Aims

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and radiological results of patients who were revised using a custom-made triflange acetabular component (CTAC) for component loosening and pelvic discontinuity (PD) after previous total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Aim: To review a single surgeon’s experience of EIG for femoral and acetabular revision arthroplasty. Method: A retrospective review of EIG revisions from Waikato Hospital from May, 1995 to November, 2000. The notes and x-rays of patients from this time were reviewed. All x-rays were reviewed by the senior author. Results: There were thirty-two revisions using the EIG system. The indication for revision in all cases was aseptic loosening of either or both of the acetabular or femoral components. There were 14 men and 12 women. Four patients had bilateral revisions. One required bilateral revisions to be repeated. The average age was 79 years and nine months (range: 53 to 90 years). The average time from initial hip replacement to revision was 10.4 years (range: 13 months to 24 years). Sixteen revisions had EIG to femur and acetabulum. Four acetabular cups and 10 femoral stems were revised with EIG alone or in combination with a replacement component.The average period of follow-up was 34 months. One acetabulum was revised for recurrent dislocation. Three other hips dislocated in the post-operative period. Two femoral stems (one patient) were revised again with EIG for subsidence. One is now stable, the other has been exchanged for a Solution stem because of repeated subsidence. The histological specimens taken from these showed the grafted bone was necrotic. One other stem subsided 2mm. There were two intraoperative femoral shaft fractures. Conclusions: EIG is one solution for complicated revision in the presence of proximal femoral bone stock loss. Subsidence requiring re-revision was been a problem with one patient

Pelvic discontinuity (PD) is a detrimental complication following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and radiological results of patients with PD who were revised using a custom-made triflange acetabular component (CTAC).

This is a single centre prospective study of patients with PD following THA who were treated with a CTAC. The Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), modified Oxford Hip Score (mOHS), EurQol five-dimension three-level (EQ-5D-3L) utility, and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), including visual analogue score (VAS) for pain, were gathered at baseline, and at one- and two-year follow-up. Clinical and radiological complications, including reasons for revisions were registered. Trends over time are described and tested for significance and clinical relevance.

18 females with 22 CTACs were included with a mean age of 73.5 years (SD 7.7). There were significant improvements between baseline and final follow-up in HOOS (p<0.01), mOHS (p<0.01), EQ-5D-3L utility (p<0.01), EQ-5D-3L NRS (p<0.01), VAS pain rest (p<0.01), and VAS pain activity (p<0.01). A minimal clinically important improvement in mOHS and the HOOS was observed in 16 patients (73%) and 14 patients (64%), respectively. Definite healing of the PD was observed in 19 hips (86%). Complications included six cases with broken screws (27%), four cases (18%) with bony fractures, and one case (4.5%) with sciatic nerve paresthesia. One patient with concurrent bilateral PD had revision surgery due to recurrent dislocations. No revision surgery was performed for screw failure or implant breakage.

This is the first prospective assessment in clinical outcome of patients with PD who were treated with a CTAC. We have demonstrated that CTAC in patients with THA acetabular loosening and PD can result in stable constructs with no mechanical failures. Moreover, clinically relevant improvements in health-related quality of life at two years’ follow-up was observed.

Introduction:. Jumbo cups (58 mm or larger diameter in females and 62 mm or larger diameter in males), theoretically have lowered the percentage of bleeding bone that is required for osseointegration in severe acetabular defects. The purpose of this study was to analyze the safety and efficacy of Tritanium jumbo cups in patients with major acetabular defects (Paprosky type IIIa and IIIb) and assess the extent of osseointegration. Material and Methods:. From February 2007 and August 2010, 28 consecutive hips (26 patients, mean age of 69 years) underwent acetabular revision arthroplasty for treatment of Paprosky type IIIa and IIIb defects using Tritanium jumbo cups (Stryker, Mahwah, New Jersey). Results:. 14% of the hips had pelvic discontinuity. There was no intra-operative fracture. The initial stability was achieved in all hips, supplemented by screws. No Tantalum augments or bulk bone grafts were used in any of the cases. At mean follow-up of 4 years, there were no failures due to loosening or cup migration. Radiographic assessment showed osseointegration in all cups, ranging from 30% to 75% of the cup surface area as assessed in both anteroposterior and false profile views in Charnley zones I through VI. Discussion and conclusion:. In Paprosky type IIIb defect with pelvic discontinuity, jumbo cup can be used safely without the use of any augments. In pelvic dissociation, the fibrous tissue is stretched with jumbo cups in an under-reamed socket to achieve a fixation by distraction, especially in failed cemented sockets

Introduction. Acetabular revision surgery is becoming more prevalent with an estimated increase of 137% by 2030. It is challenging surgery especially in the presence of deficient bone loss. Several techniques of acetabular reconstruction are used world-wide. The greater the bone loss (Paprosky Type IIIA and IIIB, and AAOS Classification of Acetabular Bone Loss Type 3 and 4) the more complex are the reconstruction methods. There is however, insufficient literature comparing the contemporary techniques of revision acetabular reconstruction and their outcomes. Objectives. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature and to report clinical outcomes and survival of contemporary acetabular revision arthroplasty techniques (tantalum metal (TM) systems, uncemented revision jumbo cups, reinforced devices such as cages and rings, oblong cups and custom-made triflange cups). We specifically looked at outcomes when reconstruction was undertaken in the presence of bone loss. Methods. Full-text papers and those with an abstract in English published from January 2001 to October 2015, identified through international databases, Medline (PubMED), EMBASE, CINHAL, Web of Science, Cochrane and Google scholar databases, were reviewed. Studies reporting failure and complications following the use of tantalum metal systems, uncemented revision jumbo cups, reinforced devices as cages and rings, oblong cups and custom-made triflange cups, were included. Functional and radiological outcomes were also evaluated. Results. A total of 50 papers of level IV scientific evidence, comprising 2811 hips in total, fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included. 1021 hips (291 of them classified Paprosky Type 3A, 98 3B and 14 AAOS type 3 and 2 type 4) with a mean follow-up 48.9 months, used TM cups with a mean overall re-revisions rate of 7.3%. 831 hips (156 of them classified Paprosky Type 3A, 178 3B and 228 AAOS type 3 and 43 type 4) with a mean follow-up 87.5 months, were reconstructed using cages and rings devices; these had a mean re-operation rate of 11.0%. 203 hips (44 of them classified Paprosky Type 3A and 8 3B) with a mean follow-up 90.9 months, were reconstructed using oblong cups and were associated with a mean of re-operate rate of 5.9%. In 518 hips (86 of them classified Paprosky Type 3A, 29 3B and 114 AAOS type 3 and 2 type 4) with a mean follow-up 117.4 months, jumbo cups were implanted and revision rate was 12.1%. Custom-made triflange cups were used in 238 hips (3 of them classified Paprosky Type 3A, 64 3B and 42 AAOS type 3 and 139 type 4) with a mean follow-up 57.9 months, and they were re-roperated in 16.8% of cases. Overall patients had improved post-operative hip scores for each different procedure. We have observed that oblong cups components had a lower failure rate compared with other different materials considered in this review. Custom-made triflange cups had one of higher failure rate, however they had been used in the most complex cases. It is possible that other designs had more favourable outcomes having been used in less demanding patients. Conclusions. This review confirms successful acetabular reconstructions using several techniques and highlights key features and outcomes of different techniques. In particular oblong and TM cups have proven long-term survivorship and our results strongly suggest these devices as preferable choice especially in moderate to high-grade acetabular defects. For hip revisions following the development of pelvic discontinuity custom-made triflange cups have a main role, however the results are not always favourable

Purpose: Massive cavitary and segmental bone defects of the medial wall in revision arthroplasty are usually managed with large auto and/or allograft in association with a cemented or a cementless cup. To obtain a satisfactory hip center reconstruction with such a procedure can be sometimes challenging and the complications rate can be high. One other option is the use of a cup with a medial expansion (“protrusio cup”) to treat the medial bone defect. Method: We carried out a retrospective study including 21 consecutive acetabular revisions arthroplasties using a cementless Converge Protrusio™ cup (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA). Clinical outcomes were assessed by Harris Hip Score (HHS), WOMAC index and SF-12. Hip centre was assessed on anteroposterior (AP) view and the reconstruction was considered as satisfying when its location was located from − 10 to + 10 mm proximally (y axis) and/or medially (x axis) in comparison with ideal theoretical hip center location. Cup migration and modification of abduction angle were considered as significant when there were respectively > 4mm and to > 4° in comparison with the immediate postoperative AP view. Results: At the last follow up [radiological data: 71.6 months (24–128.3) and clinical data: 72.1 months (24–129.5)], two patients were died and there were no lost of follow up. The mean HHS was 79.4% (52–100), WOMAC 82% (46–100), SF-12 52 (23–71) and 44 (18–65). Bone defect were filled with cancellous bone chips allograft in 16 cases and bulk bone allograft was used in only two cases to manage a large segmental defect of the roof. Bone graft integration was completed in all cases. The mean abduction cup angle was 43.6° (32–60). A satisfying hip centre positioning was obtained in 19 cases on x axis and in 10 cases on y axis, in all the remaining cases, we noted an improved implant positioning. The complications were: recurrent dislocation in one case (successfully revised with a constrained liner), infection in two cases (1 treated conservatively and the other one revised in two times procedure) and Brooker’s type III and IV ectopic ossifications in three cases. A significant cup migration occurred in only one case at nine years but was not revised because of painless. No case required revision for aseptic loosening. Conclusion: Protusio cups appear as a reliable procedure to manage bone loss in acetabular revision. The revision procedure is widely simplified by reducing the use of the massive allograft and by promoting a satisfying hip center reconstruction to allow an optimal biomechanical joint functioning. Moreover, the cementless fixation in contact with patient acetabular bone makes more easy bone integration

Background: Acetabular implant revision with large bone defects, can be challenging. One of the reconstruction options is a “jumbo cup” (outer diameter ≥62mm in women and ≥66mm in men). We hypothesized that cementless jumbo cups is a reliable technique to reconstruct hip joint with satisfying radiological and clinical outcomes. Material and Methods: Fifty-two consecutive acetabular revisions arthroplasty where a cementless jumbo cup was used were assessed. Clinical outcomes were assessed by Harris Hip Score (HHS), WOMAC index and SF-12. Hip centre was assessed on anteroposterior (AP) view according to Pierchon’s criteria. The reconstructed hip center was considered as satisfying when its location was located from −10 to + 10 mm proximally (y axis) and/or medially (x axis) in comparison with ideal theoretical hip center location. Cup migration and modification of abduction angle were considered as significant when there were respectively ≥5mm and to ≥5° in comparison with the immediate postoperative AP view. Results: Mean component size was 67.6 mm (min 62, max 81). According to Paprosky classification, there were 5 cases of type 1, 11 type 2A, 12 type 2B, 11 type 2C, 11 type 3A and 2 type 3B. Cancelous bone chips allograft were used in 34 cases and bulk bone allograft in 14. Immediate postoperative AP view showed a mean abduction cup angle of 41.3° (26–53), a satisfying hip centre positioning in 78% on x axis and in 70 % on y axis. In the remaining cases, we noted an improved implant positioning. For the patients with intact contra-lateral hip (n=29), we noted, in comparison with normal side, a mean lateralisation of the hip center of 3 mm (−10 – +16) and a mean ascension of 7 mm (−10 – +33) associated with an average limb length discrepancy of – 4 mm (−19 – +9). At the last follow up [radiological data: 79 months (24–236) and clinical data: 88 months (27–241)], 6 patients were died and 3 were lost of follow up. The mean HHS was 82% (15–100), WOMAC 86% (27–100), SF-12 46 (14–61) and 53 (15–63). Bone graft integration was completed in all but 3 cases. Significant cup migration (≥5mm) occurred in only one case. The complications were: dislocation in 5 cases (4 revisions with constrained liner), infection in 4 cases (2 treated conservatively and 2 revised in 2 times procedure) and Brooker’s type III or IV ectopic ossifications in 11 cases. No case required revision for aseptic loosening. Discussion: Jumbo cups appear as a reliable procedure to manage bone loss in acetabular revision. The complication rate is comparable with other reconstruction procedures (massive allograft, reinforcement rings, high hip center…). Cementless fixation and satisfying hip center restoration promote respectively the bone integration and allow an optimal biomechanical joint functioning. These are the main conditions for high long term survival rate