The practice of removing a well-fixed cementless femoral component is associated with high morbidity. Ceramic bearing couples are low wearing and their use minimises the risk of subsequent further revision due to the production of wear debris. A total of 165 revision hip replacements were performed, in which a polyethylene-lined acetabular component was revised to a new acetabular component with a ceramic liner, while retaining the well-fixed femoral component. A titanium sleeve was placed over the used femoral trunnion, to which a ceramic head was added. There were 100 alumina and 65 Delta bearing couples inserted. . The mean Harris hip score improved significantly from 71.3 (9.0 to 100.0) pre-operatively to 91.0 (41.0 to 100.0) at a mean follow up of 4.8 years (2.1 to 12.5) (p < 0.001). No patients reported squeaking of the hip. There were two fractures of the ceramic head, both in alumina bearings. No liners were seen to fracture. No fractures were observed in components made of Delta ceramic. At 8.3 years post-operatively the survival with any cause of failure as the endpoint was 96.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 85.7 to 99.3) for the acetabular component and 94.0% (95% CI 82.1 to 98.4) for the femoral component. The technique of revising the acetabular component in the presence of a well-fixed femoral component with a ceramic head placed on a titanium sleeve over the used trunnion is a useful adjunct in revision hip practice. The use of Delta ceramic is recommended. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:333–8

We report the results of 62 hips in 62 patients (17 males, 45 females) with mean age of 62.4 years (37 to 81), who underwent revision of the acetabular component of a total hip replacement due to aseptic loosening between May 2003 and November 2007. All hips had a Paprosky type IIIa acetabular defect. Acetabular revision was undertaken using a Procotyl E cementless oblong implant with modular side plates and a hook combined with impaction allografting. . At a mean follow-up of 60.5 months (36 to 94) with no patients lost to follow-up and one died due to unrelated illness, the complication rate was 38.7%. Complications included aseptic loosening (19 hips), deep infection (3 hips), broken hook and side plate (one hip) and a femoral nerve palsy (one hip). Further revision of the acetabular component was required in 18 hips (29.0%) and a further four hips (6.4%) are currently loose and awaiting revision. . We observed unacceptably high rates of complication and failure in our group of patients and cannot recommend this implant or technique

Aims. The benefit of a dual-mobility acetabular component (DMC) for primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) is controversial. This study aimed to compare the dislocation and complication rates when using a DMC compared to single-mobility (SM) acetabular component in primary elective THA using data collected at a single centre, and compare the revision rates and survival outcomes in these two groups. Methods. Between 2010 and 2019, 2,075 primary THAs using either a cementless DM or SM acetabular component were included. Indications for DMC were patients aged older than 70 years or with high risk of dislocation. All other patients received a SM acetabular component. Exclusion criteria were cemented implants, patients treated for femoral neck fracture, and follow-up of less than one year. In total, 1,940 THAs were analyzed: 1,149 DMC (59.2%) and 791 SM (40.8%). The mean age was 73 years (SD 9.2) in the DMC group and 57 years (SD 12) in the SM group. Complications and revisions have been analyzed retrospectively. Results. The mean follow-up was 41.9 months (SD 14; 12 to 134). There were significantly fewer dislocations in the DMC group (n = 2; 0.17%) compared to the SM group (n = 8; 1%) (p = 0.019). The femoral head size did not influence the dislocation rate in the SM group (p = 0.702). The overall complication rate in the DMC group was 5.1% (n = 59) and in the SM group was 6.7% (n = 53); these were not statistically different (p = 0.214). No specific complications were attributed to the use of DMCs. In the DMC group, 18 THAs (1.6%) were revised versus 15 THAs in the SM group (1.9%) (p = 0.709). There was no statistical difference for any cause of revisions in both groups. The acetabular component aseptic revision-free survival rates at five years were 98% in the DMC group and 97.3% in the SM group (p = 0.780). Conclusion. The use of a monobloc DMC had a lower risk of dislocation in a high-risk population than SM component in a low-risk population at the mid-term follow-up. There was no significant risk of component-specific complications or revisions with DMCs in this large cohort. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(3 Supple A):81–88

Aims

Acetabular fractures are associated with long-term morbidity. Our prospective cohort study sought to understand the recovery trajectory of this injury over five years.

Aims. The aim of this study is to evaluate whether acetabular retroversion (AR) represents a structural anatomical abnormality of the pelvis or is a functional phenomenon of pelvic positioning in the sagittal plane, and to what extent the changes that result from patient-specific functional position affect the extent of AR. Methods. A comparative radiological study of 19 patients (38 hips) with AR were compared with a control group of 30 asymptomatic patients (60 hips). CT scans were corrected for rotation in the axial and coronal planes, and the sagittal plane was then aligned to the anterior pelvic plane. External rotation of the hemipelvis was assessed using the superior iliac wing and inferior iliac wing angles as well as quadrilateral plate angles, and correlated with cranial and central acetabular version. Sagittal anatomical parameters were also measured and correlated to version measurements. In 12 AR patients (24 hips), the axial measurements were repeated after matching sagittal pelvic rotation with standing and supine anteroposterior radiographs. Results. Acetabular version was significantly lower and measurements of external rotation of the hemipelvis were significantly increased in the AR group compared to the control group. The AR group also had increased evidence of anterior projection of the iliac wing in the sagittal plane. The acetabular orientation angles were more retroverted in the supine compared to standing position, and the change in acetabular version correlated with the change in sagittal pelvic tilt. An anterior pelvic tilt of 1° correlated with 1.02° of increased cranial retroversion and 0.76° of increased central retroversion. Conclusion. This study has demonstrated that patients with symptomatic AR have both an externally rotated hemipelvis and increased anterior projection of the iliac wing compared to a control group of asymptomatic patients. Functional sagittal pelvic positioning was also found to affect AR in symptomatic patients: the acetabulum was more retroverted in the supine position compared to standing position. Changes in acetabular version correlate with the change in sagittal pelvic tilt. These findings should be taken into account by surgeons when planning acetabular correction for AR with periacetabular osteotomy. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):128–135

Aims

The aims of this study were to assess the pre- and postoperative incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) using routine duplex Doppler ultrasound (DUS), to assess the incidence of pulmonary embolism (PE) using CT angiography, and to identify the factors that predict postoperative DVT in patients with a pelvic and/or acetabular fracture.

Aims. The aim of the study was to investigate whether the primary stability of press-fit acetabular components can be improved by altering the impaction procedure. Methods. Three impaction procedures were used to implant acetabular components into human cadaveric acetabula using a powered impaction device. An impaction frequency of 1 Hz until complete component seating served as reference. Overimpaction was simulated by adding ten strokes after complete component seating. High-frequency implantation was performed at 6 Hz. The lever-out moment of the acetabular components was used as measure for primary stability. Permanent bone deformation was assessed by comparison of double micro-CT (µCT) measurements before and after impaction. Acetabular component deformation and impaction forces were recorded, and the extent of bone-implant contact was determined from 3D laser scans. Results. Overimpaction reduced primary acetabular component stability (p = 0.038) but did not significantly increase strain release after implantation (p = 0.117) or plastic deformations (p = 0.193). Higher press-fits were associated with larger polar gaps for the 1 Hz reference impaction (p = 0.002, R. 2. = 0.77), with a similar trend for overimpaction (p = 0.082, R. 2. = 0.31). High-frequency impaction did not significantly increase primary stability (p = 0.170) at lower impaction forces (p = 0.001); it was associated with smaller plastic deformations (p = 0.035, R. 2. = 0.34) and a trend for increased acetabular component relaxation between strokes (p = 0.112). Higher press-fit was not related to larger polar gaps for the 6 Hz impaction (p = 0.346). Conclusion. Overimpaction of press-fit acetabular components should be prevented since additional strokes can be associated with increased bone damage and reduced primary stability as shown in this study. High-frequency impaction at 6 Hz was shown to be beneficial compared with 1 Hz impaction. This benefit has to be confirmed in clinical studies. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):261–268

Aims. Dislocation remains a leading cause of failure following revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). While dual-mobility (DM) bearings have been shown to mitigate this risk, options are limited when retaining or implanting an uncemented shell without modular DM options. In these circumstances, a monoblock DM cup, designed for cementing, can be cemented into an uncemented acetabular shell. The goal of this study was to describe the implant survival, complications, and radiological outcomes of this construct. Methods. We identified 64 patients (65 hips) who had a single-design cemented DM cup cemented into an uncemented acetabular shell during revision THA between 2018 and 2020 at our institution. Cups were cemented into either uncemented cups designed for liner cementing (n = 48; 74%) or retained (n = 17; 26%) acetabular components. Median outer head diameter was 42 mm. Mean age was 69 years (SD 11), mean BMI was 32 kg/m. 2. (SD 8), and 52% (n = 34) were female. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods. Mean follow-up was two years (SD 0.97). Results. There were nine cemented DM cup revisions: three for periprosthetic joint infection, three for acetabular aseptic loosening from bone, two for dislocation, and one for a broken cup-cage construct. The two-year survivals free of aseptic DM revision and dislocation were both 92%. There were five postoperative dislocations, all in patients with prior dislocation or abductor deficiency. On radiological review, the DM cup remained well-fixed at the cemented interface in all but one case. Conclusion. While dislocation was not eliminated in this series of complex revision THAs, this technique allowed for maximization of femoral head diameter and optimization of effective acetabular component position during cementing. Of note, there was only one failure at the cemented interface. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(4):352–358

Aims. The aims of this study were to determine the success of a reconstruction algorithm used in major acetabular bone loss, and to further define the indications for custom-made implants in major acetabular bone loss. Methods. We reviewed a consecutive series of Paprosky type III acetabular defects treated according to a reconstruction algorithm. IIIA defects were planned to use a superior augment and hemispherical acetabular component. IIIB defects were planned to receive either a hemispherical acetabular component plus augments, a cup-cage reconstruction, or a custom-made implant. We used national digital health records and registry reports to identify any reoperation or re-revision procedure and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) for patient-reported outcomes. Implant survival was determined via Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results. A total of 105 procedures were carried out in 100 patients (five bilateral) with a mean age of 73 years (42 to 94). In the IIIA defects treated, 72.0% (36 of 50) required a porous metal augment; the remaining 14 patients were treated with a hemispherical acetabular component alone. In the IIIB defects, 63.6% (35 of 55) underwent reconstruction as planned with 20 patients who actually required a hemispherical acetabular component alone. At mean follow-up of 7.6 years, survival was 94.3% (95% confidence interval 97.4 to 88.1) for all-cause revision and the overall dislocation rate was 3.8% (4 of 105). There was no difference observed in survival between type IIIA and type IIIB defects and whether a hemispherical implant alone was used for the reconstruction or not. The mean gain in OHS was 16 points. Custom-made implants were only used in six cases, in patients with either a mega-defect in which the anteroposterior diameter > 80 mm, complex pelvic discontinuity, and massive bone loss in a small pelvis. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that a reconstruction algorithm can provide a successful approach to reconstruction in major acetabular bone loss. The use of custom implants has been defined in this series and accounts for < 5% of cases. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):47–53

Aims. Isolated acetabular liner exchange with a highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) component is an option to address polyethylene wear and osteolysis following total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the presence of a well-fixed acetabular shell. The liner can be fixed either with the original locking mechanism or by being cemented within the acetabular component. Whether the method used for fixation of the HXLPE liner has any bearing on the long-term outcomes is still unclear. Methods. Data were retrieved for all patients who underwent isolated acetabular component liner exchange surgery with a HXLPE component in our institute between August 2000 and January 2015. Patients were classified according to the fixation method used (original locking mechanism (n = 36) or cemented (n = 50)). Survival and revision rates were compared. A total of 86 revisions were performed and the mean duration of follow-up was 13 years. Results. A total of 20 patients (23.3%) had complications, with dislocation alone being the most common (8.1%; 7/86). Ten patients (11.6%) required re-revision surgery. Cementing the HXLPE liner (8.0%; 4/50) had a higher incidence of re-revision due to acetabular component liner-related complications than using the original locking mechanism (0%; 0/36; p = 0.082). Fixation using the original locking mechanism was associated with re-revision due to acetabular component loosening (8.3%; 3/36), compared to cementing (0%; 0/50; p = 0.038). Overall estimated mean survival was 19.2 years. There was no significant difference in the re-revision rate between the original locking mechanism (11.1%; 4/36) and cementing (12.0%; 6/50; p = 0.899). Using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, the revision-free survival of HXLPE fixed with the original locking mechanism and cementing was 94.1% and 93.2%, respectively, at ten years, and 84.7% and 81.3%, respectively, at 20 years (p = 0.840). Conclusion. The re-revision rate and the revision-free survival following acetabular component liner exchange revision surgery using the HXLPE liner were not influenced by the fixation technique used. Both techniques were associated with good survival at a mean follow-up of 13 years. Careful patient selection is necessary for isolated acetabular component liner exchange revision surgery in order to achieve the best outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):59–65

Aims. Acetabular retroversion is a recognized cause of hip impingement and can be influenced by pelvic tilt (PT), which changes in different functional positions. Positional changes in PT have not previously been studied in patients with acetabular retroversion. Methods. Supine and standing anteroposterior (AP) pelvic radiographs were retrospectively analyzed in 69 patients treated for symptomatic acetabular retroversion. Measurements were made for acetabular index (AI), lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA), crossover index, ischial spine sign, and posterior wall sign. The change in the angle of PT was measured both by the sacro-femoral-pubic (SFP) angle and the pubic symphysis to sacroiliac (PS-SI) index. Results. In the supine position, the mean PT (by SFP) was 1.05° (SD 3.77°), which changed on standing to a PT of 8.64° (SD 5.34°). A significant increase in posterior PT from supine to standing of 7.59° (SD 4.5°; SFP angle) and 5.89° (SD 3.33°; PS-SI index) was calculated (p < 0.001). There was a good correlation in PT change between measurements using SFP angle and PS-SI index (0.901 in the preoperative group and 0.815 in the postoperative group). Signs of retroversion were significantly reduced in standing radiographs compared to supine: crossover index (0.16 (SD 0.16) vs 0.38 (SD 0.15); p < 0.001), crossover sign (19/28 hips vs 28/28 hips; p < 0.001), ischial spine sign (10/28 hips vs 26/28 hips; p < 0.001), and posterior wall sign (12/28 hips vs 24/28 hips; p < 0.001). Conclusion. Posterior PT increased from supine to standing in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion. The features of acetabular retroversion were less evident on standing radiographs. The low PT angle in the supine position is a factor in the increased appearance of acetabular retroversion. Patients presenting with symptoms of hip impingement should be assessed by supine and standing pelvic radiographs to highlight signs of acetabular retroversion, and to assist with optimizing acetabular correction at the time of surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):786–791

Aims. The aim of this study was to investigate whether anterior pelvic plane-pelvic tilt (APP-PT) is associated with distinct hip pathomorphologies. We asked: is there a difference in APP-PT between young symptomatic patients being evaluated for joint preservation surgery and an asymptomatic control group? Does APP-PT vary among distinct acetabular and femoral pathomorphologies? And does APP-PT differ in symptomatic hips based on demographic factors?. Methods. This was an institutional review board-approved, single-centre, retrospective, case-control, comparative study, which included 388 symptomatic hips in 357 patients who presented to our tertiary centre for joint preservation between January 2011 and December 2015. Their mean age was 26 years (SD 2; 23 to 29) and 50% were female. They were allocated to 12 different morphological subgroups. The study group was compared with a control group of 20 asymptomatic hips in 20 patients. APP-PT was assessed in all patients based on supine anteroposterior pelvic radiographs using validated HipRecon software. Values in the two groups were compared using an independent-samples t-test. Multiple regression analysis was performed to examine the influences of diagnoses and demographic factors on APP-PT. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for APP-PT was defined as > 1 SD. Results. There were no significant differences in APP-PT between the control group and the overall group (1.1° (SD 3.0°; -4.9° to 5.9°) vs 1.8° (SD 3.4°; -6.9° to 13.2°); p = 0.323). Acetabular retroversion and overcoverage groups showed higher mean APP-PTs compared with the control group (p = 0.001 and p = 0.014) and were the only diagnoses with a significant influence on APP-PT in the stepwise multiple regression analysis. All differences were below the MCID. The age, sex, height, weight, and BMI showed no influence on APP-PT. Conclusion. APP-PT showed no radiologically significant variation across different pathomorphologies of the hip in patients being assessed for joint-preserving surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):3–10

We analysed the results of different strategies in the revision of primary uncemented acetabular components reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. The aim was to compare the risk of further acetabular revision after isolated liner exchange and complete component revision. The results of exchanging well-fixed components were also compared with those of exchanging loose acetabular components. The period studied was between September 1987 and April 2005. The following groups were compared: group 1, exchange of liner only in 318 hips; group 2, exchange of well-fixed components in 398; and group 3, exchange of loose components in 933. We found that the risk of a further cup revision was lower after revision of well-fixed components (relative risk from a Cox model (RR) = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.37% to 0.87%) and loose components (RR = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.39% to 0.80%), compared with exchange of the liner in isolation. The most frequent reason for a further acetabular revision was dislocation, accounting for 61 (28%) of the re-revisions. Other reasons for further revision included pain in 27 (12%), loosening in 24 (11%) and infection in 20 (9%). Re-revisions because of pain were less frequent when complete component (fixed or loose) revision was undertaken compared with isolated exchange of the liner (RR = 0.20 (95% confidence interval 0.06% to 0.65%) and RR = 0.10 (95% confidence interval 0.03% to 0.30%), respectively). The risk of further acetabular revision for infection, however, did not differ between the groups. In this study, exchange of the liner only had a higher risk of further cup revision than revision of the complete acetabular component. Our results suggest that the threshold for revising well-fixed components in the case of liner wear and osteolysis should be lowered

Aims. Radiological residual acetabular dysplasia (RAD) has been reported in up to 30% of children who had successful brace treatment of infant developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). Predicting those who will resolve and those who may need corrective surgery is important to optimize follow-up protocols. In this study we have aimed to identify the prevalence and predictors of RAD at two years and five years post-bracing. Methods. This was a single-centre, prospective longitudinal cohort study of infants with DDH managed using a published, standardized Pavlik harness protocol between January 2012 and December 2016. RAD was measured at two years’ mean follow-up using acetabular index-lateral edge (AI-L) and acetabular index-sourcil (AI-S), and at five years using AI-L, AI-S, centre-edge angle (CEA), and acetabular depth ratio (ADR). Each hip was classified based on published normative values for normal, borderline (1 to 2 standard deviations (SDs)), or dysplastic (> 2 SDs) based on sex, age, and laterality. Results. Of 202 infants who completed the protocol, 181 (90%) had two and five years’ follow-up radiographs. At two years, in 304 initially pathological hips, the prevalence of RAD (dysplastic) was 10% and RAD (borderline) was 30%. At five years, RAD (dysplastic) decreased to 1% to 3% and RAD (borderline) decreased to < 1% to 2%. On logistic regression, no variables were predictive of RAD at two years. Only AI-L at two years was predictive of RAD at five years (p < 0.001). If both hips were normal at two years’ follow-up (n = 96), all remained normal at five years. In those with bilateral borderline hips at two years (n = 21), only two were borderline at five years, none were dysplastic. In those with either borderline-dysplastic or bilateral dysplasia at two years (n = 26), three (12%) were dysplastic at five years. Conclusion. The majority of patients with RAD at two years post-brace treatment, spontaneously resolved by five years. Therefore, children with normal radiographs at two years post-brace treatment can be discharged. Targeted follow-up for those with abnormal AI-L at two years will identify the few who may benefit from surgical correction at five years’ follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):744–750

Aims. Mechanical impingement of the iliopsoas (IP) tendon accounts for 2% to 6% of persistent postoperative pain after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The most common initiator is anterior acetabular component protrusion, where the anterior margin is not covered by anterior acetabular wall. A CT scan can be used to identify and measure this overhang; however, no threshold exists for determining symptomatic anterior IP impingement due to overhang. A case-control study was conducted in which CT scan measurements were used to define a threshold that differentiates patients with IP impingement from asymptomatic patients after THA. Methods. We analyzed the CT scans of 622 patients (758 THAs) between May 2011 and May 2020. From this population, we identified 136 patients with symptoms suggestive of IP impingement. Among them, six were subsequently excluded: three because the diagnosis was refuted intraoperatively, and three because they had another obvious cause of impingement, leaving 130 hips (130 patients) in the study (impingement) group. They were matched to a control group of 138 asymptomatic hips (138 patients) after THA. The anterior acetabular component overhang was measured on an axial CT slice based on anatomical landmarks (orthogonal to the pelvic axis). Results. The impingement group had a median overhang of 8 mm (interquartile range (IQR) 5 to 11) versus 0 mm (IQR 0 to 4) for the control group (p < 0.001). Using receiver operating characteristic curves, an overhang threshold of 4 mm was best correlated with a diagnosis of impingement (sensitivity 79%, specificity 85%; positive predictive value 75%, negative predictive value 85%). Conclusion. Pain after THA related to IP impingement can be reasonably linked to acetabular overhang if it exceeds 4 mm on a CT scan. Below this threshold, it seems logical to look for another cause of IP irritation or another reason for the pain after THA before concluding that impingement is present. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(3 Supple A):97–103

Aims. The use of a porous metal shell supported by two augments with the ‘footing’ technique is one solution to manage Paprosky IIIB acetabular defects in revision total hip arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to assess the medium-term implant survival and radiological and clinical outcomes of this technique. Methods. We undertook a retrospective, two-centre series of 39 hips in 39 patients (15 male, 24 female) treated with the ‘footing’ technique for Paprosky IIIB acetabular defects between 2007 and 2020. The median age at the time of surgery was 64.4 years (interquartile range (IQR) 54.4 to 71.0). The median follow-up was 3.9 years (IQR 3.1 to 7.0). Results. The cumulative medium-term survival of the acetabular construct was 89%. Two hips (5.1%) required further revision due to shell loosening, one hip (2.6%) due to shell dislocation, and one hip (2.6%) due to infection. The median Harris Hip Score improved significantly from 47 points (IQR 41.5 to 54.9) preoperatively to 80 points (IQR 73.5 to 88.6) at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The reconstruction of Paprosky IIIB acetabular defects with porous tantalum shells and two augments using the ‘footing’ technique showed excellent medium-term results. It is a viable option for treating these challenging defects. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):54–58

Aims. To investigate the extent of bone development around the scaffold of custom triflange acetabular components (CTACs) over time. Methods. We performed a single-centre historical prospective cohort study, including all patients with revision THA using the aMace CTAC between January 2017 and March 2021. A total of 18 patients (18 CTACs) were included. Models of the hemipelvis and the scaffold component of the CTACs were created by segmentation of CT scans. The CT scans were performed immediately postoperatively and at least one year after surgery. The amount of bone in contact with the scaffold was analyzed at both times, and the difference was calculated. Results. The mean time between the implantation and the second CT scan was two years (1 to 5). The mean age of the patients during CTAC implantation was 75 years (60 to 92). The mean scaffold-bone contact area increased from 16% (SD 12.6) to 28% (SD 11.9). The mean scaffold-bone distance decreased from a mean of 6.5 mm (SD 2.0) to 5.5 mm (SD 1.6). None of the CTACs were revised or radiologically loose. Conclusion. There was a statistically significant increase of scaffold-bone contact area over time, but the total contact area of the scaffold in relation to the acetabular bone remained relatively low. As all implants remained well fixed, the question remains to what extend the scaffold contributes to the observed stability, in relation to the screws. A future design implication might be an elimination of the bulky scaffold component. This design modification would reduce production costs and may optimize the primary fit of the implant. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(4):359–364

The most widely used classification system for acetabular fractures was developed by Judet, Judet and Letournel over 50 years ago primarily to aid surgical planning. As population demographics and injury mechanisms have altered over time, the fracture patterns also appear to be changing. We conducted a retrospective review of the imaging of 100 patients with a mean age of 54.9 years (19 to 94) and a male to female ratio of 69:31 seen between 2010 and 2013 with acetabular fractures in order to determine whether the current spectrum of injury patterns can be reliably classified using the original system. Three consultant pelvic and acetabular surgeons and one senior fellow analysed anonymous imaging. Inter-observer agreement for the classification of fractures that fitted into defined categories was substantial, (κ = 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51 to 0.76) with improvement to near perfect on inclusion of CT imaging (κ = 0.80, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.91). However, a high proportion of injuries (46%) were felt to be unclassifiable by more than one surgeon; there was moderate agreement on which these were (κ = 0.42 95% CI 0.31 to 0.54). Further review of the unclassifiable fractures in this cohort of 100 patients showed that they tended to occur in an older population (mean age 59.1 years; 22 to 94 vs 47.2 years; 19 to 94; p = 0.003) and within this group, there was a recurring pattern of anterior column and quadrilateral plate involvement, with or without an incomplete posterior element injury. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1139–43

Aims

Complex displaced osteoporotic acetabular fractures in the elderly are associated with high levels of morbidity and mortality. Surgical options include either open reduction and internal fixation alone, or combined with total hip arthroplasty (THA). There remains a cohort of severely comorbid patients who are deemed unfit for extensive surgical reconstruction and are treated conservatively. We describe the results of a coned hemipelvis reconstruction and THA inserted via a posterior approach to the hip as the primary treatment for this severely high-risk cohort.

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical models of two frequently used techniques for reconstructing severe acetabular defects with pelvic discontinuity in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) – the Trabecular Metal Acetabular Revision System (TMARS) and custom triflange acetabular components (CTACs) – using virtual modelling. Methods. Pre- and postoperative CT scans from ten patients who underwent revision with the TMARS for a Paprosky IIIB acetabular defect with pelvic discontinuity were retrospectively collated. Computer models of a CTAC implant were designed from the preoperative CT scans of these patients. Computer models of the TMARS reconstruction were segmented from postoperative CT scans using a semi-automated method. The amount of bone removed, the implant-bone apposition that was achieved, and the restoration of the centre of rotation of the hip were compared between all the actual TMARS and the virtual CTAC implants. Results. The median amount of bone removed for TMARS reconstructions was significantly greater than for CTAC implants (9.07 cm. 3. (interquartile range (IQR) 5.86 to 21.42) vs 1.16 cm. 3. (IQR 0.42 to 3.53) (p = 0.004). There was no significant difference between the median overall implant-bone apposition between TMARS reconstructions and CTAC implants (54.8 cm. 2. (IQR 28.2 to 82.3) vs 56.6 cm. 2. (IQR 40.6 to 69.7) (p = 0.683). However, there was significantly more implant-bone apposition within the residual acetabulum (45.2 cm. 2. (IQR 28.2 to 72.4) vs 25.5 cm. 2. (IQR 12.8 to 44.1) (p = 0.001) and conversely significantly less apposition with the outer cortex of the pelvis for TMARS implants compared with CTAC reconstructions (0 cm. 2. (IQR 0 to 13.1) vs 23.2 cm. 2. (IQR 16.4 to 30.6) (p = 0.009). The mean centre of rotation of the hip of TMARS reconstructions differed by a mean of 11.1 mm (3 to 28) compared with CTAC implants. Conclusion. In using TMARS, more bone is removed, thus achieving more implant-bone apposition within the residual acetabular bone. In CTAC implants, the amount of bone removed is minimal, while the implant-bone apposition is more evenly distributed between the residual acetabulum and the outer cortex of the pelvis. The differences suggest that these implants used to treat pelvic discontinuity might achieve short- and long-term stability through different biomechanical mechanisms. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):74–81