Higher incidence of incidental durotomy is seen in revision surgeries [23].
The reoperation and complication rate was low, but it was higher than in primary joint replacement and closer to what is seen after revision joint replacement surgery.
Comparison is then made between pre/post results and if a clear improvement is seen, VP shunt surgical revision is offered.
In joint replacement surgery, for instance, the time to revision surgery is seen as the most important determinant of the clinical success of any prosthesis.
Revisions performed within the first year were more common during all the 3 later periods, while the opposite was seen for revisions after the first year (except in the second time period).
A similar trend was seen for revisions due to infection, although it was less evident except for the period 2003 2007 (Table 5a, column 5).
Early revision, i.e. revision within the first postoperative year, was more frequent in the 3 later time periods (p < 0.001), while the opposite was seen for revisions that took place after the first year (p < 0.001) (Table 5a, first column).
Furthermore, no difference was seen in revision rates between large headed THR and small headed HR in that study.
We believe, by simulating cortical thinning, the bones are more comparable to (osteoporotic) bones that typically are seen in revision surgery.
First, rhBMPs have a short half-life and a single dose may not be enough for healing of large bone defects that are seen with revision arthroplasty and high-energy trauma [ 4, 41].
It remains to be seen whether the revisions, if they are enacted, will be implemented as written.
