Download PDF
Z Orthop Unfall 2014; 152(1): 33-35
DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1360213
Hüfte
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Unerkannte Dissoziation des bipolaren Avantage®-Hüftprothesensystems (Biomet®) nach geschlossener Reposition einer Hüftluxation: eine seltene Komplikation

Unrecognised Dissociation of the Bipolar Hip Prosthesis Avantage® (Biomet®) after Closed Reduction of a Dislocation: A Rare Complication
M. B. Zinke
Abteilung für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Robert-Bosch-Krankenhaus, Stuttgart
,
B. Kinner
Abteilung für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Robert-Bosch-Krankenhaus, Stuttgart
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
27 February 2014 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Eine 84-jährige Patientin wurde mit einer periprothetischen Femurfraktur bei einliegender Hüftprothese (Avantage-Pfannensystem, Biomet®) in unserer Notfallambulanz vorstellig. Die konventionellen Röntgenaufnahmen von Becken und linkem Hüftgelenk zeigten neben der periprothetischen Fraktur Typ Vancouver B2 eine Dezentrierung des Prothesenschafts. Die weiterführende CT-Diagnostik zeigte eine Dissoziation des Polyethyleninlays vom Prothesenkopf, die sich im Rahmen einer bereits 3 Jahre zurückliegenden geschlossenen Reposition nach erfolgter postoperativer Luxation ereignete. Dieser Fall zeigt die Relevanz einer genauen Analyse von Röntgenkontrollaufnahmen post repositionem bez. der exakten Artikulation der Prothesenelemente.

Abstract

An 84-year-old female patient was admitted to our emergency department with a periprosthetic fracture of the left femur with an implanted Avantage prosthesis (Biomet®). Conventional X-ray images revealed besides the fracture a lateralisation of the prosthesis stem. An additional CT scan showed a dissociation of the polyethylene inlay from the head of the prosthesis which took place 3 years ago in the course of a closed reposition of a postoperative luxation. This event shows the relevance of a precise analysis of X-ray images after reposition regarding the exact articulation of the different prosthesis components.

Schlüsselwörter

Hüftluxation - Avantage - Biomet - Komplikation

Key words

hip dislocation - Avantage - Biomet - complication
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E et al. The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2009; 91: 128-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Hailer NP, Weiss RJ, Stark A et al. The risk of revision due to dislocation after total hip arthroplasty depends on surgical approach, femoral head size, sex, and primary diagnosis. An analysis of 78,098 operations in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2012; 83: 442-448
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Woolson ST, Rahimtoola ZO. Risk factors for dislocation during the first 3 months after primary total hip replacement. J Arthroplasty 1999; 14: 662-668
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Alberton GM, High WA, Morrey BF. Dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of risk factors and treatment options. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 2002; 84: 1788-1792
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hailer NP, Weiss RJ, Stark A et al. Dual-mobility cups for revision due to instability are associated with a low rate of re-revisions due to dislocation: 228 patients from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 2012; 83: 566-571
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Götze C, Glosemeyer D, Ahrens J et al. The bipolar cup Avantage in hip revision surgery. Z Orthop Unfall 2010; 148: 420-425
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Leonardsson O, Kärrholm J, Åkesson K et al. Higher risk of reoperation for bipolar and uncemented hemiarthroplasty. 23,509 procedures after femoral neck fractures from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, 2005–2010. Acta Orthop 2012; 83: 459-466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar