There remains concern with the use of constrained liners (CL) implanted at the time of acetabular cup revision in revision total hip replacement (rTHA). The aim of this study was to determine the implant survival in rTHA when a CL was implanted at the same time as acetabular cup revision. We reviewed our institutional database to identify all consecutive rTHAs where a CL was implanted simultaneously at the time acetabular cup revision from 2001 to 2021. One-hundred and seventy-four revisions (173 patients) were included in the study. Mean follow-up of 8.7 years (range two – 21.7). The most common indications for rTHA were instability (35%), second-stage periprosthetic joint infection (26.4%), and aseptic loosening (17.2%). Kaplan Meier Analysis was used to determine survival with all-cause re-revision and revision for cup aseptic loosening (fixation failure) as the endpoints. A total of 32 (18.3%) patients underwent re-revision at a mean time of 2.9 years (range 0.1 – 14.1). The most common reasons for re-revision were instability (14), periprosthetic joint infection (seven), and loosening of the femoral component (four). Three (1.7%) required re-revision due to aseptic loosening of the acetabular component (fixation failure) at a mean of two years (0.1 – 5.1). Acetabular component survival free from re-revision due to aseptic loosening was 98.9% (95% CI 97.3 – 100) at five-years and 98.1% (95% CI 95.8 – 100) at 10-years. There were no acetabular component fixation failures in modern highly porous shells. CLs implanted at the time acetabular cup revision in rTHA have a 98.1% 10-year survival free from acetabular cup aseptic loosening (fixation failure). There were no cup fixation failures in modern highly porous shells. Thus, when necessary, implanting a CL during revision of an acetabular component with stable screw fixation is safe with an extremely low risk of cup fixation failure

Introduction. Aseptic acetabular component failure rates have been reported to be similar or even slightly higher than femoral component failure. Obtaining proper initial stability by press fitting the cementless acetabular cup into an undersized cavity is crucial to allow for secondary osseous integration. However, finding the insertion endpoint that corresponds to an optimal initial stability is challenging. This in vitro study presents an alternative method that allows tracking the insertion progress of acetabular implants in a non-destructive, real-time manner. Materials and Methods. A simplified acetabular bone model was used for a series of insertion experiments. The bone model consisted of polyurethane solid foam blocks (Sawbones #1522-04 and #1522-05) into which a hemispherical cavity and cylindrical wall, representing the acetabular rim, were machined using a computer numerically controlled (CNC) milling machine (Haas Automation Inc., Oxnard, CA, USA). Fig. 1 depicts the bone model and setup used. A total of 10 insertions were carried out, 5 on a low density block, 5 on a high density block. The acetabular cups were press fitted into the bone models by succeeding hammer hits. The acceleration of the implant-insertor combination was measured using 2 shock accelerometers mounted on the insertor during the insertion process (PCB 350C03, PCB Depew, NY, USA). The force applied to the implant-insertor combination was also measured. 15 hammer hits were applied per insertion experiment. Two features were extracted from the acceleration time signal; total signal energy (E) and signal length (LS). Two features and one correlation measure were extracted from the acceleration frequency spectra; the relative signal power in the low frequency band (PL, from 500–2500Hz) and the signal power in the high frequency band (P Hf, from 4000–4800 Hz). The changes in the low frequency spectra (P Lf, from 500–2500 Hz) between two steps were tracked by calculating the Frequency Response Assurance Criterion (FRAC). Force features similar to the ones proposed by Mathieu et al., 2013 were obtained from the force time data. The convergence behavior of the features was tracked as insertion progressed. Results. Differences were noted visually between the acceleration data recorded at the beginning of insertion and towards the end, both in the time domain (fig. 2A) as well as in the frequency domain (fig. 2B). These differences were also captured by the proposed features. Fig. 3 shows a typical representation of how the time (A), frequency (B) and force (C) features evolved during insertion. Based on a simple convergence criterion, the insertion endpoint could be determined. Conclusions. The convergence behavior, and the insertion endpoint thus identified, of the force-based and acceleration based features correlated well. The different features capture the changes in damping and stiffness of the implant-bone system that are occurring as the insertion progresses and combining them improves the robustness of the endpoint detection method. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Introduction: The long-term results of 70 Harris-Galante I uncemented acetabular components implanted in 53 patients who were under 50 years of age at the time of their hip arthroplasty are presented. Methods: Follow up was both clinical, using Oxford and Harris Hip scores, and radiological. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed to calculate the survivorship of the acetabular components. Failure was defined as either liner exchange or acetabular component revision due to aseptic loosening, osteolysis, infection or dislocation. Results: The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 40 years (range 19–49 years), with follow up of between 12 and 16 (mean 13.6) years. All patients’ acetabular components were implanted primarily with cemented femoral components. The mean Oxford Hip Score at the end of the follow-up period was 20 out of 60 (range 12–46) and Harris Hip Score 81 (range 37–100). At the end of the follow up period, 11 of the 70 acetabular components (polyethylene liner or the acetabular shell) had been revised. The cumulative survival was 94.0% (95% confidence interval 88.4–99.7) with revision of the metal shell as the end point, and 84.0% (95% confidence interval 74.5–93.5) with revision surgery of the acetabular shell or liner due to any reason as an end point. Radiologically, 4 patients require acetabular revision and 22 patients had femoral osteolysis in gruen zone 7, indicative of polyethylene failure. This gave a combined revision, impending revision and zone 7 osteolysis cumulative survival of 55.3% (95% confidence interval 40.6–70.0). Discussion: In contrast to cemented acetabular components which undergo aseptic loosening and give groin pain, high density polyethylene lined metal shells do not give groin pain but cause silent acetabular and femoral osteolysis. The danger time for osteolysis is between 10–20 years, therefore follow up at that time is essential

Summary Statement. We analysed impaction bone grafting used together with cemented or uncemented fixation in acetabular revision surgery. The overall risk for re-revision did not differ between the cemented and uncemented group. However, aseptic loosening was more common in the cemented group. Background. Several surgical techniques address bone defects in cup revision surgery. Bone impaction grafting, introduced more than thirty years ago, is a biologically and mechanically appealing method. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of bone impaction grafting when used with uncemented and cemented fixation in cup revision surgery. Uncemented cups resting on more than 50% host bone were used as controls. Patient and Methods. Cup fixation was studied in ninety hips (eighty-two patients), revised due to loosening between 1993 and 1997. There were fifty-three isolated cup and thirty-seven total revisions. Patients were followed for thirteen years using conventional radiography, radiostereometry (RSA), Harris Hip score and a pain questionnaire. Peroperatively the surgeon assessed the acetabular bone bed vitality. In hips where the cup was judged to rest on > 50% vital bone (group I, n=43), an uncemented cup was used. If the cup was resting on ≤ 50% living bone, uncemented (group IIa, n=21,) or cemented (group IIb, n=26) technique was chosen, according to the surgeon's preference. The mean age of patients at index revision was 61±12 years, 56% were females. The most common index diagnosis was primary osteoarthritis (n=45) followed by rheumatoid arthritis (n=10). Results. At thirteen years, acetabular component failure had necessitated a second revision in 6/7/8 hips in Groups I/IIa/IIb respectively. These re-revisions were performed 1–10 (mean 7.1) years after index revision. Moreover four cup / liner revisions were performed in hips with femoral loosening, not allowing further RSA measurements. These twenty-five hips were followed until re-revision. Deceased patients (n=21) and patients with deteriorating medical condition, not able to attend the follow-up (n=7), were censored in the survival statistics. Aseptic loosening was the most common reason of re-revision. However, in the uncemented groups (I/IIa), four cups were re-revised due to liner wear, osteolysis or instability. In the total study population, and up to two years, the median proximal migration was lowest in Group I followed by Group IIa and Group IIb (p≤0,006). At thirteen years the mean proximal migration was highest in Group IIb 1.29 mm (SD 1.23) followed by Group I 0.30 mm (SD 0.40) and Group IIa 0.22 mm (SD 0.22), p = 0.05. In cases subsequently re-revised because of loosening or with radiographically loose cups at the last follow-up, a higher proximal migration was observed compared to the non-revised and radiographically well-fixed group (up to seven years: p < 0.001; thirteen years: p=0.04). Discussion/Conclusion. We found an increased risk for rerevision in cases with less than 50% host bone-implant contact. These cups showed high early proximal migration, measured by RSA, indicating poor initial fixation. Rate of re-revision due to any reason did not differ between cemented and uncemented cups. The cemented group (IIb) had a higher risk of being re-revised due to aseptic loosening. Poor bone stock, use of small bone chips, inferior impaction technique, and no or restricted contact with living bone are probable reasons for failures when extensive bone grafting is needed