A.S. Chekanov - Junior Research Scientist, Department of Traumatology and Orthopedic, MONIKI n.a. M.F. Vladimyrsky, Moscow, Russia. E-mail: and-chekanov@yandex.ru V.P. Voloshin - Dr.Sc. (Med.), Professor, Chief of Department of Traumatology and Orthopedic, MONIKI n.a. M.F. Vladimyrsky, Moscow, Russia. E-mail: viktor_voloshin@mail.ru M.V. Lekishvili - Dr.Sc. (Med.), Head of Laboratory «Tissue Bank», N.N. Priorov Research Institute of Trauma-tology and Orthopaedics (CITO), Moscow, Russia. E-mail: leki@mail.ru D.V. Martyunenko - Ph.D. (Med.), Assistant Professor, Department of Traumatology and Orthopedic, MONIKI n.a. M.F. Vladimyrsky, Moscow, Russia E-mail: ant0708@yandex.ru E.V. Stepanov - Junior Research Scientist, Department of Traumatology and Orthopedic, MONIKI n.a. M.F. Vladimyrsky, Moscow, Russia. E-mail: Evstepanov@list.ru

Revision hip replacement is increasingly spreading due to the increase in its number of primary total. According to world statistics (Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry), the results of the audit results of arthroplasty naturally worse than primary arthroplasty, due to severe changes in the tissue around the implant. Typical for revision cases is the occurrence of the defect bone structures of the acetabulum and the femur associated with loosening of the compo-nents. In terms of bone defects initial installation of components of a solid audit prosthesis difficult. One way to solve this problem is the reconstruction of bone defects in the acetabulum and the femur. In today's revision arthroplasty allocate 2 main approaches to the reconstruction of bone defects: 1) substitution of a fully or partially tunable implants; 2) a substitution augment porous tantalum or titanium. The present study has analyzed 41 revision arthroplasty with 36 patients who between 2005 and 2013 in the De-partment of Orthopedics and Traumatology MONIKI named by M.F. Vladimirovski during revision surgery was per-formed alloplastic replacement acetabular defects - 35 cases, 25 cases of femur. The sources of bone alloimplants were (made in the tissue bank CITO): demineralized cranial vault - 14 cases allobone chips (crisps) - 16 cases, lyophilized femoral head - the 16 cases, a combination alloimplants - 14 cases of frozen cortical implant based on the femur - 2 cases. The tactics osteoplastic reconstruction of the acetabulum was determined by the size of the bone defect and its type, which used AAOS criteria. The study took place following options acetabular defects: peripheral cavity - 2 cases, the central segmental - 1 case, the central cavity - 1 case, the longitudinal separation - 1 case combined - 30 cases. The vastness of osteoplastic remodeling acetabular bone grafts required discharge by applying a reinforcing acetabu-lar design in 28 cases. Partial support of the acetabular component alloimplants applied in 4 cases, combined defects, and in 1 case - in peripheral recessed. In 5 cases, fragmented bone implant is firmly fixed in the area of the bone de-fect, creating support for the acetabular component. In the presence of massive bone defects proximal femoral canal, bone grafting was used to restore lost wall of the fe-mur, or to increase their strength. In the first case the structure used non-reference alloimplants covering the prox-imal part of the audit of the femoral component (18 cases). In the second case, a fragmented bone implant modeled bone bed for the audit of the femoral component. Implantation of a fragmented bone cement created a support for the femoral component type CPT (7 cases). The results are tracked in a period of 2 months to 9 years. In the early postoperative period in 7 patients had pro-longed exudative reaction caused, in our opinion, a reaction to the massive bone grafting in the form of freeze-dried fragmented femoral heads. Such patients long-running puncture peri-prosthetic space with the introduction of anti-biotics. The average time of follow-up was 3.2 years. The phenomena of loosening audit components after osteoplastic reconstruction of the bone bed was observed in 7 cases that require follow-up operations. Infection was observed in 2 cases. The application alloplastic bone in revision hip arthroplasty allows to reconstruct the bone bed, for auditing compo-nents and standard components, and restructuring and engraftment alloimplants provide secondary stability of the implant components.