Pelvic discontinuity is a separation through the acetabulum with the ilium displacing superiorly and the ischium/pubis displacing inferiorly. This is a biomechanically challenging environment with a high rate of failure for standard acetabular components. The cup-cage reconstruction involves the use of a highly porous metal cup to achieve biological bone ingrowth on both sides of the pelvic discontinuity and an ilioischial cage to provide secure fixation across the discontinuity and bring the articulating hip center to the correct level. The purpose of this study was to report long term follow up of the use of the cup-cage to treat pelvic discontinuity. All hip revision procedures between January 2003 and January 2022 where a cup-cage was used for a hip with a pelvic discontinuity were included in this retrospective review. All patients received a Trabecular Metal Revision Shell with either a ZCA cage or TMARS cage (Zimmer-Biomet Inc.). Pelvic discontinuity was diagnosed on pre-operative radiographs and/or intraoperatively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed with failure defined as revision of the cup-cage reconstruction. Fifty-seven cup-cages in 56 patients were included with an average follow-up of 6.25 years (0.10 to 19.98 years). The average age of patients was 72.09 years (43 to 92 years) and 70.2% of patients were female. The five year Kaplan-Meier survival was 92.0% (95% CI 84.55 to 99.45) and the ten year survival was 80.5% (95% CI 58.35 to 102.65). There were 5 major complications that required revision of the cup-cage reconstruction (3 infections and 2 mechanical failures). There were 9 complications that required re-operation without revision of the cup-cage reconstruction (5 dislocations, 3 washouts for infection and one femoral revision for aseptic loosening). In our hands the cup-cage reconstruction has provided a reliable tool to address pelvic discontinuity with an acceptable complication rate

Segmental defects of the acetabulum are often encountered in revision surgery. Many times these can be handled with hemispherical cups. However when larger defects are encountered particularly involving the dome and/or posterior wall structural support for the cup is often needed. In the past structural allograft was used but for the last 12 years at our institution trabecular metal augments have been used in the place of structural allograft in all cases. This talk will focus on technique and mid-term results using augments in association with an uncemented revision shell. The technique can be broken down into 6 steps outlined below: 1. Exposure, 2. Reaming, 3. Trialing, 4. Augment Inserted, 5. Cup Insertion/Stabilization, 6. Trial Reduction/Liner Cementation. A recent study was undertaken to assess the mid-term results of this technique. We prospectively followed the first 56 patients in whom these augments were utilised in combination with a trabecular metal acetabular component in our unit. Details of this study will be presented. The median follow up of the surviving patients was 110 months (range 88–128 months). Survivorship of the augments at 10 years was 92.2% (95% CI: 97.0–80.5%). In one case the augment was revised for infection and in 3 for loosening. In 1 of the revised cases there was a pre-operative pelvic discontinuity, the other 2 discontinuities in the series were not revised and remain asymptomatic. Conclusions. The results of the acetabular trabecular metal augments continue to be encouraging in the medium to long term with low rates of revision or loosening in this complex group of patients

Revision of a failed acetabular reconstruction in total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be challenging when associated with significant bone loss. In cementless revision THA, achieving initial implant stability and maximising host bone contact is key to the success of reconstruction. Porous tantalum acetabular shells may represent an improvement from conventional porous coated uncemented cups in revision acetabular reconstruction associated with severe acetabular bone defects. Methods: We reviewed the clinical and radiographic results of 46 acetabular revisions with Paprosky 2 and 3 acetabular bone defects done with a hemispheric, tantalum acetabular shell (Trabecular Metal Revision Shell, Zimmer, Warsaw, USA) and multiple supplementary screws for fixation. Results: At a mean follow-up of 40 (24–51) months, one acetabular shell had been revised in a patient with a Paprosky 3B defect. Two liner revisions were performed for recurrent instability, without porous tantalum shell revision. The clinical outcome showed significant postoperative improvement in all measured sub-scales, compared with baseline pre-operative scores (mean improvement in Oxford Hip Score of 40.0, p < 0.001, in WOMAC of 36.7, p < 0.001, Physical component SF-12 of 12.3, p =0.0003, mental component of SF-12 of 6.8, p = 0.006). Radiographic evidence of osseointegration using validated criteria (Moore’s criteria) was demonstrated in 39 of the 40 hips available for radiographic analysis at a mean of 30.9 months, by two independent observers. Of the remaining six hips, five hips were lost to follow-up and one radiograph demonstrated failure of the hip reconstruction secondary to loss of fixation and superior migration of the component. Discussion: Cementless acetabular revision with the porous tantalum acetabular shell demonstrated excellent early clinical and radiographic results in a series of complex revision acetabular reconstruction associated with severe bone defects. The evidence of radiographic osseointegration suggests that outcome should remain favourable, however, further longer-term evaluation is warranted

In revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), acetabular reconstruction while dealing with severe bone loss is a challenge. The porous tantalum revision acetabular shells have been in use for the past decade. Several reports have documented successful use at early to mid-term follow up. There is, however, very little literature around the long-term survival and quality of life outcome with the use of these shells. We reviewed the results of 46 acetabular revisions with Paprosky 2 and 3 acetabular bone defects reconstructed with a hemispheric, tantalum acetabular shell and multiple supplementary screws. There were 31 females. Average age at revision was 64 years (range 23–85 years). The mean and median follow up was 11 years (range 10–12 years, SD 1). Morselised femoral allograft was used in 34 hips to fill contained cavitary defectes. Bulk femoral allografting was performed in 2 hips. At a minimum follow-up of 10 (range 10–12) years, the survivorship of the porous tantalum acetabular shell, with revision of the shell as end point was 96%. The minimum 10-year survivorship with hip revision for any reason as end point was 92%. We noted excellent pain relief (mean WOMAC pain 92.6) and good functional outcome (mean WOMAC function 90.3, mean UCLA 5); and generic quality of life measures (mean SF-12 physical component 48.3; mean SF-12 mental component 56.7). Patient satisfaction with pain relief, function and return to recreational activities were noted to be excellent. Cementless acetabular revision with the tantalum acetabular shell demonstrated excellent clinical and quality of life outcomes at minimum 10-year follow-up. As far as we are aware this is the first report of minimum 10-year follow up of use of this technique for revision hip arthroplasty

Revision total hip replacements are likely to have higher complication rates than primary procedures due to the poor quality of the original bone. This may be constrained to achieve adequate fixation strength to prevent future “aseptic loosening” [1]. A thin, slightly flexible, acetabular component with a three dimensional, titanium foam in-growth surface has been developed to compensate for inferior bone quality and decreased contact area between the host bone and implant by better distributing loads across the remaining acetabulum in a revision situation. This is assumed to result in more uniform bone apposition to the implant by minimizing stress concentrations at the implant/bone contact points that may be associated with a thicker, stiffer acetabular component, resulting in improved implant performance.[2] To assemble the liner to the shell, the use of PMMA bone cement is recommended at the interface between the polyethylene insert and the acetabular shell as a locking mechanism configuration may not be ideal due to the flexibility in the shell [3]. The purpose of this study was to quantify the mechanical integrity of a thin acetabular shell with a cemented liner in a laboratory bench-top total hip revision condition. Two-point loading in an unsupported cavity was created in a polyurethane foam block to mimic the contact of the anterior and posterior columns in an acetabulum with superior and inferior defects. This simulates the deformation in an acetabular shell when loaded anatomically [4]. The application has been extended to evaluate the fatigue performance of the Titanium metal foam Revision Non-Modular Shell Sequentially Cross Linked PE All-Poly Inserts and its influence on liner fixation

The purpose of our study was to evaluate the initial results of this new technique of acetabular revision. Osseointegration and cup stability were assessed by our musculoskeletal radiologist with radiographs at 2 years following surgery, and patients’ clinical outcomes were reviewed. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records and radiographs of all patients who underwent acetabular revision between 2003 to 2005. Patient’s clinical outcomes and records were extracted from Orthowave and Statwave software. Radiographs were digitised and evaluated by our radiologist on E-film workstation. Between January 2003 to May 2005, 62 consecutives patients with 65 acetabulum revisions (3 bilateral) were performed by a single surgeon. All acetabular shells were revised to revision tantalum shells with ancillary screws fixation. Fenestrated tantalum augments and wedges of different sizes and shapes were used to address bone defect in our series. 30.7% were Paprosky grade 3 and worse, 21.5% were Paprosky grade 2C. Radiologic review showed none of the cups had a change of 3° or more for cup inclination. There was no migration of the cups of 2 mm or greater both in the vertical direction and horizontal direction from our reference lines during the 2 year period. There were no new radiolucencies in any cases, and all the 9 cups with radiolucent lines post op either filled up or remain unchanged. Postoperative review mean HHS was 79.09 ± 16.16 (Range 33–100). There were 3 cases (4.6%) of dislocation. There were 9 fractures (13.9%) in our series. In our series of 65 revisions, the porous tantalum revision system has performed well, despite being used to reconstruct fairly significant defects (Paprosky 2C and worse) in 52.3% of our cases. The clinical improvement, stability of the cup at 2 years, and acceptable complication rates would suggest that this porous tantalum system can be an alternative to a more traditional acetabular reconstruction