Complications and radiographic findings following cemented total hip replacement

Summary

Cemented total hip replacement (cTHR) is commonly performed to treat intractable coxofemoral pain in dogs. While owners generally perceive a good outcome after the procedure, the longevity of the implant may be limited by complications such as infection and aseptic loosening. The objective of this retrospective study was to identify the prevalence of complications and radiographic changes following cTHR, and to identify factors that may predispose to a need for revision surgery. Medical records and radiographs from 97 dogs that underwent cTHR were evaluated for signalment, preoperative degree of osteoarthritis, technical errors, intra-operative culture results, and the post-operative radiographic appearance of the implant. The complications occurring in the intra-operative and short-term (<eight week) periods, and the radiographic appearance of the implant in the long-term (>eight week) time period were recorded. Mean (±SD) follow-up time was 1.1 ± 1.6 years (range: 0–7.7 years). Seven dogs had a short-term complication and a revision surgery was performed in eleven dogs. Osseous or cement changes were radiographically detectable in the majority of cTHR. Eccentric positioning of the femoral stem and the presence of radiolucent lines at the femoral cement-bone interface were positively associated with the occurrence of revision surgery. The clinical significance of the periprosthetic radiographic changes is unclear and further investigation is warranted.

Keywords

Total hip - complications - dog

^* The results of this study were presented at the 32nd annual conference of the Veterinary Orthopedic Society, Snowmass, Colorado, USA, March 5–12, 2005.

• References

• 1 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: 703-19.
• 2 Olmstead ML. Canine cementedtotal hip replacements: state of the art. J Small Anim Pract 1995; 36: 395-9.
• 3 Olmstead ML. The canine cemented modular total hip prosthesis. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1995; 31: 109-24.
• 4 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: 580-6.
• 5 Lee KC, Kapatkin AS. Positive intra-operative cultures and canine total hip replacement: risk factors, periprosthetic infection, and surgical success. JAmAnim Hosp Assoc 2002; 38: 271-8.
• 6 Dyce J, Wisner ER, Wang Q. et al. Evaluation of risk factors for luxation after total hip replacement in dogs. Vet Surg 2000; 29: 524-32.
• 7 Harris WH, McCarthy Jr. JC, O'Neill DA.. Femoral component loosening using contemporary techniques of femoral cement fixation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1982; 64: 1063-7.
• 8 Maloney WJ, Smith RL, Schmalzried TP. et al. Isolation and characterization of wear particles generated in patients who have had failure of a hip arthroplasty without cement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1995; 77: 1301-10.
• 9 Liska WD. Femur fractures associated with canine total hip replacement. Vet Surg 2004; 33: 164-72.
• 10 Liska WD, Poteet BA. Pulmonary embolism associated with canine total hip replacement. Vet Surg 2003; 32: 178-86.
• 11 Palmisano MP, Dyce J, Olmstead ML. Extraosseous cement granuloma associated with total hip replacement in 6 dogs. Vet Surg 2003; 32: 80-90.
• 12 Sebestyen P, Marcellin-Little DJ, DeYoung BA. Femoral medullary infarction secondary to canine total hip arthroplasty. Vet Surg 2000; 29: 227-36.
• 13 Jones PR, Hukins DW, Porter ML. et al. Aseptic loosening of the femoral component in cemented total hip replacement. JBiomed Eng 1992; 14: 379-84.
• 14 Ebramzadeh E, Sarmiento A, McKellop HA. et al. The cement mantle in total hip arthroplasty. Analysis of long-term radiographic results. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1994; 76: 77-87.
• 15 Star MJ, Colwell Jr. CW, Kelman GJ. et al. Suboptimal (thin) distal cement mantle thickness as a contributory factor in total hip arthroplasty femoral component failure. A retrospective radiographic analysis favoring distal stem centralization. J Arthroplasty 1994; 9: 143-9.
• 16 Lee IY, Skinner HB, Keyak JH. Effects of variation of prosthesis size on cement stress at the tip of a femoral implant. J Biomed Mater Res 1994; 28: 1055-60.
• 17 Powers CM, Lee IY, Skinner HB. et al. Effects of distal cement voids on cement stress in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1998; 13: 793-8.
• 18 Olmstead ML, Hohn RB, Turner TM. A five-year study of 221 total hip replacements in the dog. J Am VetMed Assoc 1983; 183: 191-4.
• 19 Bergh MS, Muir P, Markel MD. et al. Femoral bone adaptation to unstable long-term cemented total hip arthroplasty in dogs. Vet Surg 2004; 33: 238-45.
• 20 Skurla CP, James SP. Assessing the dog as amodel for human total hip replacement: analysis of 38 postmortem-retrieved canine cemented acetabular components. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2005; 73: 260-70.
• 21 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 SurgBr 2005; 87: 120-7.
• 22 Skurla CP, James SP. Postmortem retrievedcanine THR: femoral and acetabular component interaction. Biomed Sci Instrum 2004; 40: 255-60.
• 23 Frankel DJ, Pluhar GE, Skurla CP. et al. Radiographic evaluation of mechanically tested cemented total hip arthroplasty femoral components retrieved postmortem. Vet Comp Orthop Traumatol 2004; 17: 216-24.
• 24 Bergh MS, Muir P, Markel MD. et al. Femoral bone adaptation to stable long-term cemented total hip arthroplasty in dogs. Vet Surg 2004; 33: 214-20.
• 25 Merriam-Webster's Medical Dictionary. Merriam-Webster, Inc.; 2002
• 26 Mawby DI, Bartges JW, d' Avignon A. et al. Comparison of Various Methods for Estimating Body Fat in Dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 2004; 40: 109-14.
• 27 Bio Medtrix Canine Modular Total Hip Replacement: Surgical protocol for cement application. 2005 Ref Type: Pamphlet.
• 28 Dyce J, Wisner ER, Schräder SC. et al. Radiographic evaluation of acetabular component position in dogs. Vet Surg 2001; 30: 28-39.
• 29 Cross AR, Newell SM. Definition and determination of acetabular component orientation in cemented total hip arthroplasty. Vet Surg 2000; 29: 507-16.
• 30 Skurla CT, Egger EL, Schwarz PD. et al. Owner assessment of the outcome of total hip arthroplasty in dogs. J AmVet Med Assoc 2000; 217: 1010-2.
• 31 Hammond JW, Queale WS, KimTKet al. Surgeon experience and clinical and economic outcomes for shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003; 85-A: 2318-24.
• 32 Dahl MT, Gulli B, Berg T. Complications of limb lengthening. A learning curve. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1994; (301): 10-8.
• 33 Haydon CM, Mehin R, Burnett S. et al. Revision total hip arthroplasty with use of a cemented femoral component. Results at a mean of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004; 86-A: 1179-85.
• 34 Berli BJ, Schafer D, Morscher EW. Ten-year survival of the MS-30 matt-surfaced cemented stem. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005; 87: 928-33.
• 35 Olmstead ML. Total hip replacement. Vet Clin North Am Small Anim Pract 1987; 17: 943-55.
• 36 Massat BJ, Vasseur PB. Clinical and radiographic results of total hip arthroplasty in dogs: 96 cases (1986-1992). J Am Vet Med Assoc 1994; 205: 448-54.
• 37 Jehn CT, Manley PA. The effects of femur and implant position on the radiographic assessment of total hip femoral implants in dogs. Vet Surg 2002; 31: 349-57.