

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhang J (2011) The structural stability of wild-type horse prion protein. J Biomol Struct Dyn 29(2):369–377

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Khan MQ, Sweeting B, Mulligan VK, Arslan PE, Cashman NR, Pai EF et al (2010) Prion disease susceptibility is affected by beta-structure folding propensity and local side-chain interactions in PrP. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107(46):19808–19813

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Perez DR, Damberger FF, Wuthrich K (2010) Horse prion protein NMR structure and comparisons with related variants of the mouse prion protein. J Mol Biol 400(2):121–128

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Giachin G, Biljan I, Ilc G, Plavec J, Legname G (2013) Probing early misfolding events in prion protein mutants by NMR spectroscopy. Molecules 18(8):9451–9476

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Charalambides C, Beer M, Cobb AG (2005) Poor results after augmenting autograft with xenograft (Surgibone) in hip revision surgery: a report of 27 cases. Acta Orthop 76(4):544–549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Artese L, Piattelli A, Di Stefano DA, Piccirilli M, Pagnutti S, D'Alimonte E et al (2011) Sinus lift with autologous bone alone or in addition to equine bone: an immunohistochemical study in man. Implant dentistry 20(5):383–388

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Di Stefano DA, Gastaldi G, Vinci R, Cinci L, Pieri L, Gherlone E (2015) Histomorphometric comparison of enzyme-deantigenic equine bone and anorganic bovine bone in sinus augmentation: a randomized clinical trial with 3-year follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 30(5):1161–1167

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Di Stefano DA, Gastaldi G, Vinci R, Polizzi EM, Cinci L, Pieri L et al (2016) Bone formation following sinus augmentation with an equine-derived bone graft: a retrospective histologic and histomorphometric study with 36-month follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 31(2):406–412

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Di Stefano DA, Zaniol T, Cinci L, Pieri L (2019) Chemical, clinical and histomorphometric comparison between equine bone manufactured through enzymatic antigen-elimination and bovine bone made non-antigenic using a high-temperature process in post-extractive socket grafting. A comparative retrospective clinical study. Dent J 7(3):70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. La Monaca G, Iezzi G, Cristalli MP, Pranno N, Sfasciotti GL, Vozza I (2018) Comparative histological and histomorphometric results of six biomaterials used in two-stage maxillary sinus augmentation model after 6-month healing. Biomed Res Int 2018:9430989

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Rosito R, Galia CR, Macedo CA, Moreira LF, Quaresma LM, Palma HM (2008) Acetabular reconstruction with human and bovine freeze-dried bone grafts and a reinforcement device. Clinics (Sao Paulo) 63(4):509–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Diesel CV, Ribeiro TA, Guimaraes MR, Macedo CAS, Galia CR (2017) Acetabular revision in total hip arthroplasty with tantalum augmentation and lyophilized bovine xenograft. Revista brasileira de ortopedia 52(Suppl 1):46–51

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Molicnik A, Hanc M, Recnik G, Krajnc Z, Rupreht M, Fokter SK (2014) Porous tantalum shells and augments for acetabular cup revisions. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 24(6):911–917

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Pierannunzii L, Mambretti A, D'Imporzano M (2011) Trabecular metal cup without augments for acetabular revision in case of extensive bone loss and low bone-prosthesis contact. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol 24(1 Suppl 2):133–137

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Perrotti V, Nicholls BM, Piattelli A (2009) Human osteoclast formation and activity on an equine spongy bone substitute. Clin Oral Implants Res 20(1):17–23

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Regazzoni C, Winterhalter KH, Rohrer L (2001) Type I collagen induces expression of bone morphogenetic protein receptor type II. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 283(2):316–322

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Basle MF, Lesourd M, Grizon F, Pascaretti C, Chappard D (1998) Type I collagen in xenogenic bone material regulates attachment and spreading of osteoblasts over the beta1 integrin subunit. Der Orthop 27(2):136–142

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Mordenfeld A, Hallman M, Johansson CB, Albrektsson T (2010) Histological and histomorphometrical analyses of biopsies harvested 11 years after maxillary sinus floor augmentation with deproteinized bovine and autogenous bone. Clin Oral Implants Res 21(9):961–970

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Orthopaedic and Traumatology Division, Department of Translational Research and of New Surgical and Medical Technologies, University of Pisa, 56124, Pisa, PI, Italy

    Nicola Piolanti & Andrea Del Chiaro

  2. Orthopaedic Clinic, Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine, University of Florence, C.T.O. Largo Palagi 1, 50139, Florence, Italy

    Fabrizio Matassi & Massimiliano Marcucci

  3. Articular Replacements Excellence Center (CESAT) - Fondazione Onlus “…In Cammino…”, Fucecchio, Italy

    Lorenzo Nistri

  4. Azienda Sanitaria Provinciale Di Enna, Via Armando Diaz 7/9, 94100, Enna, Italy

    Angelo Graceffa

Authors
  1. Nicola Piolanti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrea Del Chiaro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fabrizio Matassi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lorenzo Nistri
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Angelo Graceffa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Massimiliano Marcucci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Del Chiaro.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Nicola Piolanti, Andrea Del Chiaro, Fabrizio Matassi, Lorenzo Nistri, Angelo Graceffa and Massimiliano Marcucci declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Piolanti, N., Del Chiaro, A., Matassi, F. et al. Bone integration in acetabular revision hip arthroplasty using equine-derived bone grafts: a retrospective study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 30, 575–581 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-019-02613-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-019-02613-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation