Initial experience with a newly developed  cementless hip endoprosthesis

V. Hach; G. Delfs

doi:10.3415/VCOT-08-01-0006

Veterinary and Comparative Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Inhaltsverzeichnis

Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2009; 22(02): 153-158
DOI: 10.3415/VCOT-08-01-0006

Clinical Communication

Schattauer GmbH

Initial experience with a newly developed cementless hip endoprosthesis

V. Hach

¹Small Animal Veterinary Clinic Frankfurt am Main, Germany

,

G. Delfs

¹Small Animal Veterinary Clinic Frankfurt am Main, Germany

› Institutsangaben

Abstract

Summary

The HELICA-Endoprosthesis is a newly developed cementless hip prosthesis for dogs. It was implanted in 39 dogs that had severe hip osteoarthritis and a history of hip pain, as well as in one dog that had chronic hip luxation. One dog had a bilateral arthroplasty. The body weight of the patients ranged between 22 and 54 kg and their ages between nine months and 10 years. Both the femoral stem and acetabular component of the prosthesis were screwed into position following bony preparation. Additional fixation was not necessary as the components remain fixed in position until osteointegration is complete. There are currently five sizes of prosthesis available, and the various components such as the stem, cup and head are readily interchangeable. Although it appeared that good osseous anchorage of the prostheses in the bone on the surgery table had been obtained, three patients experienced both stem and cup loosening (one week, three weeks and six months after surgery). In one animal, stem loosening was observed six weeks after surgery, and another dog experienced a cup loosening two weeks postoperatively. Most of the complications were due to technical errors that occurred during the learning phase. Surgical revisions were successful in three out of five animals. In two animals we had to perform a femoral head and neck excision. Two other animals experienced radiographic bone resorption underneath the segmented collar of the femoral prosthesis but did not show any significant clinical signs of lameness. Another dog that showed signs of ischial neuropraxy after surgery, recovered completely within six weeks after surgery. All of the dogs were capable of weight bearing on the operated leg one day after surgery. The main advantage of the HELICA-Endoprosthesis is the relatively easy surgical technique and short surgery time. The initial clinical results in these 40 cases have been very encouraging. The aim of this study was to assess the early clinical results in these 39 dogs. Final evaluation can only be based on the results of gait analysis, long-term follow-up, and post mortem histological analysis.

Keywords

Total hip arthroplasty - dog - cementless - HELICA-prosthesis

Volltext

Referenzen

Literature
1 Charnley J. Anchorage of the femoral head pros-thesis to the shaft of the femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1960; 42: B28-30. 14
2 Hoefle WD. A surgical procedure for prosthesis total hip replacement in the dog. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1974; 10: 269-276.
3 Leighton RL. The Richard`s II canine hip prosthesis. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1979; 15: 73-76.
4 Olmstead ML, Hohn RB, Turner TM. A five-year study of 221 total hip replacements in the dog. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1983; 183: 191-194.
5 Matis U. Operationsverfahren bei Hüftgelenksdysplasie. Tierärztl Praxis 1995; 23: 426-431.
6 Paul H, Shelton W, Hamilton H. et al. Modern surgery for severe arthritis of the canine hip: total joint replacement. Calif Vet 1986; 40: 11-13.
7 Gutbrod F, Festl D. Praktische Anwendung und klinische Ergebnisse der Hüftgelenk-Totalendoprothese für Hunde Modell Aesculap. Kleintierpraxis 1995; 40: 793-804.
8 Hohn RB, Olmstaed ML, Turner TM. et al. Der Hüftgelenkersatz beim Hund. Tierärztl Prax 1986; 14: 377-388.
9 Holz I. Erfahrungen mit der Biomecanique-Pro-these. Klinische und radiologische Untersuchungen in den Jahren 1991 bis 2001. Diss met vet, Tierärztl Fakultät München. 2002
10 Kosfeld HU. Der totale Hüftgelenkersatz beim Hund. Klinische, röntgenologische und ganganalytische Erhebungen in den Jahren 1983 bis 1993. Diss med vet, Tierärztl. Fakultät München. 1996
11 MacGee FP, Weinstein AM, Longo JA. et al. A canine composite femoral stem: an in vivo study. Clin Orthop 1988; 235: 237-252.
12 Matis U, Holz I. Clinical experience and long-term results of the cemented Biomécanique hip. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2003; 16: A3.
13 Olmstead ML. The canine cemented modular total hip prosthesis. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1995; 31.: 109-124.
14 Bergh MS, Gilley RS, Shofer FS. et al. Complications and radiographic findings following cemented total hip replacement. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2006; 19: 172-179.
15 DeLee JG, Charnley J. Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1976; 121: 20-32.
16 Edwards MR, Egger EL, Schwarz PD. Aseptic loosening of the femoral implant after cemented total hip arthroplasty in dogs: 11 cases in 10 dogs (1991–1995). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1997; 211: 580-586.
17 Frankel DJ, Pluhar GE, Skurla CP. et al. Radio-graphic evaluation of mechanically tested cemented total hip arthroplasty femoral components retrieved postmortem. Vet Comp Orthop Trauma-tol 2004; 17: 216-224.
18 Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC. “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997; 141: 17-27.
19 Jones PR, Huskins DW, Porter ML. et al. Aseptic loosening of the femoral component in cemented total hip replacement. J Biomed Eng 1992; 14: 379-384.
20 Skurla CP, Pluhar GE, Frankel DJ. et al. Assessing the dog as a model for human total hip replacement: Analysis of 38 canine cemented femoral components retrieved at post-mortem. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 120-127.
21 Skurla CP, James SP. Assessing the dog as a model for human total hip replacement: Analysis of 38 postmortem-retrieved canine cemented acetabular components. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Bio-mater 2005; 73: 260-270.
22 DeYoung DJ, Schiller RA. Radiographic criteria for evaluation of uncemented total hip replacement in dogs. Vet Surg 1992; 21: 88-98. 15#
23 Hanson SP, Peck JN, Berry CR. et al. Radio-graphic evaluation of the Zurich cementless total hip acetabular component. Vet Surg 2006; 35: 550-558.
24 Hozack WJ, Rothman Rh, Booth RE. et al. Cemented versus cementless total hip arthroplasty. A comparative study of equivalent patient populations. Clin Orthop 1993; 289: 161-165.
25 Schawalder P, Stich H, Spreng D. Chronologie der Entwicklung einer zementlos fixierten Hüftgelenksendoprothese. Kleintierpraxis 1997; 42: 517-596.
26 Schawalder P, Stich H, Oetliker M. et al. Hohlzylinder-Dauerimplantate im klinischen Einsatz bei verschiedenen Indikationen. Schweiz Arch Tier-heilk 2000; 142: 279-288.
27 Marcellin-Little DJ, DeYoung BA, Doyens DH. et al. Canine uncemented porous-coated anatomic total hip arthroplasty: results of a long-term prospective evaluation of 50 consecutive cases. Vet Surg 1999; 28: 10-20.
28 Tepic S, Sci, Montavon PM. Concepts of Zurich Cementless Prosthesis. Vortrag ESVOT Tagung, München 2004.
29 Sebestyen P, Marcellin-Little DJ, DeYoung BA. Femoral medullary infarction secondary to canine total hip arthroplasty. Vet Surg 2000; 29: 227-236.
30 Boudrieau RJ, Montavon P, Arai N. et al. Zurich Hip Dinner Meeting. ACVS Meeting, Washington. 2003
31 Birkenhauer B, Kistmacher H, Ries J. Zementfreie Schenkelhalsprothese Typ Spiron – Konzeption und erste klinische Ergebnisse. Orthopade 2004; 33: 1259-1266.
32 Huggler AH, Jakob HAC. Die Entwicklung der Druckscheibenprothese (DSP). In Endoprothetik: Morscher EW, Hrsg. Berlin- Heidelberg- New York- Tokyo. Springer 1995; 267-278.
33 Hochmuth K, Rehart S. Die zementfreie primäre Hüftendoprothesenimplantation beim Rheumatiker. arthritis + rheuma 2004; 24: 143-147.
34 Ishaque BA, Wienbeck S, Basad E, Stürz H. Radiologische Verlaufsanalyse der Druckscheibenpro-these (DSP). Z Orthop Unfall 2004; 142: 15-24.
35 Kraemer WJ, Maistrelli GL, Fornasier V. et al. Migration of polyethylene wear debris in hip arthroplasties: a canine model. J Appl Biomater 1995; 6: 225-230.
36 Schatzker J, Anderson G, Sumner-Smith G. et al. An experimental investigation in the dog into the mode of osseous integration of total joint implants. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1989; 108: 132-140.
37 Weill D. Reconstruction of the cup using a bone graft and a cementless self-tapping CLW screw ring. Acta Orthop Belg 1986; 52: 332-342.
38 Gorman HA. A new prosthetic hip joint: Experiences in its use in the dog and its probable application to man. Milit Med 1957; 121: 91-93.
39 Hedley AK, Kabo M, Kim W. et al. Bony ingroth fixation of newly designed acetabular components in a canine model. Clin Orthop 1983; 176: 12-23.
40 Soballe K. Hydroxyapatite ceramic coating for bone implant fixation. Mechanical and histological studies in dogs. Acta Arthop Scand 1993; 255 Suppl 1-58.
41 Skurla CT, Egger EL, Schwarz PD. et al. Owner assessment of the outcome of total hip arthroplasty in dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 2000; 217: 1010-1012.
42 Chen PQ, Turner TM, Ronnmigen H. et al. A canine cementless total hip prosthesis model. Clin Orthop 1983; 176: 24-33.
43 Cockshutt JR, Schatzker J, Sumner-Smith G. et al. Biological fixation of a porous-coated, metal-backed acetabular component in canine total hip arthroplasty. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 1988; 3: 141-145.
44 DeYoung DJ, DeYoung BA, Abermann HA. et al. Implantation of an uncemented total hip prosthesis: technique and initial results of 100 arthroplasties. Vet Surg 1992; 21: 168-177.
45 Owen TD, Moran CG, Smith SR. et al. Results of uncemented porous-coated anatomic total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1994; 76: 258-262.
46 Schawalder P. Endoprothesen. In: Klinik der Hundekrankheiten, Grünbaum EG, Schimke E, Hrsgb. Stuttgart. Enke 2007; 948-952.
47 Krebs J. In vivo comparison of the biological attachment characterictics of titanium and hydro-xyapatite coated implants. Vet Diss 2002, Universität Bern.
48 Lee KC, Kapatkin AS. Positive intra-operative cultures and canine hip replacement: risk factors, periprosthetic infection and surgical success. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2002; 38: 271-278.
49 Liska WD. Femur fractures associated with canine total hip replacement. Vet Surg 2004; 33: 164-172.
50 Dyce J, Wisner ER, Wang Q. et al. Evaluation of risk factors for luxation after total hip replacement in dogs. Vet Surg 2000; 29: 524-532.
51 Montgomery RD, Milton JL, Pernell R. et al. Total hip arthroplasty for treatment of canine hip dysplasia. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1992; 22: 703-719.
52 Parker RB, Bloomberg MS, Bitetto W. et al. Canine total hip arthroplasty: a clinical review of 20 cases. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1984; 20: 97-104.
53 Bobyn JD, Mortimer ES, Glassman AH. et al. Producing and avoiding stress shielding. Laboratory and clinical observations of uncemented total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992; 274: 79-96.
54 Huiskes R, Weinans H, van Rietbergen B. The relationship between stress shielding and bone resorption around total hip stems and the effects of flexible materials. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992; 274: 124-134.
55 Olmstead ML. Total hip replacement. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1987; 17: 943-955.
56 Kirschner P, Franz W. Initial experience using the new Weill cementless threaded ring in acetabulum replacement. Unfallchirurgie 1987; 13: 27-31.
57 Hühn F, Gösling T, Engelke E. et al. In-vitro-Vergleich der Maximalbelastung und Frakturformen von Femora des Hundes ohne oder mit zwei unterschiedlichen zementfreien Hüftendoprothesen. Kleintierpraxis 2005; 11: 683-694.