Table 1.
Comparison of revision rates, healing, and function in treatment of chronic pelvic discontinuity
| Study | Number of hips | Technique | Revision rate | Discontinuity healing | Clinical scores | Followup (years) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ballester Alfaro and Sueiro Fernández [1] | 5 | TM cup/cage | 0/5 (0%) | NR | NR | 2 |
| Berry et al. [2] | 24 | Varied | 9/27 (33%) | 17/24 (71%) | 16/27 (59%) “satisfactory” | 3 |
| DeBoer et al. [5] | 20 | Custom triflange | 0/20 (0%) | 18/20 (90%) | Average HHS 80 | 10 |
| Koshashvili et al. [10] | 26 | TM cup/cage | NR | 23/26 (89%) | Average HHS 75 | 3 |
| Sporer and Paprosky [15] | 12 | TM cup/TM augments | 1/13 (6%) | NR | Average Postel-Merle d’Aubigné 10.3 | 2.6 |
| Stiehl et al. [16] | 17 | Allograft/plates | 8/17 (47%) | 7/9 (77.8%) | NR | 6.9 |
| Current study | 57 | Custom triflange | 20/57 (30%) | 46/57 (81%) | Average HHS 75 | 5.4 |
TM = Trabecular Metal®; NR = not reported; HHS = Harris hip score.