Aims

After failed acetabular fractures, total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a challenging procedure and considered the gold standard treatment. The complexity of the procedure depends on the fracture pattern and the initial fracture management. This study’s primary aim was to evaluate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for patients who underwent delayed uncemented acetabular THA after acetabular fractures. The secondary aims were to assess the radiological outcome and the incidence of the associated complications in those patients.

Aims. Complex total hip arthroplasty (THA) with subtrochanteric shortening osteotomy is necessary in conditions other than developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) and septic arthritis sequelae with significant proximal femur migration. Our aim was to evaluate the hip centre restoration with THAs in these hips. Methods. In all, 27 THAs in 25 patients requiring THA with femoral shortening between 2012 and 2019 were assessed. Bilateral shortening was required in two patients. Subtrochanteric shortening was required in 14 out of 27 hips (51.9%) with aetiology other than DDH or septic arthritis. Vertical centre of rotation (VCOR), horizontal centre of rotation, offset, and functional outcome was calculated. The mean followup was 24.4 months (5 to 92 months). Results. The mean VCOR was 17.43 mm (9.5 to 27 mm) and horizontal centre of rotation (HCOR) was 24.79 mm (17.2 to 37.6 mm). Dislocation at three months following acetabulum reconstruction required femoral shortening for offset correction and hip centre restoration in one hip. Mean horizontal offset was 39.72 (32.7 to 48.2 mm) compared to 42.89 (26.7 to 50.6 mm) on the normal side. Mean Harris Hip Score (HHS) of 22.64 (14 to 35) improved to 79.43 (68 to 92). Mean pre-operative shortening was 3.95 cm (2 to 8 cm). Residual limb length discrepancy was 1.5 cm (0 to 2 cm). Sciatic neuropraxia in two patients recovered by six months, and femoral neuropraxia in one hip recovered by 12 months. Mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was 13.92 (9 to 19). Mean 12-item short form survey (SF-12) physical scores of 50.6 and mental of 60.12 were obtained. Conclusion. THA with subtrochanteric shortening is valuable in complex hips with high dislocation. The restoration of the hip centre of rotation and offset is important in these hips. Level of evidence IV. Femoral shortening useful in conditions other than DDH and septic sequelae. Restoration of hip centre combined with offset to be planned and ensured

Aims

The hip’s capsular ligaments passively restrain extreme range of movement (ROM) by wrapping around the native femoral head/neck. We determined the effect of hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty (DM-THA), conventional THA, and surgical approach on ligament function.

Purpose: Massive cavitary and segmental bone defects of the medial wall in revision arthroplasty are usually managed with large auto and/or allograft in association with a cemented or a cementless cup. To obtain a satisfactory hip center reconstruction with such a procedure can be sometimes challenging and the complications rate can be high. One other option is the use of a cup with a medial expansion (“protrusio cup”) to treat the medial bone defect.

Method: We carried out a retrospective study including 21 consecutive acetabular revisions arthroplasties using a cementless Converge Protrusio™ cup (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA). Clinical outcomes were assessed by Harris Hip Score (HHS), WOMAC index and SF-12. Hip centre was assessed on anteroposterior (AP) view and the reconstruction was considered as satisfying when its location was located from − 10 to + 10 mm proximally (y axis) and/or medially (x axis) in comparison with ideal theoretical hip center location. Cup migration and modification of abduction angle were considered as significant when there were respectively > 4mm and to > 4° in comparison with the immediate postoperative AP view.

Results: At the last follow up [radiological data: 71.6 months (24–128.3) and clinical data: 72.1 months (24–129.5)], two patients were died and there were no lost of follow up. The mean HHS was 79.4% (52–100), WOMAC 82% (46–100), SF-12 52 (23–71) and 44 (18–65). Bone defect were filled with cancellous bone chips allograft in 16 cases and bulk bone allograft was used in only two cases to manage a large segmental defect of the roof. Bone graft integration was completed in all cases. The mean abduction cup angle was 43.6° (32–60). A satisfying hip centre positioning was obtained in 19 cases on x axis and in 10 cases on y axis, in all the remaining cases, we noted an improved implant positioning. The complications were: recurrent dislocation in one case (successfully revised with a constrained liner), infection in two cases (1 treated conservatively and the other one revised in two times procedure) and Brooker’s type III and IV ectopic ossifications in three cases. A significant cup migration occurred in only one case at nine years but was not revised because of painless. No case required revision for aseptic loosening.

Conclusion: Protusio cups appear as a reliable procedure to manage bone loss in acetabular revision. The revision procedure is widely simplified by reducing the use of the massive allograft and by promoting a satisfying hip center reconstruction to allow an optimal biomechanical joint functioning. Moreover, the cementless fixation in contact with patient acetabular bone makes more easy bone integration.

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

Background: Revision total hip replacement in patients with a previous diagnosis of developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) can be a challenging and technically demanding procedure. Two of the major concerns are deficient acetabular bone stock and the position of the acetabular implant, particularly if the hip centre was not restored during the primary procedure. The purpose of this study was to determine if cup height, lateralization or abduction angle are correlated with functional outcome or survivorship in revision total hip replacement (THR) in patients with a previous diagnosis of DDH. Methods: A retrospective investigation of 51 sequential patients (63 hips) previously diagnosed with DDH who underwent revision THR at our center between 1984 and 2000 was performed. The mean duration of follow up was 119 months (range 36 to 238 months). Forty-one patients (52 hips) were available for functional outcome and survivorship analysis. The remaining ten patients (11 hips) were available only for survivorship analysis. Three independent variables identified apriori as possible correlates were cup height, lateralization and angle as measured on the AP radiographs. Functional outcome measurement consisted of the Harris Hip, SF36 and WOMAC questionnaires. Linear regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to determine if any of the variables correlated with functional outcome or survivorship. Results: Cup height was found to have a statistically significant (p< 0.05) correlation with Harris Hip, SF36, and WOMAC functional scores. High hip centers correlated with worse scores. In addition, patients with hip centers less than 3.5 cm above the radiographic tear drop had a statistically significant improvement in cup survivorship compared to those with higher hip centers. Conclusion: Restoration of hip center height to as close to the radiographic teardrop as possible improves functional outcome and cup survivorship