Introduction

As population grows older, and patients receive primary joint replacements at younger age, more and more patients receive a total hip prosthesis nowadays. Ten-year failure rates of revision hip replacements are estimated at 25.6%. The acetabular component is involved in over 58% of those failures. From the second revision on, the pelvic bone stock is significantly reduced and any standard device proves inadequate in the long term [Villanueva et al. 2008]. To deal with these challenges, a custom approach could prove valuable [Deboer et al. 2007].

Although the introduction of ultraporous metals in the forms of acetabular components and augments has substantially improved the orthopaedic surgeon's ability to reconstruct severely compromised acetabuli, there remain some revision THAs that are beyond the scope of cups, augments, and cages. In situations involving catastrophic bone loss, allograft-prosthetic composites or custom acetabular components may be considered. Custom components offer the potential advantages of immediate, rigid fixation with a superior fit individualised to each patient. These custom triflange components require a preoperative CT scan with three-dimensional (3-D) reconstruction using rapid prototyping technology, which has evolved substantially during the past decade. The surgeon can fine-tune exact component positioning, determine location and length of screws, modify the fixation surface with, for example, the addition of hydroxyapatite, and dictate which screws will be locked to enhance fixation. The general indications for using custom triflange components include: (1) failed prior salvage reconstruction with cage or porous metal construct augments, (2) large contained defects with possible discontinuity, (3) known pelvic discontinuity, and (4) complex multiply surgically treated hips with insufficient bone stock to reconstruct using other means. We previously reported on our center's experience with 23 patients (24 hips) treated with custom triflange components with minimum 2-year follow-up. This method of reconstruction was used in a cohort of patients with Paprosky Type 3B acetabular defects, which represented 3% (30 of 955) of the acetabular revisions we performed during the study period of 2003 to 2012. At a mean follow-up of 4.8 years (range, 2.3 – 9 years) there were four subsequent surgical interventions: two failures secondary to sepsis, and one stem revision and one open reduction internal fixation for periprosthetic femoral fracture. There were two minor complications managed nonoperatively, but all of the components were noted to be well-fixed with no obvious migration or loosening observed on the most recent radiographs. Harris hip scores improved from a mean of 42 (SD ±16) before surgery to 65 (SD ±18) at latest follow-up (p < 0.001). More recently, we participated in a multi-center study of 95 patients treated with reconstruction using custom triflange components who had a mean follow-up of 3.5 years. Pelvic defects included Paprosky Type 2C, 3A, 3B and pelvic discontinuity. Concomitant femoral revision was performed in 21 hips. Implants used a mean of 12 screws with 3 locking screws. Twenty of 95 patients (21%) experienced at least one complication, including 6% dislocation, 6% infection, and 2% femoral-related issues. Implants were ultimately removed in 11% of hips. One hip was revised for possible component loosening. Survivorship with aseptic loosening as the endpoint was 99%. Custom acetabular triflange components represent yet another tool in the reconstructive surgeon's armamentarium. These devices can be helpful in situations of catastrophic bone loss, achieving reliable fixation. Clinical results are inferior to both primary THA and more routine revision THA. Patients and surgeons should be aware of the increased complications associated with these complex hip revisions

Additive manufacturing has enabled a radical change in how surgeons reconstruct massive acetabular defects in revision hip surgery. We report on the early clinical and radiological results from our methods for surgical planning, design, and implantation of 3D printed trabecular titanium implants in a cohort of patients with large unclassifiable pelvic defects. We set up a prospective investigation involving 7 consecutive patients. Inclusion criteria was the following: 1) A history of previous total hip replacement; and 2) Current imaging showing at least a Paprosky 3B defect. Planned acetabular inclination and version was 40° and 20° respectively. Post operatively all patients had a CT scan which was analysed with software to determine component position and compared to planned. Outpatient review was done at 2 weeks (For wound), 6 weeks (for weight bearing and fixation) and 52 weeks (for fixation and infection) post-operative. The median age at surgery was: 65 years (40–78). The median bone defect volume was 140cm. 3. Median surgery length was 5.2 hours (3–6.25). Median blood loss was 1300mL (450– 2000). Radiologically, components were stable and no screw breakages were identified. Achieved inclination was 41.0° (29.0–55.6) and achieved version was 15.8° (3.8–43.6). Median Oxford Hip score improved from 9 (2–44) to 25 (18–32). We have demonstrated a new series of pre, intra and post-operative methods for reconstruction of unclassifiable acetabular bony defects. Initial clinical and radiological results are excellent considering the severity of the bony defects. We recommend the use of our or similar methods when trying to reconstruct these defects

Although the introduction of ultraporous metals in the forms of acetabular components and augments has substantially improved the orthopaedic surgeon's ability to reconstruct severely compromised acetabuli, there remain some revision THAs that are beyond the scope of cups, augments, and cages. In situations involving catastrophic bone loss, allograft-prosthetic composites or custom acetabular components may be considered. Custom components offer the potential advantages of immediate, rigid fixation with a superior fit individualised to each patient. These custom triflange components require a pre-operative CT scan with 3-D reconstruction using rapid prototyping technology. The surgeon can fine-tune exact component positioning, determine location and length of screws, modify the fixation surface with, for example, the addition of hydroxyapatite, and dictate which screws will be locked to enhance fixation. The general indications for using custom triflange components include: (1) failed prior salvage reconstruction with cage or porous metal construct augments, (2) large contained defects with possible discontinuity, (3) known pelvic discontinuity, and (4) complex multiply surgically treated hips with insufficient bone stock to reconstruct using other means. The general indications for using custom triflange components include: (1) failed prior salvage reconstruction with cage or porous metal construct augments, (2) large contained defects with possible discontinuity, (3) known pelvic discontinuity, and (4) complex multiply surgically treated hips with insufficient bone stock to reconstruct using other means. We previously reported on our center's experience with 23 patients (24 hips) treated with custom triflange components with minimum 2-year follow-up. This method of reconstruction was used in a cohort of patients with Paprosky Type 3B acetabular defects, which represented 3% (30 of 955) of the acetabular revisions we performed during the study period of 2003 to 2012. At a mean follow-up of 4.8 years (range, 2.3–9 years) there were 4 subsequent surgical interventions: 2 failures secondary to sepsis, and 1 stem revision and 1 open reduction internal fixation for periprosthetic femoral fracture. There were two minor complications managed non-operatively, but all of the components were noted to be well-fixed with no obvious migration or loosening observed on the most recent radiographs. Harris Hip Scores improved from a mean of 42 (SD ±16) before surgery to 65 (SD ±18) at latest follow-up (p<0.001). More recently, we participated in a multi-center study of 95 patients treated with reconstruction using custom triflange components w a mean follow-up of 3.5 years. Pelvic defects included Paprosky Type 2C, 3A, 3B and pelvic discontinuity. Concomitant femoral revision was performed in 21 hips. Implants used a mean of 12 screws with 3 locking screws. Twenty of 95 patients (21%) experienced at least one complication, including 6% dislocation, 6% infection, and 2% femoral-related issues. Implants were ultimately removed in 11% of hips. One hip was revised for possible component loosening. Survivorship with aseptic loosening as the endpoint was 99%. Custom acetabular triflange components represent yet another tool in the reconstructive surgeon's armamentarium. These devices can be helpful in situations of catastrophic bone loss, achieving reliable fixation. Clinical results are inferior to both primary THA and more routine revision THA. Patients and surgeons should be aware of the increased complications associated with these complex hip revisions

Although the introduction of ultraporous metals in the forms of acetabular components and augments has substantially improved the orthopaedic surgeon's ability to reconstruct severely compromised acetabuli, there remain some revision THAs that are beyond the scope of cups, augments, and cages. In situations involving catastrophic bone loss, allograft-prosthetic composites or custom acetabular components may be considered. Custom components offer the potential advantages of immediate, rigid fixation with a superior fit individualised to each patient. These custom triflange components require a pre-operative CT scan with three-dimensional (3-D) reconstruction using rapid prototyping technology, which has evolved substantially during the past decade. The surgeon can fine-tune exact component positioning, determine location and length of screws, modify the fixation surface with, for example, the addition of hydroxyapatite, and dictate which screws will be locked to enhance fixation. The general indications for using custom triflange components include: (1) failed prior salvage reconstruction with cage or porous metal construct augments, (2) large contained defects with possible discontinuity, (3) known pelvic discontinuity, and (4) complex multiply surgically treated hips with insufficient bone stock to reconstruct using other means. The general indications for using custom triflange components include: (1) failed prior salvage reconstruction with cage or porous metal construct augments, (2) large contained defects with possible discontinuity, (3) known pelvic discontinuity, and (4) complex multiply surgically treated hips with insufficient bone stock to reconstruct using other means. We previously reported on our center's experience with 23 patients (24 hips) treated with custom triflange components with minimum 2-year follow-up. This method of reconstruction was used in a cohort of patients with Paprosky Type 3B acetabular defects, which represented 3% (30 of 955) of the acetabular revisions we performed during the study period of 2003 to 2012. At a mean follow-up of 4.8 years (range, 2.3–9 years) there were 4 subsequent surgical interventions: 2 failures secondary to sepsis, and 1 stem revision and 1 open reduction internal fixation for periprosthetic femoral fracture. There were 2 minor complications managed nonoperatively, but all of the components were noted to be well-fixed with no obvious migration or loosening observed on the most recent radiographs. Harris hip scores improved from a mean of 42 (SD ± 16) before surgery to 65 (SD ± 18) at latest follow-up (p<0.001). More recently, we participated in a multi-center study of 95 patients treated with reconstruction using custom triflange components who had a mean follow-up of 3.5 years. Pelvic defects included Paprosky Type 2C, 3A, 3B and pelvic discontinuity. Concomitant femoral revision was performed in 21 hips. Implants used a mean of 12 screws with 3 locking screws. Twenty of 95 patients (21%) experienced at least one complication, including 6% dislocation, 6% infection, and 2% femoral-related issues. Implants were ultimately removed in 11% of hips. One hip was revised for possible component loosening. Survivorship with aseptic loosening as the endpoint was 99%,. Custom acetabular triflange components represent yet another tool in the reconstructive surgeon's armamentarium. These devices can be helpful in situations of catastrophic bone loss, achieving reliable fixation. Clinical results are inferior to both primary THA and more routine revision THA. Patients and surgeons should be aware of the increased complications associated with these complex hip revisions

Introduction and Aims: The standard treatment for an infected total hip replacement involves removal of all foreign material and re-implantation in either one or two stages with antibiotic cement. This study has investigated the use of cementless reconstruction in infected hip arthroplasties to determine if there is a difference in the re-infection rate. Method: Thirteen patients (three females and 10 males) with an average age of 67 have been followed-up prospectively after revision hip surgery for infection. Removal of the prosthesis was followed by six weeks intravenous antibiotics and in some cases a period of oral therapy. Reconstruction was undertaken at a median of four months post Girdlestone’s arthroplasty, with the exception of a one-stage exchange for medical reasons. Cementless titanium femoral components were used in all revisions and titanium acetabular components where applicable. Allograft and cage reconstruction were employed for major pelvic defects. Results: Patients have been followed-up for an average of 58 months (range 12–96 months), with no loss to follow-up. Bacteria were cultured from eleven (11) of the thirteen (13) patients and the other two were clinically septic. Bacteria cultured included MRSA, Staph. Aureus, E.Coli and Strep. Faecalis. All prostheses remain in situ with improvement in both Charnley and Oxford hip scores. No recurrence of infection has been documented clinically or radiologically and no component is loose. Conclusion: Debate still exists about the merits of one vs. two-stage reconstruction for infected hip arthroplasty. This series with mid-term follow-up demonstrates that cementless reconstruction for infected hip arthroplasty is successful in providing an infection-free stable revision

Fibula autograft reconstruction, both vascularised (v) and non-vascularised (nv), has been established as a standard method in limb salvage surgery of bone and soft tissue tumours of the extremities. This study retrospectively analyses the results of fibula autograft procedures in general and in relation to vascular reconstruction or simple bone grafting. Since the implementation of the Vienna Tumour Registry in 1969, 26 vascularised and 27 non-vascularised fibula transfers have been performed at our institution in 53 patients, 26 males and 27 females with an average age of 21 years (range 4 to 62 years). Indications included osteosarcoma in 18, Ewing’s Sarcoma in 15, adamantinoma in 5, leiomyosarcoma in 3 and others in 12. Thirty patients were operated for reconstruction of the tibia (8v/22 nv), 7 for the femur (6v/1nv), 7 for defects of the forearm (4v/3nv), 5 for metarsal defects (all v), 3 for the humerus (1v/2nv) and one patient was treated for a pelvic defect (nv). Average follow-up was 63 months (range 2 to 259 months). 43 patients showed successful primary bony union of the autograft. In 12 cases pseudarthrosis indicated further surgical revision, 9 of these patients were primarily reconstructed by use of a nv autograft. 4 patients, 2 with v and 2 with nv reconstruction, suffered a fracture of the transplant and were operated for secondary osteosynthesis. 10 patients with v bone graft developed wound healing disturbances which led to surgery, 2 patients with nv grafts suffered such complications. In 2 patients recurrent infection of a nv and a v fibula transfer led to the implantation of a modular tumour prostheses or amputation, retrospectively. Function of all patients with primary bone healing was rated satisfactory. The use of fibula autograft in limb-salvage surgery under oncological conditions allows biological reconstruction with good functional outcome, especially when primary bone healing is achieved. Vascularised bone grafting seems to have a better outcome in terms of primary bone healing than simple fibula bone grafting, and thus represents a feasible choice in the reconstruction of bone defects from tumour resection

Reconstruction acetabular surgery with bone stock loss is still a difficult and challenging problem for the orthopaedic surgeon. The goals of acetabular revision are: stable bone coverage that can support the new acetabular component, restoration of the anatomy and bone stock for future revisions, equalization of leg length and restoration of the centre of hip motion. These goals are difficult to achieve when the pelvic defect is particularly severe. We examine the case of a female 73 years old who underwent a third revision arthroplasty of the hip joint because of extensive bony defect of the acetabular cavity (massive protrusio defect-type III –D’Antonio- combined segmental/cavitary acetabular defect). The femoral component which was revised in a previous operation with a mega stem (type Kotz), was radiologically stable and symptomless. Preoperative radiological assessment was performed using standard radiographic views, Judet views and CT scan. The surgical approach that we used was a slight modification of the previous incision achieving a better visualization of the entire acetabulum and iliac wing. The loose acetabular cup as well as soft tissue and debris were removed from the acetabulum. The large acetabular defect was filled with a massive allograft (tibial plateau) properly cut and shaped. The stability of the allograft was achieved fixing the allograft to the iliac bone with screws. A large amount of particulate allograft bone was placed in the depths of the acetabular defect restoring a proper level of the acetabular floor. Then a Burke-Schneider cage was firmly seated and fixed with screws in the prepared acetabular bed. A polyethylene cup was cemented into the acetabular shell. The superior part of the Kotz femoral prosthesis was also revised with a new one. Postoperatively we din not have any complications, the graft incorporation was successful with a satisfactory functional result. We believe that the use of structural allograft bone is essential for the reconstruction of large segmentalace-tabular defects. The results however are less predictable because of important technical difficulties and sometimes serious complications occur

A retrospective review of our prospectively collected database was undertaken to determine the functional and oncologic outcome following combined pelvic allograft and total hip arthroplasty (THA) reconstruction of large pelvic bone defects following tumour resection. There were twenty-four patients with a minimum followup of fifteen months. The complication rate following hemipel-vic allograft and THA reconstruction of resection Types I+II and I+II+III was high, but when successful this reconstruction resulted in reasonable functional outcome. In comparison, the functional outcome after allograft and THA reconstruction of isolated Type II acetabular resections was better and more predictable. Resection of large pelvic bone tumours often results in segmental defects with pelvic discontinuity and loss of the acetabulum. We reviewed the functional and oncologic outcomes following pelvic allograft and total hip arthroplasty (THA) reconstruction. Reconstruction of large pelvic defects including the acetabulum using hemipelvic allograft and THA is associated with high complication rates, however when successful provides reasonable function. In comparison, the outcomes of allograft and THA for acetabular defects alone are better and more predictable. A retrospective review of our prospectively collected database was undertaken. Minimum followup was fifteen months (15–167). Nineteen patients were hemipel-vic resections (twelve Type I+II and seven Type I+II+III, eleven cases including partial sacral resection) reconstructed by hemipelvic allograft and THA. Five patients had Type II acetabular resections, reconstructed with structural allograft, roof ring and THA. Osteosarcoma and chondrosarcoma were the most frequent tumours. All patients required walking aids. In the hemipelvic group there were two early deaths (peri-operative haemorrhage and aplastic anaemia). In seven patients (37%) the allograft remained intact without infection but three required revision THA for loosening. For these seven patients the functional outcome scores were TESS 64%, MSTS87 17/35 and MSTS93 of 45% (mean fifty-two months.). There were nine cases of deep infection (47%) with three patients maintaining a functional implant. The nineteenth patient was revised following allograft fracture. In the Type II acetabular group, three patients had no complications, and two patients dislocated. The average scores were TESS 78%, MSTS87 21/35 and MSTS93 64% (mean fifty-five months)

Introduction and Aims: Resection of large pelvic bone tumors often results in segmental defects with pelvic discontinuity and loss of the acetabulum. We reviewed the functional and oncologic outcomes following pelvic allograft and total hip arthroplasty (THA) reconstruction. Method: A retrospective review of our prospectively collected database was undertaken. Minimum follow-up was 15 months (range 15–167 months). Nineteen patients were hemipelvic resections (12 Type I+II and seven Type I+II+III, 11 of these cases included partial sacral resection) reconstructed by hemipelvic allograft and THA. In comparison, five patients had Type II acetabular resections, reconstructed with structural allograft, roof ring and THA. Functional outcome was assessed by the Toronto Extremity Salvage score (TESS) and the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores (MSTS87 and MSTS93). Results: Osteosarcoma and chondrosarcoma were the most frequent tumors. All patients required walking aids. In the hemipelvic group there were two early deaths (peri-operative haemorrhage and aplastic anaemia). In seven patients (37%), the allograft remained intact without infection but three required revision THA for component loosening. For these seven patients, the functional outcome scores were TESS 64%, MSTS87 17/35 and MSTS93 45% (mean follow-up 52 months). There were nine cases of deep infection (47%) with three patients maintaining a functional implant with antibiotic suppression. Of the remaining six patients with infection, four patients required hindquarter amputation, one patient required allograft removal and the allograft fragmented in the remaining patient. The 19th patient was revised following allograft fracture. Five patients sustained at least one allograft fracture. In the Type II acetabular group, three patients had no complications, and two patients sustained dislocations. The average scores were TESS 78%, MSTS87 21/35 and MSTS93 64% (mean follow-up 55 months). Conclusion: Reconstruction of large pelvic defects including the acetabulum using hemipelvic allograft and THA is associated with high complication rates, however when successful provides reasonable function. In comparison, the functional outcome after allograft and THA reconstruction of isolated Type II acetabular resections was better and more predictable

Introduction: From June 1991 to June 1995, 256 consecutive total hip arthroplasties using the Duraloc 100 TM acetabular shell, manufactured by Depuy, were performed by two surgeons. The acetabular component featured a non-locking apex hole eliminator. In January 1995 the first patient with extrusion of the apex hole eliminator was seen. Since that time 21 patients, or 8% (21/256) have been seen with partial or complete extrusion. This study reports the outcomes and discusses a possible rationale for this finding. Methods: The study group comprises 12 men, nine women, mean age was 59 years (32-86), mean weight 180 lbs. 18 (86%) femurs were cementless, three (14%) were cemented. Mean acetabular component size was 58 mm (52-64), with 18 acetabular liners manufactured with HylamerTM, and three liners EnduronTM. Sixteen (76%) liners were 10 degree hooded, and five (24%) were non-hooded. Eighteen (86%) femoral heads were ceramic, and three (14%) were chrome-cobalt. 15 (71%) femoral heads were 28 mm diameter, and six (29%) were 32 mm. Results: Radiographs were obtained at routine follow-up in 20 (95%) patients. One (5%) patient had groin pain as the indication for radiographs. Four (19%) patients had complete extrusion in to the pelvis of the apex hole eliminator, and 17 (81%) had partial backout with the apex hole eliminator still within the confines of the acetabular component. On the antero-posterior radiograph visible pelvic osteolysis was seen in the four patients with complete extrusion of the apex hole eliminator, all in zone B. Zone one femoral osteolysis was seen in one patient with incomplete extrusion of the apex hole eliminator. Sixteen patients had incomplete extrusion of the apex hole eliminator associated with no visible radiographic pelvic or femoral osteolyisis. Two (10%) patients have undergone revision with curettage and allografting of the pelvic lesion and head and liner exchange. At the time of revision surgery liner motion was grossly obvious. Discussion: The apex hole eliminator is neither watertight nor locking. Our hypothesis is that activity-related hydraulic pressure generated from excessive liner motion causes a high-pressure fluid leak into the pelvis. This fluid contains sub-micron particles generated by backside wear. The combination of particulates and fluid under pressure produces retro-acetabular osteolysis. The cyclic pressure then allows the non-locking plug to advance into the osteolytic pelvic defect