Revision for Recurrent or Irreducible Dislocation

, Paul D. Siney1 and Patricia A. Fleming1



(1)
The John Charnley Research Institute Wrightington Hospital, Wigan, Lancashire, UK

 



Between November 1962 and June 1972, 14,672 LFAs had been carried out. Post-operative dislocation occurred in 92, an incidence of 0.63 % and included dislocation immediately after surgery reduced under the same general anaesthetic [1].

Twenty one, 0.14 % required revision. Three main causes were identified:



  • Loss of abductor mechanism (trochanteric non-union),


  • Shortening of the limb (high placement of the cup, low section of the femoral neck.


  • Malorientation of components.

After the revision 16 patients (76.2 %) had no further dislocations, 1 had a single dislocation, while 4 (19 %) had more than one dislocation but managed to cope and did not require or want a further revision.

The review confirmed previously published information highlighting the essential points.



  • Full exposure of the acetabulum,


  • Correct preparation and placement of the cup at the correct level


  • Neutral version of the cup with 45° angle open laterally.


  • Correct level of femoral neck section.


  • Stability of the joint at trial reduction.


  • Secure re-attachment of the greater trochanter.


Comment


Dislocation of THA should not come as a surprise if it is considered that the natural and symptomatic joint is replaced by an artificial, neuropathic spacer. Absence of sensory input works both ways: freedom from pain but lack of warning of an impending dislocation – especially in the early post-operative period before healing of the deep soft tissues.

Recurrent dislocation undermines the patient’s confidence and frustrates the surgeon who may seek refuge in alternative methods and designs. Exposures avoiding trochanteric osteotomy and use of larger diameter heads are intuitively considered to be likely immediate solutions. Both present new challenges but may appear more attractive than to follow what is a well established method in order to expand the understanding and improve on the results already achieved.


Revision for Dislocation Survivorship Analysis (Table 17.1 and Fig. 17.1)





Table 17.1
Survivorship analysis: dislocation: end-point: revision for dislocation














Follow-up (years)

Only gold members can continue reading. Log In or Register to continue

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Nov 27, 2016 | Posted by in RHEUMATOLOGY | Comments Off on Revision for Recurrent or Irreducible Dislocation

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access