Betancourt CM

Language: Spanish
References: 17
Page: 28-33
PDF size: 180.34 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: In spite of this being a procedure indicated as archaic, it is a useful option in all those patients who are not candidates for a revision arthroplasty. A total of 28 patients who are currently hanging hip in the outpatient department of the hip module of the Hospital de Especialidades Centro Médico Nacional de Occidente, will be evaluated. A descriptive observational study will be carried out. Using the modified Harris scale, the analog pain assessment (VAS) scale and the pelvic limb scan as evaluation methods. Objective: Analyze the indications for its realization as well as disseminate the surgical technique and postoperative care used for a better prognosis. Conclusion: Resection arthroplasty is an effective, painless and functional method as definitive treatment for prosthetic hip failure, especially in those patients with severe acetabular defects (pelvic discontinuity), periprosthetic infections, generally after multiple unsuccessful attempts to eradicate the infection, patients not candidates for reimplantation (anesthetic or surgical risk unacceptable, technical difficulties, rejection of the patient). Showing a satisfaction of 78% (result of regular to excellent, according to modified Harris scale). The use of a postsurgical skin traction boot, for a period of eight weeks, is an important factor for the success of the procedure. As well as the resumption of ambulation after 8 weeks, accompanied by rehabilitation.

REFERENCES

1. Burgo F, Vindver GI, Paprosky WG, Rosenberg AG. Revisión acetabular: métodos de reconstrucción, indicaciones y resultados. Rev Asoc Arg Ortop y Traumatol. 2002; 67 (2): 130-140.

2. Malcolm TL, Gad BV, Elsharkawy KA, Higuera CA. Complication, survival, and reoperation rates following Girdlestone resection arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2015; 30 (7): 1183-1186.

3. Maguire N, Robertson B, Henman P. Girdlestone procedure for avascular necrosis of the hip in an intravenous drug user. J Surg Case Rep. 2014; 2014 (8).

4. Manjón-Cabeza SJ, Moreno PJ, Mozo MA, Cátedra VE, Sancho LR, Úbeda TA. Situación funcional de los pacientes tras resección de artroplastia de cadera (Girdlestone). Rev Esp Geriatr Gerontol. 2008; 43 (1): 13-813.

5. Terry CS. Campbell cirugía ortopédica. 10ª ed. Tennessee: Elsevier; España, 2004, p. 233.

6. Marinko LN, Christie RE, Lewis CL. Successful rehabilitation of a young adult with total hip arthroplasty a decade after a Girdlestone procedure: a case presentation. PM R. 2015; 7 (8): 895-900.

7. Callaghan JJ, Rosenberg AG, Rubash HE. Cadera. Philadelphia: Marbán. 2012, pp. 683-692.

8. Escala del dolor EVA, antidepresivos en el dolor crónico. Rev Fibromialgianoticias. 2016.

9. Escala de Harris. Modificada: Minsal. 2010.

10. Cordero-Ampuero J. Girdlestone procedure: when and why. Hip Int. 2012; 22 (8): S36-39.

11. Oheim R, Gille J, Schoop R, Mägerlein S, Grimme CH, Jürgens C, et al. Surgical therapy of hip-joint empyema. Is the Girdlestone arthroplasty still up to date? Int Orthop. 2012; 36 (5): 927-933.

12. Stoklas J, Rozkydal Z. Resection of head and neck of the femoral bone according to Girdlestone. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2004; 71 (3): 147-151.

13. Haw CS, Gray DH. Excision arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1976; 58 (1): 44-47.

14. Purushotham VJ, Ranganath BT. Total hip arthroplasty in a girdlestone hip following a failed hemiarthroplasty. J Orthop Case Rep. 2015; 5 (2): 47-49.

15. Rittmeister M, Manthei L, Müller M, Hailer NP. Reimplantation of the artificial hip joint in girdlestone hips is superior to Girdlestone arthroplasty by itself. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2004; 142 (5): 559-563.

16. Sharma H, De Leeuw J, Rowley DI. Girdlestone resection arthroplasty following failed surgical procedures. Int Orthop. 2015; 29 (2): 92-95.

17. Hip Implants [In line]. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 2007.