Orthopedics Today—September 29, 2009
“Once you have decided to intervene, the goals of surgical treatment should be to arrest the osteolytic process, to debulk the biological response via complete synovectomy and removal of wear debris, to replenish bone stock, to exchange bearing services, and potentially take advantage of an increased head size,” he said.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In surgery, the two options for addressing osteolysis are a liner exchange with or without bone grafting or, alternatively, complete component revision.
An isolated liner exchange is a faster surgery, it lacks of bony disruption, has a quicker recovery time and cost. However, it also can lead to instability and may be limited by the existing implant.
Complete revision gives access to lytic lesions, allows modification of component position and the use of newer technologies. It also has bony disruption and increased costs and recovery time.
Su said you have to balance the variables: to retain or revise the shell, or choosing to do a less-invasive procedure which may require future surgery.
If the lesions can be accessed easily through screw holes or a makeshift “trap door,” retaining the shell is the obvious choice, Su said. But, if the component position is poor, it is better to revise the shell.
Read the full story at orthopedicsupersite.com.
Enter a last name to search for information about a doctor.
Phyllis Fisher
212.606.1197
fisherp@hss.edu
Tracy Hickenbottom
212.606.1197
hickenbottomt@hss.edu
Elyse Bernstein
212.606.1197
bernsteinel@hss.edu
© Hospital for Special Surgery. 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY 10021