The indications for cementless acetabular fixation have been broadened because our data supports the use of trabecular metal cups even when there's limited bleeding host bone contact. Trabecular metal augments have allowed us to use cementless cups when there is segmental loss of bone. Surgical Technique: The acetabular bed is prepared. If there is less medial bone stock than 2 mm, then morselised allograft is impacted by reverse reaming. When reaming is complete and less than 50% bleeding host bone is available for cup stabilization, then a trabecular metal cup is indicated. Trabecular augments are used if the trabecular cup trial is not stable, or if it is uncovered by 40% or more. The conventional augments come in different sizes to accommodate the diameter of the cup and the size of the defect. Larger defects are addressed with anterior and posterior column augments, and superior defects with figure of seven augments. Augments are fixed with at least two screws. The interface between the cup and the augments should be stable, but some surgeons place a very thin layer of cement between the augment and cup so micromotion does not occur while ingrowth is occurring. We have used trabecular metal augments in 46 acetabular revisions in conjunction with a trabecular metal cup. Thirty-four cases have at least 2 years follow-up with an average of 64.5 months. There has been 4 cup loosenings with 3 re-revisions

The indications for cementless acetabular fixation have been broadened because our data supports the use of trabecular metal cups even when there's limited bleeding host bone contact. Trabecular metal augments have allowed us to use cementless cups when there is segmental loss of bone. Surgical Technique: The acetabular bed is prepared. If there is less medial bone stock than 2mm, then morselised allograft is impacted by reverse reaming. When reaming is complete and less than 50% bleeding host bone is available for cup stabilisation, then a trabecular metal cup is indicated. Trabecular augments are used if the trabecular cup trial is not stable, or if it is uncovered by 40% or more. The conventional augments come in different sizes to accommodate the diameter of the cup and the size of the defect. Larger defects are addressed with anterior and posterior column augments, and superior defects with figure of seven augments. Augments are fixed with at least two screws. The interface between the cup and the augments should be stable, but some surgeons place a very thin layer of cement between the augment and cup so micromotion does not occur while ingrowth is occurring. We have used trabecular metal augments in 46 acetabular revisions in conjunction with a trabecular metal cup. Thirty-four cases have at least 2 years follow-up with an average of 64.5 months. There have been 4 cup loosenings with 3 re-revisions

The indications for cementless acetabular fixation have been broadened because our data supports the use of trabecular metal cups even when there's limited bleeding host bone contact. Trabecular metal augments have allowed us to use cementless cups when there is segmental loss of bone. Surgical Technique:. The acetabular bed is prepared. If there is less medial bone stock than 2mm, then morselised allograft is impacted by reverse reaming. When reaming is complete and less than 50% bleeding host bone is available for cup stabilization, then a trabecular metal cup is indicated. Trabecular augments are used if the trabecular cup trial is not stable, or if it is uncovered by 40% or more. The conventional augments come in different sizes to accommodate the diameter of the cup and the size of the defect. Larger defects are addressed with anterior and posterior column augments, and superior defects with figure of seven augments. Augments are fixed with at least two screws. The interface between the cup and the augments should be stable, but some surgeons place a very thin layer of cement between the augment and cup so micromotion does not occur while ingrowth is occurring. We have used trabecular metal augments in 46 acetabular revisions in conjunction with a TM cup. Thirty-four cases have at least 2 years follow-up with an average of 64.5 months. There has been 4 cup loosenings with 3 re-revisions

Uncemented acetabular component fixation remains the gold standard for managing various defects in the revision hip setting. Multiple series have demonstrated over 90% ten-year survivorship of these constructs. Modern “enhanced” metals such as trabecular tantalum and titanium continue to perform well and are growing in popularity. So called “jumbo” cups, diameters >=62mm in females and >=66mm in males have demonstrated excellent survivorship. Good bony support with viable bone and stable initial fixation is necessary for long-term success. It is unknown how much remaining bone is necessary for reliable ingrowth with modern enhanced metals. The location of the remaining bone is probably more important than the absolute amount remaining. Occasionally, the uncemented cup must be augmented with metal augments or even a so-called “cup cage” construct. Even in these situations, the uncemented cup remains the workhorse of revision THA due to its ingrowth potential and excellent track record. Augments are commercially available in various shapes and sizes to assist in the management of cavitary, segmental and combined defects while restoring the desired cup position. Trials are available to ensure good approximation of the augment to remaining bone. The constructs are typically “unitised” to the cup via bone cement. Available data show excellent survivorship of augmented constructs for these challenging reconstructions

The indications for cementless acetabular fixation have been broadened because our data supports the use of trabecular metal cups even when there's limited bleeding host bone contact. Trabecular metal augments have allowed us to use cementless cups when there is segmental loss of bone. Surgical Technique: The acetabular bed is prepared. If there is less medial bone stock than 2 mm, then morselised allograft is impacted by reverse reaming. When reaming is complete and less than 50% bleeding host bone is available for cup stabilization, then a trabecular metal cup is indicated. Trabecular augments are used if the trabecular cup trial is not stable, or if it is uncovered by 40% or more. The conventional augments come in different sizes to accommodate the diameter of the cup and the size of the defect. Larger defects are addressed with anterior and posterior column augments, and superior defects with figure of seven augments. Augments are fixed with at least two screws. The interface between the cup and the augments should be stable, but some surgeons place a very thin layer of cement between the augment and cup so micromotion does not occur while ingrowth is occurring. We have used trabecular metal augments in 46 acetabular revisions in conjunction with a trabecular metal cup. Thirty-four cases have at least 2 years follow-up with an average of 64.5 months. There has been 4 cup loosenings with 3 re-revisions. Our most up to date data is 101 cases with an average follow-up of 3 years. There has been one infection that underwent a two stage revision. There are 4 loose cups – 3 revised

Uncemented acetabular component fixation remains the gold standard for managing various defects in the revision hip setting. Multiple series have demonstrated over 90% ten-year survivorship of these constructs. Modern “enhanced” metals such as trabecular tantalum and titanium continue to perform well and are growing in popularity. So called “jumbo” cups, diameters >=62mm in females and >=66mm in males have demonstrated excellent survivorship. Good bony support with viable bone and stable initial fixation is necessary for long-term success. It is unknown how much remaining bone is necessary for reliable ingrowth with modern enhanced metals. The location of the remaining bone is probably more important than the absolute amount remaining. Occasionally, the uncemented cup must be augmented with metal augments or even a so-called “cup cage” construct. Even in these situations, the uncemented cup remains the workhorse of revision THA due to its ingrowth potential and excellent track record. Augments are commercially available in various shapes and sizes to assist in the management of cavitary, segmental and combined defects while restoring the desired cup position. Trials are available to ensure good approximation of the augment to remaining bone. The constructs are typically “unitised” to the cup via bone cement. Available data show excellent survivorship of augmented constructs for these challenging reconstructions

The indications for cementless acetabular fixation have been broadened because our data supports the use of trabecular metal cups even when there's limited bleeding host bone contact. Trabecular metal augments have allowed us to use cementless cups when there is segmental loss of bone. Surgical Technique:. The acetabular bed is prepared. If there is less medial bone stock than 2 mm, then morsellised allograft is impacted by reverse reaming. When reaming is complete and less than 50% bleeding host bone is available for cup stabilisation, then a trabecular metal cup is indicated. Trabecular augments are used if the trabecular cup trial is not stable, or if it is uncovered by 40% or more. The conventional augments come in different sizes to accommodate the diameter of the cup and the size of the defect. Larger defects are addressed with anterior and posterior column augments, and superior defects with figure of seven augments. Augments are fixed with at least two screws. The interface between the cup and the augments should be stable, but some surgeons place a very thin layer of cement between the augment and cup so micromotion does not occur while ingrowth is occurring. We have used trabecular metal augments in 46 acetabular revisions in conjunction with a TM cup. Thirty-four cases have at least 2 years follow-up with an average of 64.5 months. There has been 4 cup loosenings with 3 re-revisions

Introduction:

Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can be very complex in nature with difficulties/obstacles involving bone and soft tissue deficits, visualization and exposure, as well as alignment and fixation. Auxiliary devices such as augmentation and offset adapters help address these issues; however they increase the complexity of the reconstruction. The objective of this study was to show that use of a single radius revision TKA system allowing for minimal auxiliary revision devices can yield positive early clinical outcomes.

This paper presents an ongoing review of the use of a wedge-shaped porous metal augments in the shoulder to address glenoid retroversion as part of anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA).

Seventy-five shoulders in 66 patients (23 women and 43 men, aged 42 to 85 years) with Walch grade B2 or C glenoids underwent porous metal glenoid augment (PMGA) insertion as part of aTSA. Patients received either a 15º or 30º PMGA wedge (secured by screws to the native glenoid) to correct excessive glenoid retroversion before a standard glenoid component was implanted using bone cement. Neither patient-specific guides nor navigation were used. Patients were prospectively assessed using shoulder functional assessments (Oxford Shoulder Score [OSS], American Shoulder and Elbow Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form [ASES], visual analogue scale [VAS] pain scores and forward elevation [FE]) preoperatively, at three, six, and 12 months, and yearly thereafter, with similar radiological surveillance.

Forty-nine consecutive series shoulders had a follow-up of greater than 24 months, with a median follow-up of 48 months (range: 24–87 months). Median outcome scores improved for OSS (21 to 44), ASES (24 to 92), VAS (7 to 0), and FE (90º to 140º). Four patients died, but no others were lost to follow-up. Apart from one infection at 18 months postoperatively and one minor peg perforation, there were no complications, hardware failures, implant displacements, significant lucency or posterior re-subluxations. Radiographs showed good incorporation of the wedge augment with correction of glenoid retroversion from median 22º (13º to 46º) to 4º. All but four glenoids were corrected to within the target range (less than 10º retroversion).

The porous metal wedge-shaped augments effectively addressed posterior glenoid deficiency as part of aTSA for rotator cuff intact osteoarthritis, producing satisfactory clinical outcomes with no signs of impending future failure.

In primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) for patients with Crowe II or higher classes developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) or rapidly destructive coxopathy (RDC), the placement of the cup can be challenging due to superior and lateral acetabular bone defects. Traditionally, bone grafts from resected femoral heads were used to fill these defects, but bulk graft poses a risk of collapse, especially in DDH with hypoplastic femoral heads or in RDC where good quality bone is scarce. Recently, porous metal augments have shown promising outcomes in revision surgeries, yet reports on their efficacy in primary THA are limited.

This study retrospectively evaluated 27 patients (30 hips) who underwent primary THA using cementless cups and porous titanium acetabular augments for DDH or RDC, with follow-up periods ranging from 2 to 10 years (average 4.1 years). The cohort included 22 females (24 hips) and 5 males (6 hips), with an average age of 67 years at the time of surgery.

The findings at the final follow-up showed no radiographic evidence of loosening or radiolucency around the cups and augments, indicating successful biological fixation in all cases. Clinically, there was a significant improvement in the WOMAC score from an average of 39.1±14.7 preoperatively to 5.1±6.4 postoperatively. These results suggest that the use of cementless cups and porous titanium acetabular augments in primary THA for DDH and RDC can lead to high levels of clinical improvement and reliable biological fixation, indicating their potential as a viable solution for managing challenging acetabular defects in these conditions.

The use of trabecular metal (TM.) shells supported by two TM augments in the footing technique has been described as a potential option for the treatment of Paprosky 3B acetabular defects. The aim of this study was to assess the mid implant survivorship and radiological and clinical outcomes after acetabular revision using this technique.

We undertook a retrospective, double-centre series of 39 hips in 39 patients (15 male, 24 female) treated with the footing technique using a TM shell supported by two TM augments, for severe acetabular bone loss between 2007 and 2020. The mean age at the time of surgery was 62,9 (28 to 86) years. The mean follow-up was 5,4 (1,5 to 15) years.

The cumulative mid survivorship of the implant with revision for any cause was 89%. 3 hips (7,6%) required further revision due to aseptic loosening, and 1 (2,8%) required revision for infection. The mean Harris Hip Score improved significantly from 48 (29 to 65) preoperatively to 79 points (62 to 98) at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001).

The reconstruction of Paprosky 3B acetabular defects with TM shells and two augments in footing-technique showed excellent mid-term results. This technique appears to be a viable option for treating these defects.

Reconstruction of massive acetabular bone defects in primary and revision THA is challenging for reconstructive joint surgeons. The use of porous metal augments is one of the options. The advantages of porous metal augments are easy to use, modularity and lack of resorption. We investigated the radiological results of porous metal augments used for massive acetabular bone defects in primary and revision THA.

Forty-one hips in forty patients had porous metal augments between 2011 and 2016. Thirty of the procedures were revision arthroplasties and 11 were primary procedures (Crowe type III in 5 hips, Crowe type IV in 3, septic hip sequalae in 2 and RA in one). Four of the revisions were second-stage reimplantation after infection. The Paprosky classification for revision was 2B in 4 hips, 2C in one, 3A in 3 and 3B in 22. Regenerex augments were used in 39 hips and trabecular metal augments were used in 2. Thirty-six cups were cemented and 5 cups were uncemented.

Mean follow-up was 37.6 months (range, 1–82). Radiographic findings of osteointegration between host bone and the porous metal augments were assessed. The presence or absence of radiolucent lines between cement or cup/host bone and augment/host bone interface was noted.

Two revisions were performed due to infection, one month and 66 months after operation. The other implants were stable without any complications. Osteointegration between host bone and the porous metal augments were recognized in 36 hips. Radiolucent lines between cement/host bone interface, less than 1 mm in width, were visualized in 2 hips.

Porous metal augments are convenient and our short-term results showed excellent radiological results for massive acetabular bone defects in primary and revision THA.

Trabecular metal (TM) augments are designed to support an uncemented socket in revision surgery when adequate rim fit is not possible. We have used TM augments in an alternative arrangement, to contain segmental defects to facilitate impaction bone grafting (IBG) and cementation of a cemented socket. However, there is a paucity of literature supporting the use of this technique. We present one of the largest studies to date, reporting early outcomes of patients from a tertiary centre.

A single-centre retrospective analytical study of prospectively collected data was performed on patients who had undergone complex acetabular reconstruction using TM augments, IBG and a cemented cup. All patients operated between 2015 and 2019 were included. We identified 105 patients with a mean age of 74yrs. The mean follow-up was 2.3 years(1–5.5yrs). Our primary outcome measure was all-cause revision of the construct. The secondary outcome measures were, Oxford hip score (OHS), radiographic evidence of cup migration/loosening and post-op complications.

Eighty-four out of 105 patients belonged to Paprosky grade IIb, IIc or IIIa. Kaplan-Meier survivorship for all-cause revision was 96.36% (CI, 90.58–100.00) at 2 years with 3 failures. Two were due to early infection which required two-stage re-revision. The third was due to post-operative acetabular fracture which was then re-revised with TM augment, bone graft and large uncemented cup. Pre-op and post-op matched OHS scores were available for 60 hips(57%) with a mean improvement of 13 points. Radiographic analysis showed graft incorporation in all cases with no evidence of cup loosening. The mean vertical cup migration was 0.5mm (Range −5 to 7mm). No other complications were recorded.

This study shows that reconstruction of large acetabular defects during revision THA using a combination of TM augments to contain the acetabulum along with IBG to preserve the bone stock and a cemented socket is a reliable and safe technique with low revision rates and satisfactory clinical and radiographic results. Long term studies are needed to assess the possibility of preservation and regeneration of bone stock.

Background

Failed ingrowth and subsequent separation of revision acetabular components from the inferior hemi-pelvis constitutes a primary mode of failure in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Few studies have highlighted other techniques than multiple screws and an ischial flange or hook of cages to reinforce the ischiopubic fixation of the acetabular components, nor did any authors report the use of porous metal augments in the ischium and/or pubis to reinforce ischiopubic fixation of the acetabular cup. The aims of this study were to introduce the concept of extended ischiopubic fixation into the ischium and/or pubis during revision total hip arthroplasty [Fig. 2], and to determine the early clinical outcomes and the radiographic outcomes of hips revised with inferior extended fixation.

Aims

Severe, superior acetabular bone defects are one of the most challenging aspects to revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). We propose a new concept of “superior extended fixation” as fixation extending superiorly 2 cm beyond the original acetabulum rim with porous metal augments, which is further classified into intracavitary and extracavitary fixation. We hypothesized that this new concept would improve the radiographic and clinical outcomes in patients with massive superior acetabular bone defects.

Major bone loss involving the acetabulum can be seen during revision THA due to component loosening, migration or osteolysis and can also occur as a sequela of infected THA. Uncemented porous ingrowth components can be used for reconstruction of the vast majority of revision cases, where smaller segmental or cavitary defects are typically present. But when stable structural support on host bone is lacking, highly porous metal acetabular augments have been described as an alternative to large structural allograft. The fundamental concept behind these acetabular augments is the provision of critical additional fixation, structural support and increased contact area against host bone over the weeks following surgery while the desired ingrowth into porous implant surfaces is occurring.

Three separate patterns of augment placement have been utilised in our practice since the development of these implants a decade ago: Type 1 - augment screwed onto the superolateral acetabular rim in a “flying buttress” configuration for treatment of a segmental rim defect, Type 2 – augment placed superiorly against host and then fixed to the acetabular component adjacent to the cup to fill a mainly elliptical cavitary defect, and Type 3 – augment(s) placed medial to the cup to fill a protrusio type cavitary or combined cavitary segmental defect of the superomedial or medial wall, and allow peripheral cup placement against the still intact acetabular rim. In all cases the acetabular component and augment interface is fixed together with cement, with care to prevent any cement extrusion between any implant and the bone. When possible, we now prefer to place the acetabular component first and fix it provisionally with 2 or more screws, and then place the augments second as this is technically quicker and easier. This order of insertion is only possible in type 1 and a few select type 2 cases. Type 3 cases always require placement of one or more augments first, before cup insertion. Supplemental cancellous bone graft is used routinely, but the need for structural bone is avoided.

From 2000 through 2007, porous tantalum acetabular augments were used very selectively in 85 revision THA procedures out of total of the 1,789 revision hip cases performed at our institution. All cases had associated massive acetabular deficiency precluding stable mechanical support for a cup alone. Fifty-eight hips had complete radiographic and clinical follow at minimum 5 years. The majority of patients had either Paprosky type 3A defects (28/58, 48%) or 3B defects (22/58, 38%). Ten out of 58 had pre-operative pelvic discontinuities. Three separate patterns of augment placement were utilised: Type 1 - augment screwed onto the superolateral acetabular rim (21%), Type 2 – augment fixed to the acetabular component adjacent to the cup to fill a mainly elliptical cavitary defect (34%), and Type 3 – augment(s) placed medial to the cup to fill a protrusio type cavitary or combined cavitary segmental defect of the superomedial medial wall (45%). At 5 years, 2/58 (3%) were revised for aseptic loosening and another 6/58 demonstrated incomplete radiolucencies between the acetabular shell and zone 3. One of the revised cups and 5 of 6 of the cups with radiolucencies had an associated pelvic discontinuity.

Highly porous metal acetabular augments are an infrequently needed, but extremely valuable, versatile and reliable adjunctive fixation method for use with uncemented acetabular components during complex revision THA associated with major bone deficiency. Smaller patients are more likely to require this approach as reaming away defects to allow insertion of a jumbo cup is more difficult with a smaller AP dimension to the acetabular columns and less local bone for implant support. Intermediate term durability and apparent radiographic incorporation has been very good despite the complex reconstructions originally required. This technique can allow the avoidance of structural bone grafting for even the most massive of bone defect problems, but additional followup is needed to see how durable these encouraging results are over the longer term.

Major bone loss involving the acetabulum can be seen during revision THA due to component loosening, migration or osteolysis and can also occur as a sequela of infected THA. Uncemented porous ingrowth components can be used for reconstruction of the vast majority of revision cases, where smaller segmental or cavitary defects are typically present. But when stable structural support on host bone is lacking, highly porous metal acetabular augments have been described as an alternative to large structural allograft, avoiding the potential for later graft resorption and the resulting loss of mechanical support that can follow. The fundamental concept behind these acetabular augments is the provision of critical additional fixation, structural support and increased contact area against host bone over the weeks following surgery while the desired ingrowth into porous implant surfaces is occurring.

Technique: Three separate patterns of augment placement have been utilised in our practice since the development of these implants: Type 1 - augment screwed onto the superolateral acetabular rim in a “flying buttress” configuration for treatment of a segmental rim defect, Type 2 – augment placed superiorly against host and then fixed (with cement) to the acetabular component adjacent to the cup to fill a mainly elliptical cavitary defect, and Type 3 – augment(s) placed medial to the cup to fill a protrusio type cavitary or combined cavitary segmental defect of the superomedial or medial wall, and allow peripheral cup placement against the still intact acetabular rim. In all cases the acetabular component and augment interface is fixed together with cement, with care to prevent any cement extrusion between any implant and the bone. When possible, we now prefer to place the acetabular component first and fix it provisionally with 2 or more screws, and then place the augments second as this is technically quicker and easier. This order of insertion is only possible though in type 1 and a few select type 2 cases. Type 3 cases always require placement of one or more augments first, before cup insertion. Supplemental cancellous bone graft is used routinely.

Results: From 2000 through 2007, porous tantalum acetabular augments were used very selectively in 85 revision THA procedures out of total of 1,789 revision hip cases performed at our institution in that time frame. All cases had associated massive acetabular deficiency precluding stable mechanical support for a cup alone. Fifty-eight hips had complete radiographic as well as clinical follow at minimum 5 years. The majority of patients had either Paprosky type 3A defects (28/58, 48%) or 3B defects (22/58, 38%). Ten out of 58 had pre-operative pelvic discontinuities. At 5 years, 2/58 (3%) were revised for aseptic loosening and another 6/58 demonstrated incomplete radiolucencies between the acetabular shell and zone 3. One of the revised cups and 5 of 6 of the cups with radiolucencies had an associated pelvic discontinuity.

Summary: Highly porous metal acetabular augments are an infrequently needed, but extremely valuable, versatile and reliable adjunctive fixation method for use with uncemented acetabular components during complex revision THA associated with major bone deficiency. Intermediate term durability and apparent radiographic incorporation has been very good despite the complex reconstructions originally required. This technique can allow the avoidance of structural bone grafting for even the most massive of bone defect problems, but additional followup is needed to see how durable these encouraging results are over the longer term.

Although total hip arthroplasty is highly successful for treatment of osteoarthrosis of hip joint, it is skill demanding surgery to perform and even more challenging in case of revision with bone defects. There are many options available for reconstruction of acetabular bony defects. Here, we evaluate the outcome of acetabular bony defect reconstructed with trabecular metal augments in short term.

We performed, 22 revision total hip arthroplasties and 6 primary total hip arthroplasties (total 28 in 28 patients) using trabecular metal augments to reconstruct acetabular defect between 2011 to 2015. Out of these 28 patients, 18 were males and 10 were females. Mean age of these patients was 61.2 years (range: 46 years to 79 years). Pre-operative templating was done for all cases and need for trabecular metal augments was anticipated in all cases. All cases were classified according to Paprosky classification for acetabular bone defects. Out of 28 patients, 3 had type 2B, 1 had type 2C, 18 had type 3A and 6 had type 3B acetabular defects. Post operatively, all patients were followed at regular interval for their clinical and radiological outcome. An average follow up was 20.1 months (range: 6 months to 42.5 months). We assessed clinical outcome in the form of Herris hip score (HHS) and radiological outcomes in form of osteolysis in acetabular zones and osseointegration, according to the criteria of Moore.

The average Harris hip score (HHS) was improved from 58.0 preoperatively to 87.2 postoperatively. The average degree of cup abduction at the final follow up was 44.29. The centre of rotation of the hip joint was corrected from average 38.90mm (range: 22.15mm to 66.35mm) above the inter-teardrop line preoperatively to average 23.85mm (range: 11.82mm to 37.69mm) above the inter-teardrop line postoperatively. Out of 28 patients, 18 patients had three or more signs of osseointegration, according to the criteria of Moore, at the time of final follow up. Rest of patients, had one or two signs of osseointegration (5 patients had one sign and 5 patients had two signs). We had no patient with migration or loosening of acetabular components. No patient has osteolysis of acetabulum in any zone.

Trabecular metal augments provide good initial stability to acetabular cup as well as helpful to bring down the centre of rotation of the hip joint within limit of 35mm above the inter-teardrop line. They also facilitate osseointegration. Our study showed that the results of the trabecular metal augments in reconstruction of acetabular bony defects were successful even in short term. However, long term study is required for better evaluation.

Failed ingrowth and subsequent separation of revision acetabular components from the inferior hemi-pelvis constitutes a primary mode of failure in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Few studies have highlighted other techniques than multiple screws and an ischial flange or hook of cages to reinforce the inferior fixation of the acetabular components, nor did any authors report the use of porous metal augments in the ischium and/or pubis to reinforce inferior fixation of the acetabular cup.

The aims of this study were to introduce the concept of inferior extended fixation into the ischium and/or pubis during revision total hip arthroplasty, and to answer the following questions: (1) what are early clinical outcomes using inferior extended fixation and (2) what are the radiographic outcomes of hips revised with inferior extended fixation?

Patients who underwent revision THA utilizing the surgical technique of inferior extended fixation with porous metal augments secured in the ischium and/or pubis in a single institution from 2014 to 2016 were reviewed. Twenty-four patients were initially identified, and 16 patients were included based on the criteria of minimum 18 months clinical and radiographic follow-up.

The median HHS, as well as the SF-12 physical and mental components improved significantly at the latest follow-up (p<0.001). The WOMAC global score decreased significantly at the latest follow-up (p<0.001). All constructs were considered to have obtained bone ingrowth fixation.

Early follow-up of patients reconstructed with porous metal augments using the inferior extended fixation surgical technique demonstrated satisfactory clinical outcomes, restoration of the center of rotation and adequate biological fixation.

Highly porous metal surfaces have transformed acetabular revision surgery by providing (1) enhanced friction which potentially provides greater primary fixation, (2) enhanced bone ingrowth potential, (3) enhanced screw fixation options. These characteristics have led many surgeons to use these devices routinely in acetabular revision and have led to an expansion of the indications for porous uncemented hemispherical cups in acetabular revision. Mid-term results suggest that the historical indications for hemispherical cups in revision surgery can be moderately expanded with some implants with these characteristics. In a recent study of 3448 revision total hip arthroplasties, we found porous tantalum cups had a statistically lower revision rate than other materials/designs. Highly porous metals also have provided the options of metal augments to fill selected bone defects—which can both enhance cup fixation and manage bone loss simultaneously. A number of different highly porous metals are now available, and how each will perform is not yet known.