Techniques for abductor reattachment in proximal femoral replacement for non-oncological reconstructions: a narrative review

被引:0
|
作者
Innocenti, Matteo [1 ]
Leggieri, Filippo [1 ]
Stimolo, Davide [1 ]
Carminati, Mattia [1 ]
Christian, Carulli [1 ]
Civinini, Roberto [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Florence, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Viale Pieraccini 6, I-50139 Florence, Italy
来源
ANNALS OF JOINT | 2024年 / 9卷
关键词
Abductor mechanism; abductor reattachment; gluteus medius; proximal femoral replacement; proximal femur megaprostheses; TOTAL HIP-ARTHROPLASTY; SUBTROCHANTERIC FRACTURES; UNITED-STATES; REVISION HIP; FEMUR; SALVAGE; MANAGEMENT;
D O I
10.21037/aoj-23-26
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background and Objective: Proximal femoral replacement due to revision hip arthroplasty or catastrophic proximal femur fracture fixation failures with considerable proximal femur bone loss can lead to a substantial loss of function of the soft tissue around the hip and the abductor muscles in particular. Surgical techniques of gluteus medius repair and/or abductor mechanism reattachment/reconstruction are widely debated in the literature, but it is quite rarely dealt with in the context of megaprosthesis and femoral reconstruction, particularly in non-oncologic patients. The aim of this study is to present a narrative review of the literature on techniques for abductor reattachment in proximal femoral replacement for nononcological reconstructions. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched by two researchers independently from inception until February 1st, 2023 (923 for MEDLINE and 963 for Embase; Cochrane is a composite of multiple databases and thus does not report a standard inception date). Articles examining proximal femoral reconstruction with megaprosthesis or allograft prosthesis were included. Studies concerning cadaver and oncologic patients were excluded. If the researchers failed to find an agreement on whether to include a study, the senior researcher would make a final decision in such cases. Data were extracted and stored, and qualitative synthesis was performed. Key Content and Findings: A total of 1,157 articles from MEDLINE, 11,187 articles from Embase, and 0 articles from Cochrane were identified. Of 12,344 articles, the structured screening process revealed 10 eligible trials. Four different types of abductor musculature reconstruction/reinsertion were identified. Conclusions: Multiple and complex revision hip arthroplasties as well as multiple surgical procedures for proximal femur fracture fixations failures may have a great impact on proximal femur bone stock condition and soft tissue preservation requiring the use of a proximal femur megaprosthesis. In such cases, the abductor mechanism reconstruction and/or reattachment is achievable with different techniques that can be resumed in four different groups: direct suture to the prosthesis, trochanteric sleeve osteotomy, muscle-to-muscle suture, and synthetic tube augmentation suture.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 24 条
  • [1] Proximal femoral reconstruction with modular megaprostheses in non-oncological patients
    Doering, Kevin
    Vertesich, Klemens
    Martelanz, Luca
    Staats, Kevin
    Boehler, Christoph
    Hipfl, Christian
    Windhager, Reinhard
    Puchner, Stephan
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2021, 45 (10) : 2531 - 2542
  • [2] Proximal femoral reconstruction with modular megaprostheses in non-oncological patients
    Kevin Döring
    Klemens Vertesich
    Luca Martelanz
    Kevin Staats
    Christoph Böhler
    Christian Hipfl
    Reinhard Windhager
    Stephan Puchner
    International Orthopaedics, 2021, 45 : 2531 - 2542
  • [3] The major proximal femoral defects: megaprosthesis in non oncological patients - A case series
    Zanchini, Fabio
    Piscopo, Antonio
    Cipolloni, Valerio
    Vitiello, Raffaele
    Piscopo, Davide
    Fusini, Federico
    Cacciapuoti, Stefano
    Panni, Alfredo Schiavone
    Pola, Ernico
    ORTHOPEDIC REVIEWS, 2023, 15 (01)
  • [4] Proximal femoral replacement for non-neoplastic conditions: a systematic review on current outcomes
    Di Martino, Alberto
    Pederiva, Davide
    Bordini, Barbara
    Di Carlo, Gabriele
    Panciera, Alessandro
    Geraci, Giuseppe
    Stefanini, Niccolo
    Faldini, Cesare
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2022, 23 (01)
  • [5] Hip abductor moment arm - a mathematical analysis for proximal femoral replacement
    Henderson, Eric R.
    Marulanda, German A.
    Cheong, David
    Temple, H. Thomas
    Letson, G. Douglas
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2011, 6
  • [6] Similar risks of complications and reoperation rates in proximal femur megaprostheses for oncological and non-oncological indications
    Tran, Guillaume
    Waast, Denis
    Nich, Christophe
    Pere, Morgane
    Berchoud, Juliane
    Gouin, Francois
    Crenn, Vincent
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2025, 49 (02) : 495 - 502
  • [7] Megaprosthesis use in Paprosky III/IV femoral defects in non-oncological patients: analysis of survival, clinical, and functional outcomes after an average follow-up of five years
    Ribera, Juan
    Payo-Ollero, Jesus
    Serrano-Toledano, David
    del Rio-Arteaga, Marta
    Montilla, Francisco Javier
    Muela, Rafael
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND TRAUMATOLOGY, 2024, 34 (02) : 1183 - 1192
  • [8] Survivorship and clinical outcomes of proximal femoral replacement in non-neoplastic primary and revision total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review
    Mancino, Fabio
    Di Matteo, Vincenzo
    Mocini, Fabrizio
    Cacciola, Giorgio
    Malerba, Giuseppe
    Perisano, Carlo
    De Martino, Ivan
    BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2021, 22 (SUPPL 2)
  • [9] Proximal femoral replacement for non-neoplastic conditions: a systematic review on current outcomes
    Alberto Di Martino
    Davide Pederiva
    Barbara Bordini
    Gabriele Di Carlo
    Alessandro Panciera
    Giuseppe Geraci
    Niccolò Stefanini
    Cesare Faldini
    Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2022, 23
  • [10] Proximal femoral replacement in non-neoplastic revision hip arthroplasty FIVE-YEAR RESULTS
    Syam, K.
    Unnikrishnan, P. N.
    Lokikere, N. K.
    Wilson-Theaker, W.
    Gambhir, A.
    Shah, N.
    Porter, M.
    BONE & JOINT OPEN, 2022, 3 (03): : 229 - 235