USE OF A RIM CUTTER IN CEMENTED HIP ARTHROPLASTY: A TECHNICAL INNOVATION

Abstract

Purpose: The authors would like to report a technical innovation in cemented hip arthroplasty. The new device, a “rim cutter” (patent pending) was designed in Exeter and aims at improving the surgical technique of insertion of cemented sockets. The principle aim of this innovation is to cut a rim around the periphery of the acetabulum to a set depth so that the flange of the socket seats into this rim and thus by sealing the space underneath the flange, there is a sustained rise in cement injection pressure behind the socket during implantation. This, improves cement macro and micro interlock, creates a congruent cement mantle with no radioluciencies, especially in the highly predictive DeLee-Charnley Zone I.

Materials and methods: A retrospective clinical study was performed in order to assess the radiological result of the use of the rim cutter. Two groups of patients with 30 in each group (consecutive cases) were enrolled in the present study. In group A, the rim cutter device was used while in group B, the acetabulum was prepared without the use of the rim cutter. In all cases an Exeter contemporary cup and stem were used. All cases were evaluated with postoperative radiographs which were analysed to record the anatomic measurements with regard to:

1. i) centre of rotation of the socket (COR),

2. ii) height of the centre of rotation from the teardrop,

3. iii) lateralisation of the centre of rotation from the teardrop, and iv) the width of the cement mantle in the three acetabular zones.

These values were compared with the equivalent measurements made for a normal contralateral hip. In addition to these measurements, any radiolucent line in any zone was recorded. The post-operative film was templated using Orthoview (TM, Southampton, Hampshire) software, which is a digital X ray templating system.

Results: The group where the rim cutter was used showed significantly improved radiological parameters. In this group (group A) the socket was placed closer to the normal centre of rotation (COR) compared to the other group (group B) where the rim cutter was not used. This difference was statistically significant (p< 0.0001). Two cases in the non rim cutter group showed radioluciencies in Zone I. Similarly, with regard to the lateralisation of the COR, the implants in the rim cutter group were closer to the COR of the contralateral normal hip The cement mantle was found to be more concentric in the rim cutter group (in group A, more patients had the same width of cement mantle in all Zones) than the non rim cutter group. This difference between the two groups was statistically significant (p< 0.0001).

Conclusions: The introduction of the new “rim cutter” represents a progression in the technique for the preparation of the acetabulum in cemented hip arthroplasty. It indicates a further step, following the introduction of flanged sockets.