本文關(guān)鍵詞： 全髖關(guān)節(jié)置換術(shù) 髖臼 翻修 重建 骨移植　出處：《新疆醫(yī)科大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：目的:探討在THA術(shù)后髖臼骨缺損翻修中應(yīng)用生物型大臼杯聯(lián)合打壓植骨技術(shù)進(jìn)行髖臼翻修的早期療效。方法:研究分析了新疆自治區(qū)人民醫(yī)院骨科中心,自2008年3月至2015年6月收治的27例(27髖)應(yīng)用生物型大臼杯聯(lián)合打壓植骨技術(shù)進(jìn)行髖臼翻修患者。其中男11例(11髖),女16例(16髖),平均年齡64.58(42-77)歲。翻修的原因:無菌性松動21髖,脫位4髖,髖臼假體磨損2髖。本組患者均為單側(cè)翻修,距THA間隔為10月-25年,平均為10.05年。其中應(yīng)用骨水泥型髖臼假體11髖,非骨水泥髖臼假體16髖。髖臼骨缺損程度依據(jù)Paprosky分類法:Ⅰ型5髖,ⅡA型10髖,ⅡB型7髖,ⅡC型3髖,ⅢA型2髖。應(yīng)用生物型大臼杯假體聯(lián)合打壓植骨技術(shù)對髖臼側(cè)進(jìn)行翻修,術(shù)后定期隨訪。采用Harris方法及視覺模擬評分法(Visual Analogue Scale,VAS)評分評估髖關(guān)節(jié)功能恢復(fù)情況,根據(jù)術(shù)后隨訪X線片判斷假體穩(wěn)定性及植骨融合情況。結(jié)果:本組27例(27髖)中有4例失訪,其余23例(23髖)均獲得有效隨訪,平均隨訪時間為39.53個月(13-85個月)。至末次隨訪:患側(cè)髖關(guān)節(jié)Harris評分由(41.18±7.59)分提高至(89.76±6.54)分,P0.05;Vas評分由(4.82±0.88)分提高至(0.39±0.62)分,P0.05。3例患者術(shù)后假體脫位,給予手法復(fù)位后康復(fù)。隨訪X線提示植入髖臼假體及螺釘固定良好,假體位置未見移位,植骨區(qū)骨融合情況良好,未見明顯骨吸收。無再次翻修病例。結(jié)論:應(yīng)用生物型大臼杯聯(lián)合打壓植骨技術(shù)對THA術(shù)后髖臼骨缺損進(jìn)行翻修,早期療效滿意,但中長期療效仍待進(jìn)一步觀察。
[Abstract]:Objective: to investigate the early effect of acetabular revision in the revision of acetabular defect after THA. Methods: the orthopaedic center of Xinjiang Autonomous region people's Hospital was studied and analyzed. From March 2008 to June 2015, 27 patients (11 hips, 11 males) underwent acetabular revision with biotype acetabular cup combined with bone grafting. The average age of 16 female patients was 64.58 (42-77) years old. The causes of revision were aseptic loosening in 21 hips, dislocation in 4 hips and acetabular prosthesis wear in 2 hips. The interval between THA and THA was from October to 25 years, with an average of 10.05 years. The cement acetabular prosthesis was used in 11 hips. The degree of acetabular defects was based on Paprosky classification: type 鈪，

本文編號：1444064