CASE REPORT
 
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
Introduction:
Despite the advances made in medicine, arthroplasty performed in young patients is still associated with an increased risk of complications. Massive destruction of the acetabular ring is a challenge, requires careful planning, and the use of various surgical techniques and implants.

Case Report:
The case is presented of a young woman with a Paprosky type IIIB defect of the acetabular rin who underwent a revision total hip arthroplasty. During planning, 3D printed bone models were used because the choice of surgical technique was not obvious. The 3D prints, together with the radiological diagnostics performed, provided a real picture of the problem, and a better understanding of the pathoanatomy.

Conclusions:
Multiple, unpunished trialing on printed models by using different trial implants make it possible to test the feasibility and practice the techniques. It may prevent making the mistake of choosing wrong the surgical technique. Additionally, the models give better visualization of the patient’s anatomy during the surgery lifetime.

 
REFERENCES (16)
1.
Zagra L. Advances in hip arthroplasty surgery: what is justified? EFORT Open Rev. 2017; 2: 171–178. doi: 10.1302/2058-5241.2.170008.
 
2.
Evans JT, Evans JP, Walker RW, Blom AW, Whitehouse MR, Sayers A. How long does a hip replacement last? A systematic review and metaanalysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up. Lancet. 2019; 393(10172): 647–654. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31665-9.
 
3.
Norwegian Arthroplasty Register, Total Hip Replacement. 2018: 9–59.
 
4.
Gallo J, Vaculova J, Goodman SB, Konttinen YT, Thyssen JP. Contributions of human tissue analysis to understanding the mechanisms of loosening and osteolysis in total hip replacement. Acta Biomater. 2014; 10(6): 2354–2366. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2014.02.003.
 
5.
Wooley PH. How Has the Introduction of New Bearing Surfaces Altered the Biological Reactions to Byproducts of Wear and Modularity?. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 472(12): 3699–3708. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3725-4.
 
6.
Telleria JJM, Gee AO. Classifications in brief: Paprosky classification of Acetabular bone loss. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471(11): 3725–30. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3264-4.
 
7.
Mancino F, Cacciola G, Di Matteo V, et al. Reconstruction options and outcomes for acetabular bone loss in revision hip arthroplasty. Orthop Rev (Pavia). 2020; 12(Suppl 1): 8655. https://doi.org/10.4081/or.202....
 
8.
Niedźwiedzki Ł, Niedźwiedzki T. Reconstruction of massive acetabular bone loss with pelvic discontinuity. Chirurgia Narządów Ruchu i Ortopedia Polska. 2019; 84(2): 56–60. doi: 10.31139/chnriop.2019.84.2.11.
 
9.
Ibrahim DA, Fernando ND. Classifications in brief: the Paprosky classification of femoral bone loss. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017; 475: 917-21. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-5012-z.
 
10.
Shon WY, Santhanam SS, Choi JW. Acetabular Reconstruction in Total Hip Arthroplasty. Hip Pelvis. 2016; 28(1): 1–14. doi: 10.5371/hp.2016.28.1.1.
 
11.
Hsu CC, Hsu CH, Yen SH, Wang JW. Use of the Burch-Schneider cage and structural allografts in complex acetabular deficiency: 3- to 10-year follow up. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2015; 31(10): 540–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjms....
 
12.
Khuangsirikul S, Chotanaphuti T. Management of femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Clin Orthop Trauma. 2020; 11(1): 29–32. doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2019.12.004.
 
13.
Dipaola M, Wodajo F. M, 3D Printing in Orthopaedic Surgery. Elsevier, 2019.
 
14.
Kaziunas, France A. Świat druku 3D, Przewodnik. Helion, 2014.
 
15.
Siemiński P, Budzik G. Techniki przyrostowe. Druk 3D. Drukarki 3D. OWPW, 2015.
 
16.
Sperring TR, Wintermeyer E, DeRogatis MJ, Di Cesare PE, Issack PS. Massive Acetabular Bone loss Reconstructed with a Custom Made Triflange Acetabular Component during Revision Hip Arthroplasty. Case Report. World J Surg Surgical Res. 2018; 1: 1073.
 
eISSN:1898-7516
ISSN:1898-2395