Aims. This single-centre observational study aimed to describe the results of extensive bone impaction grafting of the whole acetabular cavity in combination with an uncemented component in acetabular revisions performed in a standardized manner since 1993. Methods. Between 1993 and 2013, 370 patients with a median age of 72 years (interquartile range (IQR) 63 to 79 years) underwent acetabular revision surgery. Of these, 229 were more than ten years following surgery and 137 were more than 15 years. All revisions were performed with extensive use of morcellized allograft firmly impacted into the entire acetabular cavity, followed by insertion of an uncemented component with supplementary screw fixation. All types of reoperation were captured using review of radiographs and medical charts, combined with data from the local surgical register and the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Results. Among patients with possible follow-up of ten and 15 years, 152 and 72 patients remained alive without revision of the acetabular component. The number of deaths was 61 and 50, respectively. Of those who died, six patients in each group had a reoperation performed before death. The number of patients with a reoperation was 22 for those with ten-year follow-up and 21 for those with 15 years of follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier implant survival rate for aseptic loosening among all 370 patients in the cohort was 96.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 94.1 to 98.5) after ten years and 92.8% (95% CI 89.2 to 96.6) after 15 years. Conclusion. Extensive bone impaction grafting combined with uncemented revision components appears to be a reliable method with favourable long-term survival. This technique offers the advantage of bone stock restoration and disputes the long-standing perception that uncemented components require > 50% of host bone contact for successful implant survival. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(2):198–204

Trabecular metal (TM) augments are a relatively new option for reconstructing segmental bone loss during acetabular revision. We studied 34 failed hip replacements in 34 patients that were revised between October 2003 and March 2010 using a TM acetabular shell and one or two augments. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 69.3 years (46 to 86) and the mean follow-up was 64.5 months (27 to 107). In all, 18 patients had a minor column defect, 14 had a major column defect, and two were associated with pelvic discontinuity. The hip centre of rotation was restored in 27 patients (79.4%). The Oxford hip score increased from a mean of 15.4 points (6 to 25) before revision to a mean of 37.7 (29 to 47) at the final follow-up. There were three aseptic loosenings of the construct, two of them in the patients with pelvic discontinuity. One septic loosening also occurred in a patient who had previously had an infected hip replacement. The augments remained stable in two of the failed hips. Whenever there was a loose acetabular component in contact with a stable augment, progressive metal debris shedding was evident on the serial radiographs. Complications included another deep infection treated without revision surgery. Good clinical and radiological results can be expected for bone-deficient acetabula treated by a TM cup and augment, but for pelvic discontinuities this might not be a reliable option.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:166–72.

Aims. Dislocation remains a significant complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA), being the third leading indication for revision. We present a series of acetabular revision using a dual mobility cup (DMC) and compare this with our previous series using the posterior lip augmentation device (PLAD). Methods. A retrospective review of patients treated with either a DMC or PLAD for dislocation in patients with a Charnley THA was performed. They were identified using electronic patient records (EPR). EPR data and radiographs were evaluated to determine operating time, length of stay, and the incidence of complications and recurrent dislocation postoperatively. Results. A total of 28 patients underwent revision using a DMC for dislocation following Charnley THA between 2013 and 2017. The rate of recurrent dislocation and overall complications were compared with those of a previous series of 54 patients who underwent revision for dislocation using a PLAD, between 2007 and 2013. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean distribution of sex or age between the groups. The mean operating time was 71 mins (45 to 113) for DMCs and 43 mins (21 to 84) for PLADs (p = 0.001). There were no redislocations or revisions in the DMC group at a mean follow-up of 55 months (21 to 76), compared with our previous series of PLAD which had a redislocation rate of 16% (n = 9) and an overall revision rate of 25% (n = 14, p = 0.001) at a mean follow-up of 86 months (45 to 128). Conclusion. These results indicate that DMC outperforms PLAD as a treatment for dislocation in patients with a Charnley THA. This should therefore be the preferred form of treatment for these patients despite a slightly longer operating time. Work is currently ongoing to review outcomes of DMC over a longer follow-up period. PLAD should be used with caution in this patient group with preference given to acetabular revision to DMC. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(4):423–425

Fifty-five patients undergoing isolated acetabular revisions in fifty-seven hips were available for review. In thirty-three of fifty-seven hips there was no significant acetabular deficiency; of the remaining twenty-four hips twenty underwent allograft reconstruction and four autogenous bone grafting. Mean follow-up was four years with a range of three to seven years; there have been no femoral loosening, and three further surgical procedures for hip instability. All acetabular components at last review were soundly fixed with the exception of one patient who underwent excision arthroplasty at twelve months for deep infection. The purpose of this study was to review the functional outcome and the fate of the femoral stem and revised acetabular component following isolated ace-tabular revision. Findings of the current study demonstrate that isolated acetabular revision does not compromise the final functional nor radiographic outcome in acetabular revision in appropriately selected patients; the fate of the femoral component is not adversely influenced by this procedure. There is no need to remove the femoral component at the time of acetabular revision if the femoral component is well fixed and stable by pre- and intra-operative assessment. Prospectively entered data on fifty-seven hips (fifty-five patients) who have undergone isolated acetabular revision without femoral revision was available for review. All patients were assessed pre-operatively and post-operatively on an annual basis by means of physical examination, x-ray, SF-36 and WOMAC questionnaires. In thirty-three of fifty-seven hips there was no significant acetabular deficiency; of the remaining twenty-four hips, one had a segmental defect, thirteen had a cavitary defect and ten had a combined segmental and cavitary defect. Osteolysis existed in the proximal femur of two hips. Bone grafting in twenty-four hips consisted of morselized allograft in nine; combined structural and morselized allograft used in eleven and autogenous bone used in four acetabular defects. Autogenous bone grafting was done in two femoral osteolytic lesions. Mean follow-up was four years with a range of three to seven years. The mean duration of arthroplasty prior to revision was fourteen years (range four to twenty-three years). There were no nerve palsies, vascular injuries or intra-operative fractures in this patient group. All ace-tabular components at latest review were soundly fixed with the exception of one patient who underwent excision arthroplasty at twelve months for deep infection. Twenty-one of the twenty-four hips with bone grafting demonstrated positive radiographic signs of incorporation; the remaining threehips have a stable interface but no evidence of bone ingrowth. Three of the fifty-seven hips presented with hip dislocations after revision arthroplasty; two were managed by closed reduction; the third by open reduction and soft tissue repair

The need for supplementary screw fixation in acetabular revisions is still widely debated. We carried out 439 acetabular revisions over an eight-year period. In 171 hips with contained or small segmental defects, the Morscher press-fit cup was used. These revisions were followed prospectively. No screws were used for additional fixation. A total of 123 hips with a mean follow-up of 7.4 years (5 to 10.5) were available for clinical and radiological review. There was no further revision of a press-fit cup for aseptic loosening. Radiological assessment revealed osteolysis in three hips. Of the original 171 hips there was cranial and medial migration of up to 6 mm at two years in 44 (26%). No further migration was seen after the second post-operative year. Acetabular revision without screws is possible with excellent medium-term results in well selected patients

A common finding in acetabular revisions is loss of medial bone stock. Using a standard cementless hemispherical component, alternatives for reconstruction include medialisation of the cup, medial particulate allograft with rim fixation on host bone, or use of a “mega-cup”. A cementless shell that has 6 mm of lateral augmentation is useful in restoring the joint centre while at the same time achieving implant stability and increasing host bone contact without loss of additional bone. From 1991 to 2000, a total of 142 acetabular revisions were performed with the Arthropor TM DP+6 implant (Joint Medical Products/J& J/DePuy). These patients have been prospectively followed bi-annually with Harris Hip Scores and monitoring of complications and radiographic findings. Average follow-up is 5 years (range 2 to 11 years). Implant survivorship is 100%. There have been seven re-operations: one for infection (debrided), two for femoral revision and four head/liner changes for recurrent dislocations. Dislocation incidence is 7.8%. The average Total Harris Score at 5 years is 74.3, with an average Harris Pain Score of 34.9 (out of a maximum of 44). Radiographic analysis showed frequent zone 3 radiolucent zones. Initial migration of > 2 mm with subsequent stabilisation occurred in 18%. The joint centre was restored to within 5 mm of the contralateral hip in 85% of cases. We have found this type of implant to be efficacious in the more common acetabular revisions where the loss of bone stock is mainly medial/cavitary, with an intact posterior column and small medial segmental defects

We present an update of the clinical and radiological results of 62 consecutive acetabular revisions using impacted morsellised cancellous bone grafts and a cemented acetabular component in 58 patients, at a mean follow-up of 22.2 years (20 to 25). The Kaplan-Meier survivorship for the acetabular component with revision for any reason as the endpoint was 75% at 20 years (95% confidence interval (CI) 62 to 88) when 16 hips were at risk. Excluding two revisions for septic loosening at three and six years, the survivorship at 20 years was 79% (95% CI 67 to 93). With further exclusions of one revision of a well-fixed acetabular component after 12 years during a femoral revision and two after 17 years for wear of the acetabular component, the survivorship for aseptic loosening was 87% at 20 years (95% CI 76 to 97). At the final review 14 of the 16 surviving hips had radiographs available. There was one additional case of radiological loosening and four acetabular reconstructions showed progressive radiolucent lines in one or two zones. Acetabular revision using impacted large morsellised bone chips (0.5 cm to 1 cm in diameter) and a cemented acetabular component remains a reliable technique for reconstruction, even when assessed at more than 20 years after surgery

Introduction. The management of periprosthetic pelvic bone loss is a challenging problem in hip revision surgery. This study evaluates the minimum 10-year clinical and radiographic outcome of major column structural allografts combined with the Burch-Schneider antiprotrusio cage for acetabular reconstruction. Methods. From January 1992 to August 2005, 106 hips with periprosthetic osteolysis underwent acetabular revision using massive allografts and the Burch-Schneider antiprotrusio cage. Forty-five patients (49 hips) died for unrelated causes without further surgery. Fifty-nine hips in 59 patients underwent clinical and radiographic evaluation at an average follow-up of 15.1 years. There were 17 male and 42 female patients, with age ranging from 29 to 83 years (mean 59). Results. Ten hips required rerevision because of infection (3), aseptic loosening (6), and flange breakage (1). Moreover, 4 cages showed x-ray signs of instability with severe bone resorption. The survivorship of the Burch-Schneider cage at 21.9 years with removal for any reason or radiographic migration and aseptic or radiographic failure as the end points were 76.3 and 81.4, respectively. The average Harris hip score improved from 33.2 points preoperatively to 75.7 points at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Discussion. In hip revision surgery, severe deficiency of pelvic bone stock is a critical concern because of the difficulty in providing a stable and durable fixation of the prosthesis. Although antiprotrusio cages have a limited role in acetabular revision, the use in association with massive allografts in extended bone loss demonstrated highly successful long-term results, enabling bone stock restoration and cup stability

Porous-coated acetabular hemispherical components have proven successful in all but the most severe revision acetabular defects. A revision jumbo porous coated component has been defined as cup with minimum diameter of 66 mm in men and 62 mm in women. In published studies this size cup is used in 14–39% of acetabular revisions. The advantages of this technique are ease of use, most deficiencies can be treated without structural graft, host bone contact with the porous surface is maximised, and the hip center is generally normal. Jumbo cups are typically used in Paprosky type 2, 3A, and many 3B defects. Requirements for success include circumferential acetabular exposure, an intact posterior column, and much of the posterior wall. The cup should be stable with a press-fit between the ischium and anterior superior acetabulum with the addition of some superior lateral support. Additional support is provided with multiple dome or rim screws. Survivorship of the metal shell with revision for any reason has been reported to be 80%-96% at time frames from 15–20 years. The most common post-operative complication is dislocation

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

There is evidence that recommends the retention of a well-fixed cement mantle at the time of revision hip arthroplasty. The cement-cement interface has been proven to have greater shear strength than a new bone-cement interface after removing a well-fixed cement mantle. This study reviewed a series of acetabular revision procedures with a minimum 2-year follow-up where the original cement mantle was left intact. From 1988 to 2004, 60 consecutive cement-in-cement revisions of the acetabular component were performed at our institution. Outcome was based on functional assessment using the Oxford, Charnley, and Harris scoring systems as well as radiographic analysis using the DeLee and Charnley criteria. In total 60 procedures were performed in 60 patients (40 female and 20 male), whose mean age at surgery was 75 years (range 40 to 99 years). 80% were performed for recurrent dislocation, 13.3% during femoral component revision, 5% for acetabular component wear, and 1.7% for pain. No case was lost to follow-up. There was one re-revision for aseptic cup loosening at 7 years, with 1 further case of radiological loosening identified at the latest review. There were 6 further cases of dislocation 4 of which were treated with further in-cement revisions. All other cases showed well-fixed components on radiographic analysis and no evidence of failure at the most recent follow up. The cement-in-cement technique already has a good body of evidence based on revision of the femoral component and this study shows that the technique can be applied to acetabular revisions as well with good functional and radiological results in the short to medium term

Structural bulk autografts restore the severe bone loss at primary hip arthroplasty in dysplastic hips and have shown to have good long term outcomes. There are only a few reports of revision arthroplasty for these sockets that fail eventually. We report on a series of such primary hips which underwent cemented revision of the socket for aseptic loosening and their outcomes. A retrospective review was performed from our database to identify fifteen acetabular revisions after previous bulk autograft. The mean age at revision was 53.9 years (range 31–72.1). The mean duration between the primary and revision arthroplasty was 12.4 years (range 6.6 – 20.3). All procedures were done using trochanteric osteotomy and three hips also needed the femoral component revision. All fifteen hips needed re-bone grafting at the revision surgery to restore the new socket to the level of the true acetabulum. Of these ten hips had morsellised impaction allograft, and the remaining five also needing a structural bulk allograft. Two sockets underwent re-revision at mean 7.5 years for aseptic loosening. One patient had a dislocation that was reduced closed. At a mean follow up of 5.7 years, one socket showed superior migration, but was stable and did not need further intervention. Two other sockets also showed radiological evidence of loosening, and are being closely monitored. The medium term results of cemented acetabular revision in this younger age group are satisfactory, with repeat bone grafting being required to restore the true acetabular position. Though the primary arthroplasty with bulk bone graft recreates the acetabular bone stock, significant bone loss due to the mechanical loosening of the socket needs to be anticipated in revision surgery

Introduction. Reinforcement ring with allograft bone is commonly used for acetabular reconstruction of bone defects because it can achieve stable initial fixation of the prosthesis. It is not clear whether the allograft bone can function as a viable host bone and provide long-standing structural support. The purpose of this study was to assess to long-term survival of the reinforcement rings and allograft bone incorporation after acetabular revisions. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 39 hips (37 patients) who underwent reconstruction of the acetabulum with a Ganz reinforcement ring and allograft bone in revision total hip arthroplasty. There were 18 females and 19 males with a mean age of 55.9 years (35–74 years). The minimum postoperative follow-up period was 10 years (10∼17 years). We assessed the acetabular bone defect using the Paprosky's classification. We determined the rates of loosening of the acetabular reconstructions, time to aseptic loosening, integration of the allograft bone, resorption of the allograft bone, and survival rate. Aseptic loosening of the acetabular component was defined as a change in the cup migration of more than 5 mm or a change in the inclination angle of more than 5° or breakage of the acetabular component at the time of the follow-up. Graft integration was defined as trabecular remodelling crossing the graft-host interface. Resorption of the allograft bone was classified as minor (<1/3), moderate (1/3–1/2) or severe (>1/2). Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed for aseptic loosening of the acetabular component. The results. The acetabular bone defects were classified as follows: 8 type II hips (4 type IIB, 4 type IIC), and 31 type III hips (17 type IIIA, 14 type IIIB). Fourteen (35.9%) of 39 hips was defined as aseptic loosening of an acetabular component. Loosening was more frequent in type IIIB (57.1%) than in type IIIA hips (29.4%). Mean time to aseptic loosening of the acetabular reconstructions was 6.3 years in type IIIA and from 5 years in type IIIB defects, respectively. Allograft bone incorporation was satisfactory in 66.7% of hips. There was minor bone resorption in 14.3% and moderate bone resorption in 10.2%. In 9 hips (23.1%), severe resorption of the allograft bone was observed and early component loosening was observed in these cases. The survival rate of acetabular component at 10 years of follow-up was 63.6% (95% confidence interval, 49–77%) with aseptic loosening as endpoints. Conclusions. The long-term survival rate of acetabular revision using the reinforcement ring and allograft bone in the reconstruction of severe acetabular bone defects was unsatisfactorily low due to loosening of acetabular components. Because of unfavorable graft incorporation into a host bone, an alternative component and structural support may be employed in the reconstruction of severe acetabular bone defects

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

Fracture of contemporary femoral stems is a rare occurrence. Earlier THR stems failed due to design issues or post manufacturing heat treatments that weakened the core metal. Our group identified and analyzed 4 contemporary fractured femoral stems after revision surgery in which electrochemical welds contributed to the failure.

All four stems were proximally porous coated titanium alloy components. All failures occurred in the neck region post revision surgery in an acetabular cup exchange. All were men and obese. The fractures occurred at an average of 3.6 years post THR redo (range, 1.0–6.5 years) and 8.3 years post index surgery (range, 5.5–12.0 years). To demonstrate the effect of electrocautery on retained femoral stems following revision surgery, we applied intermittent electrosurgical currents at three intensities (30, 60, 90 watts) to the polished neck surface of a titanium alloy stem under dry conditions.

At all power settings, visible discoloration and damage to the polished neck surface was observed. The localized patterns and altered metal surface features exhibited were like the electrosurgically-induced damage priorly reported.

The neck regions of all components studied displayed extensive mechanical and/or electrocautery damage in the area of fracture initiation. The use of mechanical instruments and electrocautery was documented to remove tissues in all 4 cases.

The combination of mechanical and electrocautery damage to the femoral neck and stem served as an initiation point and stress riser for subsequent fractures. The electrocautery and mechanical damage across the fracture site observed occurred iatrogenically during revision surgery. The notch effect, particularly in titanium alloys, due to mechanical and/or electrocautery damage, further reduced the fatigue strength at the fractured femoral necks. While electrocautery and mechanical dissection is often required during revision THA, these failures highlight the need for caution during this step of the procedure in cases where the femoral stem is retained.

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

Aims: This study evaluates the clinical results of acetabular revision with Lima SPH Anatomic cup in 63 cases, performed at our Institute since 1999. Methods: We have evaluated 63 acetabular revision with SPH Anatomic cup in retrospective way. All the cases were produced by aseptic loosening and bone loss was in stage I or II according to GIR classiþcation (simple acetabular enlargement or one wall defect). The evaluation occurred after 1 to 3.5 years. Results: Preoperative mean Harris Hip Score was 54 and at time of evaluation it was 91. No sign of loosening was found. The mean cranial elevation of centre of rotation was preoperatively 13 mm and postoperatively 9 mm. Conclusions: The good results obtained with this kind of cup can be explained through its peculiarities: the emispheric design with the cranial ßange permits a press-þt þxation in presence of sufþcient bone stock and an exact-þt þxation with screws when the wall defect is important. In our opinion the 18û automatic antiversion of the implant is helpful in cases in which there is a great posterior wall defect and a traditional cup could determinate a wrong, retroverted orientation of the acetabulum. As we can see, a cranial elevation of the centre of rotation is well tolerated because less than 1 cm, and many Authors agree with us upon this consideration. In conclusion SPH Anatomic cup is a good solution for acetabular revision with minimal to moderate bone loss

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

Introduction. In the case of bipolar hemiarthroplasty, surgeons are often faced with only migration of outer head and severe osteolysis in acetabulum without loosening of femoral component. There has been much debate regarding the merits of removing or retaining stable femoral components in such cases. The purpose of this study was to determine whether revision of an isolated acetabular component without the removal of a well-fixed femoral component [Fig. 1] could be successfully performed. Materials and methods. Thirty-four hips of 33 patients who were followed up for a minimum of 1 year were examined. There were 29 women and 4 men. The average time from primary operation to revision surgery was 12.5 years (range, 0.0 to 17.9 years), and the average follow-up time after revision was 5 years (range, 1.1 to 15.2 years). The average age of the patients at the time of the index revision was sixty-four years (range, thirty-two to seventy-eight years). The reason for acetabular revision was migration of outer head in twenty-eight hips, disassembly of bipolar cup in four hips and recurrent dislocation in two hips. Of the thirty-four femoral components, twenty-seven were cementless and seven were cemented. In nine hips, we performed bone grafting to osteolysis of the proximal femur around the stem. Acetabular components were revised to an acetabular reinforcement ring with a cemented cup in 26 hips, to cementless acetabular components in 8 hips, and to cemented cup in 1 hip. Results. The average Japan Orthopaedic Association hip score improved from 50.7 to 86.1 points after revision surgery. One femoral component (3%) was revised because of periprosthetic fracture, three years after the index acetabular revision and eighteen years after the initial bipolar hemiarthroplasty. Radiographic evaluation of the thirty-three femoral components that were not revised demonstrated no evidence of loosening or subsidence. There were no dislocation or deep infection. Thirty-three (97%) of the acetabular components were judged to be stable at the final follow-up. A nonprogressive radiolucent line of less than 2 mm was observed in one case. Conclusion. We recommend that isolated acetabular revision be considered in cases of failed bipolar hemiarthroplasty with a well-fixed femoral component

This study presents the clinical and radiological results of 62 consecutive acetabular revisions in 58 patients, at a mean of 16.5 years follow-up (15 to 20). The Kaplan-Meier survivorship for the cup with end-point revisions for any reason, was 79% at 15 years (95% confidence interval (CI); 67 to 91). Excluding two revisions for septic loosening at three and six years, and one revision of a well-fixed cup after 12 years in the course of a femoral revision, the survivorship was 84% at 15 years (95% CI; 73 to 95). At review there were no additional cases of loosening, although seven acetabular reconstructions showed radiolucent lines in one or two zones. Acetabular revision using impacted large morsellised bone chips (0.7 cm to 1.0 cm) and a cemented cup, is a reliable technique of reconstruction, when assessed at more than 15 years

Aims: To study clinical and radiological outcome of acetabular revision in THR with porous, hydroxyapatite-coated cups. Methods: 50 acetabular revisions (48 patients) operated by single surgeon were reviewed. Uncemented, hydroxyapatite coated cup (Mallory/Head, Biomet) was used. Preoperative acetabular bone loss graded by Paprosky’s classification (grade 1: 12, grade 2a: 26, grade 2b: 8, 2c: 2, grade 3a: 2). Acetabulum alone was revised in 22 hips. Duration of follow up: 35 months (24–52). Clinical outcome assessment was done using Merle d’Aubigne and Postel score & QALY index questionnaire. Radiological assessment by standard X-rays taken at the latest review date. No case was lost to follow up. Results: Merle d’Aubigne & Postel scores improved from 2.1, 2.7 and 2.4 (pre-operative) to 5.0, 4.3 and 4.5 (post-operative) respectively with significant improvement in QALYs scores. Radiological assessment showed no mechanical failures. Good trabecular formation between HA-coating and the bone seen in the majority. Non-progressive radiolucency < 1mm in 6 cases, superior migration > 2 mm in 3 cups where bone graft was used, and < 2mm migration in 9 cups was noted. 2 cases had rerevision for recurrent dislocation. Conclusions: Hydroxyapatite coating on the implant may enhance bony ongrowth at bone-implant interface giving additional stability. Good midterm results obtained in our study using hydroxyapatite-coated components favour the use of this type of cup in acetabular revisions for moderate bone loss, but a long-term follow up is essential

To evaluate large/Jumbo acetabular cups in revision surgery, 52 cups in 48 patients were reviewed; mean age was 71. 6 years and mean follow up 6 years. Average Harris Hip Score was 85. Excellent bony incorporation was seen in all but the failures, of which there were three, 1 due to infection and 2 due to aseptic loosening. Major complications included 2 intraoperative fractures. Intermediate results of acetabular revisions, using large cups, without bone grafting are encouraging

Aim: to evaluate the use of large acetabular cup in revision surgery without structural bone graft. Materials/methods: Patients who had revision hip surgery at Greenwich Hospital between 1991 and 1994 were reviewed. All patients had complete clinical and radiological follow up. Large cup was the press fit Mathys Isoelastic cup. No patient had any structural bone grafting. Failure was defined as need for surgery and/or poor clinical outcome. Objective clinical assessment was done using the Harris Hip score. Radiological assessment was carried out using RC Johnston’s criteria for uncemented cups. Results: 52 revised cups in 48 patients were reviewed. Mean age was 71.6yrs, 21 males and 27 females. Mean follow up was 6 years (4 to 8 years). Average cup size was 64 mm (62 to 66). Diagnosis at index operation was 10 Rheumatoid, and 42 osteoarthrosis. Average Harris Hip Score was 85 (excellent 35, good 11, fair 3, poor 3). Radiological assessment showed excellent bony incorporation in all but the failures. There were 3 failures, 1 due to infection (revision was for infected primary THR), and 2 due to aseptic loosening in rheumatoid patients (both had significant cup malposition at revision). The major complications included 2 intraoperative fractures. Conclusion: Intermediate term results of acetabular revisions, using large cups, without structural bone grafting, in our hands, are encouraging. Cup position at revision appears crucial for long-term survival

The most challenging aspect of acetabular revision is the management of bone loss compromising implant fixation and stability. Several options, including both nonbiologic and biologic fixation, are available for acetabular revision. Biologic fixation is considered the best solution for revision surgery because it aims to restore the detoriated bone stock by using structural or cancellous allografts and a cemented polyethylene cup with impaction grafting with or without an antiprotrusio cage. With this technique, reliable and durable fixation of cemented acetabular components depend on the incorporation of allografts. Impaction grafting with use of morselized bone is a biological fixation alternative as defined by Sloof in 1984. He reported 94% survival in 11 years. Best results of this technique are obtained in contained or cavitary defects because the skeleton, while weakened, is basically intact. In these defects the anterior and posterior columns and the peripheral supporting bone for the acetabular component are intact. However, uncontained, or segmental, defects are more of a challenge. If the patient has a large segmental defect and there is no possibility of placing the implant against host bone or of restoring nearly normal anatomy, then the use of a structural bone graft may be indicated. In our revision arthroplasty series, despite the success of impaction grafting on the femoral side and on cavitary defects of the acetabulum, we had early loosening in segmentary defects with mesh or structural allograft reconstruction of the acetabular wall and impaction. Retrospectively, we have compared the survival of acetabular cup revisions with impaction grafting technique with or without reconstruction cages in 40 hips of 39 patients. There were 15 hips without cage support and 25 hips with cage reconstruction. Patient demographics and preoperative hip scores were comparable in each group. After 4 years of follow-up we have evaluated 26.3% aseptic loosening in impaction grafting alone, and 8.3% loosening in impaction with cage reconstruction. We have concluded that the metal cage allows for a better stability, protects the cancellous graft micromotion and eventually leading to a better incorporation in segmentary defects. Impaction of the cancellous bone cubes without a cage support in segmentary acetabular defects may prone to fail because of the micromotion between the cement and the graft which is not contained in stable walls

Introduction. The objective of this study was to compare the performance of the Explant Acetabular Cup Removal System (Zimmer), which has been the favored system for many surgeons during hip revision surgery, and the new EZout Powered Acetabular Revision System (Stryker). Methods. 54mm Stryker Trident® acetabular shells were inserted into the foam acetabula of 24 composite hemi-pelvises (Sawbones). The hemi-pelvises were mounted on a supporting apparatus enclosing three load cells. Strain gauges were placed on the hemipelvis, on the posterior and the anterior wall, and on the internal ischium in proximity to the acetabular fossa. A thermocouple was fixed onto the polar region of the acetabular component. One experienced orthopaedic surgeon and one resident performed mock revision surgery 6 times each per system. Results. Statistical analysis was conducted using Tukey's range test (HSD). The maximum force transferred to the implant was more than 4X lower with the EZout System regardless the surgeon experience (p=1.0E-08). Overall, recorded strains were lower for the EZout System with the higher decrease in strain (5X) observed at the posterior wall region(p=2E-08). The temperature at the interface was higher for the EZout System but never more than 37°C. Total removal time was on average reduced by a third with the EZout System (p=0.01). The calculated torque was lower for the EZout System. The amount of foam left on the cup after removal, which mimics the compromised bone, was 2.5X higher on average for the Explant System with most of the foam concentrated in the polar region. Lastly, it was observed that the polar region of each implant was reached by rotating the EZout System handpiece within a very narrow cylinder of space centered along the axis of the acetabular component compared to the Explant System, which required movement of the pivoting osteotomes within a large cone-shaped operating envelope. Discussion. Quantitatively, the EZout System required lower force, producing lower strains in the surrounding composite bone. Higher impact forces and associated increased strains may increase fracture risk. Qualitatively, the Explant System required a greater cone of movement than the EZout System requiring more space for the surgeon to leverage the handle of the tool. In addition, both surgeon and resident felt substantially greater exhaustion after using the Explant System vs. the EZout System. The resident compensated for the increased workload of the Explant with time, the experienced surgeon with force. The learning curve for both experienced surgeon and resident was also much shorter with the EZout System as shown by the close force values between the experienced surgeon and resident. Conclusion. Based on the results of this in vitro model, the EZout Powered Acetabular Removal System may be a reasonable alternative to manual removal techniques

Failure of total hip arthroplasty with acetabular deficiency occurred in 55 patients (60 hips) and was treated with acetabular revision using morsellised allograft and a cemented metal-backed component. A total of 50 patients (55 hips) were available for clinical and radiological evaluation at a mean follow-up of 5.8 years (3 to 9.5). No hip required further revision of the acetabular component because of aseptic loosening. All the hips except one had complete incorporation of the allograft demonstrated on the radiographs. A complete radiolucent line of > 1 mm was noted in two hips post-operatively. A good to excellent result occurred in 50 hips (91%). With radiological evidence of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component as the end-point, the survivorship at a mean of 5.8 years after surgery was 96.4%. The use of impacted allograft chips in combination with a cemented metal-backed acetabular component and screw fixation can achieve good medium-term results in patients with acetabular bone deficiency

Aim of the study: To assess the results of the uncemented oblong shaped Bofor cup in acetabular revision. Methods & materials: A prospective study from January 2001 to July 2006.15 cases of acetabular revision in 14 patients is studied. Paprosky classification for the acetabular defects is used. Final outcome assessed clinically and radiologically. Both Harris hip and Oxford hip functional scoring is used to assess the patients. None of the cases are lost in follow up. Results: The average follow-up was 36 months (range 8–52 months). All the cases were of aseptic loosening. 1case of type 2a, 6 cases of type 2b, 5 cases of type 2c, 3cases of type 3 defect and 4 cases with medial wall defect were noted. Stem was revised in 8 cases. In 4 cases auto graft from iliac crest was used. allograft was not used in any cases. In 12 cases 15 degree hooded insert was used. Average HHS improved from 30 points (range 20–38) to 84 points (range 70–90). Average OHS improved from 24 points (range 18–40) to 82 points (range 74–92). There were no cases of dislocation& infection.1 patient had sciatic nerve neuropraxia.1 case of severe Ankylosing spondylitis failed which was revised. Conclusion: Assemytical shape and design of the Boforcup makes it an useful cup for segmental and cavitatory acetabular defects. Pre operative classification of acetabular defects is inconsistent and unreliable. Allograft usage is not essential for these defects

Introduction: This study is a prospective series using a porous-coated cobalt-chromium alloy cup augmented with screw fixation for acetabular revisions. Methods: Between August 1997 and December 2001, eighty-five consecutive cementless acetabular revisions (81 patients) were performed. The mean age at operation was 64 years. Using the AAOS classification of acetabular defects there was one type I defect, 25 type two defects and 59 type III defects. Eighty-three cases were available for review (98%) with an average follow up of 6 years 6 months (range 3 months – 110 months). Clinical outcome was measured using the Charnley Hip Score and radiological assessment by plain radiographic measurement. Results: The Charnley Hip Score had improved from a pre-operative average of 7.52 (range 4–11) to the latest score of 14.84 (range 8 – 18). Significant cup migration occurred in only one case, which did not require revision. Sixteen cases demonstrated non-progressive radiolucent lines in one or two Delee and Charnley zones but none extended to all three zones. There were no cases of significant osteolysis. There were five dislocations none requiring re-operation; one revision was carried out for deep infection and one liner exchange at time of stem revision for subsidence. The results of Kaplan-Meier survival analysis using revision for all causes as the endpoint was 98.8% (95% confidence limits 0.964 to 1) at seventy-three months. Discussion: This press fit porous-coated cobalt-chromium alloy cup augmented with screw fixation for acetabular revision surgery produced excellent midterm results. Changes in cup design and material should only be undertaken with consideration of such results

There is evidence that recommends the retention of a well-fixed cement mantle at the time of revision hip arthroplasty. The cement-cement interface has been proven to have a greater shear strength than a new bone-cement interface after removing the old cement mantle. This study reviewed a series of acetabular revision procedures with a minimum 2 year follow-up where the original cement mantle was left intact. From 1988 to 2004, 61 consecutive cement-in-cement revisions of the acetabular component were performed at our institution. Outcome was based on functional assessment using the Oxford, Charnley, and Harris scoring systems as well as radiographic analysis using the DeLee and Charnley criteria. In total 61 procedures were performed in 59 patients (40 female and 19 male), whose mean age at surgery was 75 years (range 40 to 99 years). 47 hips (77%) were performed for recurrent dislocation, 12 for polyethylene wear associated with other reasons for revision (aseptic stem loosening in 8, stem fracture in 2, femoral periprosthetic fracture in 1, subluxation in 1), 1 for unexplained pain, and 1 for disarticulation (intraprosthetic dislocation) of a constrained liner. No case was lost to follow-up. There was a significant improvement in the functional scores from the pre-operative status with the patients maintaining a low level of pain. There was one re-revision for aseptic cup loosening at 7 years, with 1 further case of radiological loosening identified at the latest review. There were 6 further cases of dislocation 4 of which were treated with further in-cement revisions. All other cases showed well-fixed components on radiographic analysis and no evidence of failure at the most recent follow up. The cement-in-cement revision technique can be used in selected cases of acetabular revision surgery, providing satisfactory functional outcomes backed up by good radiographic results. Blood loss and surgical time are also significantly decreased

Purpose: There is evidence that recommends the retention of a well-fixed cement mantle at the time of revision hip arthroplasty. The cement-cement interface has been proven to have a greater shear strength than a new bone-cement interface after removing the old cement mantle. Method: This study reviewed a series of acetabular revision procedures with a minimum 2-year follow-up where the original cement mantle was left intact. From 1988 to 2004, 63 consecutive cement-in-cement revisions of the acetabular component were performed at our institution. Outcome was based on functional assessment using the Oxford, Charnley, and Harris scoring systems as well as radiographic analysis using the DeLee and Charnley criteria. Results: In total 63 procedures were performed in 61 patients (40 female and 21 male), whose mean age at surgery was 74 years (range 40 to 99 years). 47 hips (75%) were performed for recurrent dislocation, 13 for aseptic loosening, 1 for pain, 1 for excessive shortening, and 1 for disarticulation of a constrained liner. No case was lost to follow-up. There was a significant improvement in the functional scores from the pre-operative status with the patients maintaining a low level of pain. There was one re-revision for aseptic cup loosening at 7 years, with 1 further case of radiological loosening identified at the latest review. There were 6 further cases of dislocation 5 of which were treated with further in-cement revisions. All other cases showed well-fixed components on radiographic analysis and no evidence of failure at the most recent follow up. Conclusion: The cement-in-cement revision technique can be used in selected cases of acetabular revision surgery, providing satisfactory functional outcomes backed up by good radiographic results. Blood loss and surgical time are also significantly decreased

We wanted to evaluate the clinical and radiological results of acetabular revision using the acetabular reinforcement ring and allograft impaction in patients with severe acetabular bony defect. 41 hips revision arthroplasty using reinforcement ring were performed between April 1997 and October 2005 and were followed up for more than two years. The cause of primary arthroplasty was AVN in 18 cases, secondary osteoarthritis (OA) in 17 cases, fracture in cases and primary OA in 1 case. The cause of revision arthroplasty was acetabular cup loosening in 20 cases, massive osteolysis in 14 cases, infection in 4 cases, liner dissociation in 2 cases, and recurrent dislocation in 1 case. The average period between primary and revision arthroplasty was 11.4 years (range 0.6 to 29.1 years). Acetabular defects were classified based on the AAOS classification and Paprosky classification system. All were treated with autografts or allografts. Muller ring was used in 18 cases, Burch-Schneider ring was used in 14 cases, and Ganz ring in 9 cases. Clinical evaluations were performed according to the Harris hip score (HHS), and the radiographic results were evaluated by progression of acetabular component loosening, union of bone grafts, periacetabular osteolysis, and migration of the hip center. The mean preoperative Harris hip score of 64.9 was improved to 91.8 points at the latest follow-up. There were 39 cases of type 3 defect, 2 cases of type 4 defect according to the AAOS classification and 8 cases of type 2B defect, 3 cases of type 2C defect, 28 cases of type 3A defect, and 2 cases of type 3B defect according to Paprosky classification. Radiographically, the bone grafts were well united except one case. The mean preoperative hip center of rotation which was vertically 32.3mm, horizontally 33.2 mm migrated to vertically 26 mm, horizontally 33.2 mm postoperatively and it was statistically significant. The mean preoperative abductor lever arm of 41.7 mm changed to 45 mm postoperatively which was statistically insignificant. However the mean preoperatiave body lever arm of 89.4 mm changed to 96.9 mm postoperatively which was statistically significant. Postoperative complications were cup loosening in 1 case, dislocation in 2 cases, and recurrence of deep infection in 1 case. Clinically and radiographically, acetabular reconstruction using reinforcement ring showed very promising short term result. We conclude that reinforcement ring can provide stable support for grafted bone in severe bone defect. But meticulous surgical technique to get initial firm stability of ring and optimal indication in mandactory for the successful result

In acetabular revision press-fit cups usually are used in smaller defects and contact to the host bone should be more than 50 %. Due to the thin wall thickness and the surface design the cementless press-fit cup Allofit S has a specific characteristic during implantation. Therefore this cup was used for revision with greater acetabular defects and analysed in a prospective study. The press-fit in these cases was 4 mm and additional 2 or 3 screws into the Os ilium were used. 64 cups were were followed prospectively for 38.3 months with a minimum of 24 months and examined clinically (Harris-Hip-Score) and radiographically for migration (Method of Nunn et al.) and loosening (Method of Delee and Charnley). Corresponding to Nunn et al. and Blum et al., cup migration was defined to be a change of position greater than 3 mm or referring to Cordero-Ampuero et al. and Dickob et al. a change of inclination greater than 5 degrees. There were 25 revisions of the cup and 39 complete exchanges of the prosthesis due to 54 aseptic and 10 septic loosenings (two-step revision with spacer and cementless reimplantation). There were acetabular defects of type Paprosky 2A in 12 cases, of type 2B in 15 cases, type 2C in 19 cases, type 3A in 16 cases and type 3 B in 2 cases. The average age of the patients was 70.9 ± 8.9 years. The Harris-Hip-Score increased from 45.4 ± 14.9 points preoperatively to 81.8 ± 17.5 points one year and 82.3 ± 17.1 points two years postoperative. There was no loosing or significant migration of the cups. The Allofit S press-fit cup shows good result in cup revisions with greater acetabular defects when using a press-fit of 4 mm and additional 2 or 3 screws. In these cases it seems to be a good and cheeper alternative to specific implants like trabecular metal cups

It is still unclear whether it is best, when revision surgery is required for replacement of an acetabular component, to treat femoral focal osteolysis with bone-grafting or instead to leave it untreated because the defect is too small and uncontained; the concern is to prevent bone graft from escaping into the hip joint. We hypothesized that progression of osteolysis can halted if the cause of particulate generation is removed and the femoral component is well osseointegrated. We prospectively followed 21 patients (24 hips) who underwent acetabular revision and curetting of proximal femoral osteolysis. These patients were followed for the minimum 3 years (mean, 4.3 years; range, 3–7.4 years). At the time of the latest follow-up examination, all hips were judged to be stable and to have well-fixed acetabular cups and femoral stems. No hips had significant progression of the osteolytic defect through the follow-up period and none demonstrated any new osteolytic lesion. Provided that a femoral component is bone ingrown with osseointegration sufficient to provide long-term stability, that the osteolytic defect is in the proximal aspect of the femur, and that the defect is uncontained, simple curettage is an effective alternative to additional bone-grafting

Aims: To reconstruct acetabular bone stock loss in revision hip surgery, from 1979 on we have used a biologic reconstruction method with tightly impacted cancellous allografts in combination with a cemented polyethylene cup. Methods: This studies presents the clinical and radiological results of 62 consecutive acetabular revisions in 58 patients at a mean of 16.5 years (15–20 years) followup. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship for the cup with end-point revisions for any reason was 79% at fifteen years followup (95% C.I.: 67–91%). Results: Excluding two revisions for septic loosening at 3 and 6 years, the survivorship with end point aseptic loosening was 84% at fifteen years years (95% C.I.: 73–95%). At review there were no additional radiological loosenings, although 7 acetabular reconstructions showed radiolucent lines in one or two zones. Conslusions: This acetabular bone impaction technique using large morselized bone chips (range 0.7–1.0 cm) and a cemented cup is a reliable reconstruction technique, even after a 15–20 years followup

Acetabular cages are necessary when an uncemented or cemented cup cannot be stabilised at the correct anatomic level. Impaction grafting with mesh for containment of bone graft is an alternative for some cases in centers that specialise in this technique.

At our center we use three types of cage constructs –

(A)

Conventional cage ± structural or morselised bone grafting. This construct is used where there is no significant bleeding host bone. This construct is susceptible to cage fatigue and fracture, This reconstruction is used in young patients where restoration of bone stock is important.

In our center the cup-cage reconstruction is our most common technique where a cage is used, especially if there is a pelvic discontinuity.

Acetabular bone loss and presence of pelvic discontinuity were assessed according to the Gross classification. Sixty-seven cup-cage procedures with an average follow-up of 74 months (range, 24–135 months; SD, 34.3) months were identified; 26 of 67 (39%) were Gross Type IV and 41 of 67 (61%) were Gross Type V (pelvic discontinuity). Failure was defined as revision surgery for any cause, including infection.

The 5-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate with revision for any cause representing failure was 93% (95% confidence interval, 83.1–97.4), and the 10-year survival rate was 85% (95% CI, 67.2–93.8). The Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score improved significantly from a mean of 6 pre-operatively to 13 post-operatively (p < 0.001). Four cup-cage constructs had non-progressive radiological migration of the ischial flange and they remain stable.

Pelvic discontinuity with associated bone loss is a complex challenge in acetabular revision surgery. Reconstruction using ilio-ischial cages combined with trabecular metal acetabular components and morsellised bone (the component-cage technique) is a relatively new method of treatment. We reviewed a consecutive series of 26 cases of acetabular revision reconstructions in 24 patients with pelvic discontinuity who had been treated by the component-cage technique. The mean follow-up was 44.6 months (24 to 68). Failure was defined as migration of a component of > 5 mm. In 23 hips (88.5%) there was no clinical or radiological evidence of loosening at the last follow-up. The mean Harris hip score improved significantly from 46.6 points (29.5 to 68.5) to 76.6 points (55.5 to 92.0) at two years (p < 0.001). In three hips (11.5%) the construct had migrated at one year after operation. The complications included two dislocations, one infection and one partial palsy of the peroneal nerve. Our findings indicate that treatment of pelvic discontinuity using the component-cage construct is a reliable option

Acetabular cages are necessary when an uncemented or cemented cup cannot be stabilised at the correct anatomic level. Impaction grafting with mesh for containment of bone graft is an alternative for some cases in centers that specialise in this technique.

At our center we use three types of cage constructs:

(A)

Conventional cage ± structural or morselised bone grafting. This construct is used where there is no significant bleeding host bone. This construct is susceptible to cage fatigue and fracture. This reconstruction is used in young patients where restoration of bone stock is important.

In our center the cup cage reconstruction is our most common technique where a cage is used, especially if there is a pelvic discontinuity.

Acetabular cages are necessary when an uncemented or cemented cup cannot be stabilised at the correct anatomic level. Impaction grafting with mesh for containment of bone graft is an alternative for some cases in centers that specialise in this technique.

At our center we use three types of cage constructs –

Conventional cage ± structural or morselised bone grafting. This construct is used where there is no significant bleeding host bone. This construct is susceptible to cage fatigue and fracture. This reconstruction is used in young patients where restoration of bone stock is important.

In our center the cup cage reconstruction is our most common technique where a cage is used, especially if there is a pelvic discontinuity.

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

Total hip revision surgery in cases with previous multiple reconstructive procedures is a challenging treatment due to difficulties in treatment huge bone defects with standard revision prosthetic combinations. A new specially made production system in Electron-Beam Melting (EBM) technology based on a precise analysis of patients' preoperative CT scans has been developed.

Aims. It may not be possible to undertake revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the presence of massive loss of acetabular bone stock using standard cementless hemispherical acetabular components and metal augments, as satisfactory stability cannot always be achieved. We aimed to study the outcome using a reconstruction cage and a porous metal augment in these patients. Patients and Methods. A total of 22 acetabular revisions in 19 patients were performed using a combination of a reconstruction cage and porous metal augments. The augments were used in place of structural allografts. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 70 years (27 to 85) and the mean follow-up was 39 months (27 to 58). The mean number of previous THAs was 1.9 (1 to 3). All patients had segmental defects involving more than 50% of the acetabulum and seven hips had an associated pelvic discontinuity. . Results. Three failures were observed in two hips, both of which had undergone a previous resection of a tumour affecting the acetabulum. Other complications included a late arterial injury, a sciatic nerve palsy, a dislocation treated with a femoral revision, a deep infection treated with irrigation and debridement and a fracture of the greater trochanter treated conservatively. The mean Oxford Hip Score significantly increased from 13.9 (2 to 23) to 28.7 (13 to 38) (p < 0.00001). The mean vertical distance between the centre of rotation of the hip and its normal location decreased from 30 mm to 10 mm. Conclusions. Acceptable early survivorship can be achieved using this novel technique, but it may be unsuitable for use in patients who have previously undergone the resection of a tumour involving the acetabulum. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:607–13

Aim: The purpose of this study was to assess the results with use of an oval cementless acetabular component for revision total hip arthroplasty. Methods: 30 hips had an acetabular revision with an cementless oval acetabular component. No patient was lost to follow-up, but one died during the study period. All defects were classiþed during surgery according the AAOS classiþcation. All patients were evaluated radiographically and clinically and were followed for an average of thirty-six months (range, twenty four to fourty eight months). In 21 of the 30 hips no additional bone grafting was necessary. Results: There were 17 segmental defects (type 1), 12 combined defects (type III) and one case of pelvic discontinuity (type IV). At the time of follow-up, 27 (93.1%) of 29 cups were stable. One of the loosening affected the patient with pelvic discontinuity, the other a patient with a combined segmental defect including the medial wall. The average Harris Hip Score improved from 39 points (range: 15–73 points) preoperatively to 89 points (range 68–96 points) postoperatively. Complications included three dislocations without recurrency. The radiological follow-up examinations revealed good osteointegration of 27 implants. All postoperatively remaining defects were completly þlled in by bone at the follow up. Conclusion: The asymmetrical shape of the BOFOR enhanced the primary stabilty on the lateral columns with three point anchorage. We recommend this device when a patient has an oblong-shaped acetabular defect and the surgeon wants to correct an elevated hip center. However, the medial wall of the acetabulum (Kohlerñs line) should be intact

We present the results of 62 consecutive acetabular revisions using impaction bone grafting and a cemented polyethylene acetabular component in 58 patients (13 men and 45 women) after a mean follow-up of 27 years (25 to 30). All patients were prospectively followed. The mean age at revision was 59.2 years (23 to 82).

We performed Kaplan–Meier (KM) analysis and also a Competing Risk (CR) analysis because with long-term follow-up, the presence of a competing event (i.e. death) prevents the occurrence of the endpoint of re-revision.

A total of 48 patients (52 hips) had died or had been re-revised at final review in March 2011. None of the deaths were related to the surgery. The mean Harris hip score of the ten surviving hips in ten patients was 76 points (45 to 99).

The KM survivorship at 25 years for the endpoint ‘re-revision for any reason’ was 58.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 38 to 73) and for ‘re-revision for aseptic loosening’ 72.1% (95% CI 51 to 85). With the CR analysis we calculated the KM analysis overestimates the failure rate with respectively 74% and 93% for these endpoints. The current study shows that acetabular impaction bone grafting revisions provide good clinical results at over 25 years.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1338–44.

Hemispheric, porous-ingrowth revision acetabular components (generally with multiple screw fixation) have demonstrated versatility and durability over 25 years. Jumbo cups (minimum diameter of 62mm in women, 66mm in men, or 10mm larger than the normal contra-lateral acetabulum) are utilised in the majority of revisions with acetabular bone loss, with or without bone grafting, or other augmentation. The popularity of jumbo cups is due to their relative ease of use and the reliability of the result. With up to 20 year follow-up, and failure defined as cup revision for aseptic loosening or radiographic evidence of loosening, implant survival was 97.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.6% to 99.3%) at ten years and 82.8% (95% CI, 59% to 97.6%) at fifteen years. Instability is decreased in association with larger diameter bearings. Revisions associated with wear of non-crosslinked polyethylene increased in the second decade. Cross-linked polyethylene and ultra-porous materials will likely increase both the durability and the utility of jumbo cups

Aims: To test the outcome of acetabular revisons with impacted morsellized bone grafts and a cemented cup at a minimum follow-up of 15 years. Methods: Between 1979–1986 62 acetabular revisions (58 patients) were performed with impacted bone grafts and a cemented cup. Two cases (2 hips) were lost to FU. The average age at operation was 59.1 years. The indication was aseptic in 56 and septic loosening in 4 hips. Defects were AAOS-classiþed as ñcavitaryñ in 37 and ñcombinedñ 23 cases. Femoral-head allografts were used. Acetabular re-revisions were determined, the HHS obtained and radiographs analyzed. Results: Nineteen cases (20 hips) died within þfteen years after the operation, none had a re-revision. Eleven acetabular re-revisions were performed: 2 septic loosenings (3 and 6 years p.o.), 7 aseptic loosenings (6, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 14 year p.o.) and two for cup wear (12 and 17 yrs p.o.). The average HHS at follow-up was 86 (50–100). There were no additional radiographic failures. Using Kaplan-Meier analysis the survival with endpoint revision for any reason was 79% at 15 years and 71% at 20 years; for aseptic loosening of the cup 84% at 15 years and 84% at 20 years. Conclusions: This technique is attractive to reconstruct acetabular bone stock loss

We report the result of 49 revisions for aseptic cup loosening using freeze-dried allografts.

We assessed the results according to the primary pathology, severity of bone loss, direction of socket migration before revision, method of bone grafting, socket position, graft incorporation and socket loosening.

Patient’s mean age at revision was 56 years 8 months. At a mean follow up of 7 years and 5 months four cups have been revised for aseptic loosening. Five sockets have migrated but remained stable while six showed full demarcation but have not migrated.

The other 34 remained stable and show radiographic evidence of graft incorporation.

Introduction. Many surgeons are reluctant to use a constrained liner at the time of acetabular component revision given concerns this might result in early acetabular component loosening. We hypothesized that with appropriate initial implant stabilization of highly porous acetabular components with supplemental screw fixation, constrained liners could be safely used at the time of acetabular revision. Methods. We retrospectively identified 148 revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) where a constrained liner of one design was cemented into a newly placed highly porous acetabular component fixed with supplemental screws (mean 5 screws). Mean age at revision THA was 69 years, with 68% being female. The most common indications for revision were two-stage re-implantation (33%), recurrent dislocation (30%), and aseptic loosening (22% acetabular; 9% acetabular/femoral component). Mean follow-up was 8 years. Results. There were no failures at the bone-implant interface, and there were no revisions for aseptic loosening of the acetabular component. Furthermore, all acetabular components were bone ingrown on radiographic analysis. The 10-year survivorships free from any acetabular revision and free from any reoperation were 75% and 67%, respectively. Overall, 33 hips (22%) required revision or reoperation for infection/wound complications (n=12), dislocation (n=11), periprosthetic femur fracture (n=4), femoral loosening (n=3), and other (n=3). The 10-year survivorship free from dislocation was 84% overall, which was similar to the 85% 10-year survivorship free from dislocation for those specifically revised for instability (p=0.9). Conclusions. Implanting a constrained liner at the time of acetabular revision in high-risk patients resulted in no cases of aseptic acetabular component loosening in this large series. This is likely related to the fact that a highly porous acetabular component was utilized with a large number of supplemental screws in each case. Such information is valuable as these data favor a paradigm shift when compared to some traditionally-held tenets. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

The number of joint revision surgeries is rising, and the complexity of the cases is increasing. In 58% of the revision cases, the acetabular component has to be revised. For these indications, literature decision schemes [Paprosky 2005] point at custom pre-shaped implants. Any standard device would prove either unfeasible during surgery or inadequate in the short term. Studies show that custom-made triflanged implants can be a durable solution with good clinical results. However, the number of cases reported is few confirming that the device is not in widespread use.

Introduction

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasties (THA) have a significantly higher failure rate than primary THA's and the most common cause is aseptic loosening of the cup. To reduce this incidence of loosening various porous metal implants with a rough surface and a porous architecture have been developed which are said to increase early osteointegration. However, for successful osteointegration a minimal micromotion between the implant and the host bone (primary stability) is beneficial. It has not been previously determined if the primary stability for the new Gription® titanium cup differs from that of the old Porocoat® titanium cup.

We have reviewed 29 patients (30 hips) who had undergone revision total hip arthroplasty using a Freeman metal-backed acetabular component and acetabular impaction allografting. The mean follow-up was for 15.3 years (12 to 17).

Five patients (5 hips) died with the prosthesis in situ and four (4 hips) were lost to follow-up. Twelve hips had failed and in the remaining nine there were minor symptoms. The mean time to failure requiring further surgery was nine years. Excluding patients who were lost to follow-up or had died, 72% of the hips were radiologically loose at the last review. The commonest pattern in those requiring revision was failure of the reinforcement ring in adduction with remodelling of the medial wall.

Of the nine patients who had not undergone revision, one with bilateral replacements had no current radiographs and only three of the remaining seven replacements had no radiological signs of loosening.

The short-term results for this technique have been reported to be satisfactory, but in the long term they are not. The factors associated with failure include the design of the prosthesis, which has been implicated in disappointing long-term results when used in primary arthroplasty, but not with the frequency of failure found in this series. It seems that the reliance on peripheral screw fixation over a bed of allograft without bridging the graft does not provide sufficient stability to allow incorporation of the graft.

Reconstruction and revision of the acetabulum component in loose hip implants may be conducted with several techniques, depending on the entity of the defects and of the surgeon’s experience. Impaction grafting with cemented cups or associated to rings or non cemented cups with flanges are some of the options. Rings or cages may have a containment effect but usually do not osteo-integrate.

Since 2001 we performed 28 acetabular revisionswith trabecular tantalum metal cups (Zimmer) for Paprosky type II and IIId efects. All the patients but three needed fresh frozen morcellized allograft. Eight patients had less than 50 years; twelve had a previous acetabular fracture that ended in an improper reduction or an infection.Three had a previous infected joint implant, one an infected non-union; this group before the definitive reconstruction had one to three débridement procedures. Six patients without infection had three to six previous surgeries including hip reconstruction. Medial containment disks were used in six patients, to contain bone defects. All patients had a trabecular metal cup fixed with screws or stabilized with press fit alone , associated to a cemented poly cup.

Dislocations were not observed. The cemented cup was oriented to overcorrect the head coverage only in four cases. Three patients had a high hip center, but only one has shorter limb. At short follow up no lyseswere observed with adequate osteointegration. Infection did not recurred in any patient.

TMT cups simplify complex reconstructive procedures, and in spite of cementing a poly cup, osteointegration occurred in all patients. Lysis was readable in three patients but it was marginal and restricted. Great attention should be kept when an additional hole is done in the cup to confine metal dissemination to the soft tissues.

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

Purpose. Cementless cup with structural allograft is one of option for acetabular revision in the cases which has severe bone loss. This study was performed to verify that the structural allograft with cementless cup could be one of good options for revision of acetabular cup with severe bone defect and to verify that the allograft resorption affect the stability of cementless acetabular cup. Materials and Methods. We reviewed 25 cases of 25 patients who underwent acetabular cup rvision using cementless porous coated hemispherical cup with structural allograft from May 1992 to July 2011 July 2011. There were nine males and sixteen females with an average age of 50.0 years. The average follow-up period was 76.7(28∼212) months. The clinical evaluation was performed using Harris Hip Score(HHS) and UCLA activity score. Radiologically, the degree of resorption of grafted bone, incorporation of allograft bone with normal bone, osteolysis and cup loosening were evaluated. Results. Clinically, the average Harris hip score was improved from 54 preoperatively to 93.4 at the last follow-up. The average UCLA activity score was also improved from 4.3 preoperatively to 6.4 at the last follow-up. Radiologically, the incorporation of allograft was accomplished in 11.4 months and the resorption of grafted bone was noted in 3 cases(12%), but the allograft resorption had not progressed to moderate degree even in long term follow-up. There was no cup loosening and average survivor rate was 100% in 6 years. There was no infection, allograft nonunion, osteolysis. Conclusion. Cementless cup with structural allograft in acetabular cup reconstruction can provide excellent mi-term results in both clinical and radiological aspects. Structural allograft can provide strong mechanical support for the bone ingrowth of cementless cup. The clinical result of this study auggest that cementless cup with structural allograft can be a good option for acetabular cup revision with severe bone defect. Resorption of structural allograft rarely occurred, and the resorption of structural allograft does not affect stablility of cup even in long term follow-up

Aims

Custom flange acetabular components (CFACs) are a patient-specific option for addressing large acetabular defects at revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), but patient and implant characteristics that affect survivorship remain unknown. This study aimed to identify patient and design factors related to survivorship.

Twenty-nine patients (30 hips) with uncemented acetabular impaction allografting contained behind a metal backed component screwed to the pelvis at revision hip arthroplasty were reviewed at 12 to17 years (average 15.3 years) follow up. Five patients had died with the prosthesis in situ, 4 patients were lost to follow up, 13 patients had failed requiring further revision (only one failed prior to 5 years) and 9 survivors were minimally asymptomatic. The mean time to failure warranting further surgery was 9 years.

Analysis of available serial radiographs (24 cases) demonstrated signs of loosening (migration, progressive radiolucent lines, screw breakage) in 54% of the latest radiographs of all cases. Removing those lost to follow up or deceased, 72% were radiologically loose (in the intact asymptomatic group 57% could be defined as loose). Additionally, in 70% of the cases the acetabular component tended to fail in a varus manner as the medial wall remodelled.

These results indicate as previously published, short term results for this technique are satisfactory but in the long term they are not. Factors associated with this include the pressfit nature of the polyethylene liner which has been implicated in disappointing long term results for this prosthesis in primary applications, but not of the level of failure encountered in the current series. This experience suggests that the reliance on screw fixation over a bed of allograft in the absence of cement supplementation does not provide sufficient stability for reliable bone graft incorporation.

The method reported above should be abandoned.

Objectives. In order to address acetabular defects, porous metal revision acetabular components and augments have been developed, which require fixation to each other. The fixation technique that results in the smallest relative movement between the components, as well as its influence on the primary stability with the host bone, have not previously been determined. Methods. A total of 18 composite hemipelvises with a Paprosky IIB defect were implanted using a porous titanium 56 mm multihole acetabular component and 1 cm augment. Each acetabular component and augment was affixed to the bone using two screws, while the method of fixation between the acetabular component and augment varied for the three groups of six hemipelvises: group S, screw fixation only; group SC, screw plus cement fixation; group C, cement fixation only. The implanted hemipelvises were cyclically loaded to three different loading maxima (0.5 kN, 0.9 kN, and 1.8 kN). Results. Screw fixation alone resulted in up to three times more movement (p = 0.006), especially when load was increased to 100% (p < 0.001), than with the other two fixation methods (C and SC). No significant difference was noted when a screw was added to the cement fixation. Increased load resulted in increased relative movement between the interfaces in all fixation methods (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Cement fixation between a porous titanium acetabular component and augment is associated with less relative movement than screw fixation alone for all implant interfaces, particularly with increasing loads. Adding a screw to the cement fixation did not offer any significant advantage. These results also show that the stability of the tested acetabular component/augment interface affects the stability of the construct that is affixed to the bone. Cite this article: N. A. Beckmann, R. G. Bitsch, M. Gondan, M. Schonhoff, S. Jaeger. Comparison of the stability of three fixation techniques between porous metal acetabular components and augments. Bone Joint Res 2018;7:282–288. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.74.BJR-2017-0198.R1

Introduction. In most cases of revision acetabular total hip arthoplasty (THA), some degree of bone loss will be accompanied. If the bone loss is massive, the management of bone defect is more challenging problem. We consider that using cementless accetabular cup for revision acetabular reconstruction is good indication when stable interface fit between the acetabular cup and bone is achieved. The purpose of this study is to review the result of revision hip arthroplasty using cementless acetabular cup with and without bone graft. Materials and methods. Between 1998 and 2012, 65 revisions using cementless acetabular cup (Mallory-Head 4 Finned component) were performed in 64 patients, whose mean age was 64.9 years. The cases of revision are aseptic loosening (53 joints), and infection (12 joints). All patients were followed up for a minimum period of 24.0 months (mean, 84 months) and were divided into two groups as follows: in group A, revisions without bone graft (28 joints); in group B, revisions with bone graft (37 joints). We compared clinical and radiographical results of group A with group B. Results. According to Paproski's classification, bone defects in Group A were evaluated as either Type I or Type IIa, and those in Group B were in the range of Type IIb to Type IIIb. Large cementless accetablar compornent with diameters of 58 mm or more were used in 6 joints and 21 cases, respectively. Postoperative radiography showed there were no significant deference of the position of hip center, lateral inclination and anteversion of acetabular cup in each group. The migration of the socket in the superior and medialaxes has not been observed in all cases at the latest follow-up. The mean JOA hip score improved from 63.1 points to 88.3 points and from 53.2 to 86.1, respectively and there were no cases of re-revisions in this series. Conclusions. Depending on the bone defect, large cementless accetablar compornent and bone graft should be considered. We are confident that results of acetabular reconstraction using cementless acetabular cup are satisfactory

Aims. Dual-mobility (DM) components are increasingly used to prevent and treat dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Intraprosthetic dissociation (IPD) is a rare complication of DM that is believed to have decreased with contemporary implants. This study aimed to report incidence, treatment, and outcomes of contemporary DM IPD. Methods. A total of 1,453 DM components were implanted at a single academic institution between January 2010 and December 2021: 695 in primary and 758 in revision THA. Of these, 49 presented with a dislocation of the large DM head and five presented with an IPD. At the time of closed reduction of the large DM dislocation, six additional IPDs occurred. The mean age was 64 years (SD 9.6), 54.5% were female (n = 6), and mean follow-up was 4.2 years (SD 1.8). Of the 11 IPDs, seven had a history of instability, five had abductor insufficiency, four had prior lumbar fusion, and two were conversions for failed fracture management. Results. The incidence of IPD was 0.76%. Of the 11 IPDs, ten were missed either at presentation or after attempted reduction. All ten patients with a missed IPD were discharged with a presumed reduction. The mean time from IPD to surgical treatment was three weeks (0 to 23). One patient died after IPD prior to revision. Of the ten remaining hips with IPD, the DM head was exchanged in two, four underwent acetabular revision with DM exchange, and four were revised to a constrained liner. Of these, five (50%) underwent reoperation at a mean 1.8 years (SD 0.73), including one additional acetabular revision. No patients who underwent initial acetabular revision for IPD treatment required subsequent reoperation. Conclusion. The overall rate of IPD was low at 0.76%. It is essential to identify an IPD on radiographs as the majority were missed at presentation or after iatrogenic dissociation. Surgeons should consider acetabular revision for IPD to allow conversion to a larger DM head, and take care to remove impinging structures that may increase the risk of subsequent failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):98–104

Polyethylene liners of modular acetabular components wear and sometimes need to be replaced, despite the metal shell being well fixed. Replacing the liner is a relatively simple procedure, but very little is known of the outcome of liner revision. We prospectively followed up 1126 Harris-Gallante 1 metal backed, uncemented cups for between 9 and 19 years. 38 (3.4%) liners out of 1126 acetabular components wore and required revision. These revisions were then followed up for a mean of 4.8 years. The rate of dislocation was 28.9%. Nine of the dislocations were single dislocations and 2 were recurrent.

The overall re-revision rate was 3 out of 38 total hip replacements (7.9%) at a mean follow up of 4.8 years. This gives a 92.1% survivorship at just under 5 years. In isolated liner revision we had a complication rate of 23%. In liner revision combined with stem revision we had a complication rate of 48%. Possible reasons for high dislocation rates are discussed.

Leaving the well fixed acetabular shell in-situ leads to an increased risk of instability. However, this needs to be balanced against the otherwise low complication rate for liner revision. Patients should be consented accordingly

The last two decades have seen remarkable technological advances in total hip arthroplasty (THA) implant design. Porous ingrowth surfaces and highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) have been expected to dramatically improve implant survivorship. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate survival of contemporary cementless acetabular components following primary THA. 16,421 primary THAs performed for osteoarthritis between 2000 and 2019 were identified from our institutional total joint registry. Patients received one of 12 contemporary cementless acetabular designs with HXLPE liners. Components were grouped based on ingrowth surface into 4 categories: porous titanium (n=10,952, mean follow-up 5 years), porous tantalum (n=1223, mean follow-up 5 years), metal mesh (n=2680, mean follow-up 6.5 years), and hydroxyapatite (HA) coated (n=1566, mean follow-up 2.4 years). Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to assess the survivorship free of acetabular revision. A historical series of 182 Harris-Galante-1 (HG-1) acetabular components was used as reference. The 15-year survivorship free of acetabular revision was >97% for all 4 contemporary cohorts. Compared to historical control, porous titanium (HR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02–0.17, p<0.001), porous tantalum (HR 0.09, 95%CI 0.03–0.29, p<0.001), metal mesh (HR 0.11, 95%CI 0.04–0.31, p<0.001), and HA-coated (HR 0.14, 95%CI 0.04–0.48, p=0.002) ingrowth surfaces had significantly lower risk of any acetabular revision. There were 16 cases (0.1%) of acetabular aseptic loosening that occurred in 8 (0.07%) porous titanium, 5 (0.2%) metal mesh, and 3 (0.2%) HA-coated acetabular components. 7 of the 8 porous titanium aseptic loosening cases occurred in one known problematic design. There were no cases of aseptic loosening in the porous tantalum group. Modern acetabular ingrowth surfaces and HXLPE liners have improved on historical results at the mid-term. Contemporary designs have extraordinarily high revision-free survivorship, and aseptic loosening is now a rare complication. At mid-term follow-up, survivorship of contemporary uncemented acetabular components is excellent and aseptic loosening occurs in a very small minority of patients

Introduction. Acetabular component loosening with associated bone loss is a challenge in revision hip arthroplasty. Trabecular Metal (TM) by Zimmer Biomet has been shown to have greater implant survivorship for all-cause acetabular revision in small cohort retrospective studies. Our study aims to review outcomes of acetabular TM implants locally. Method. This is a retrospective observational study using data from Auckland City and North Shore Hospitals from 1st of January 2010 to 31st of December 2020. Primary outcome is implant survivorship (re-revision acetabular surgery for any cause) demonstrated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Secondary outcome is indication for index revision and re-revision surgery. Multivariate analysis used to identify statistically significant factors for re-revision surgery. Results. 225 cases used acetabular TM implants (shells and/or augments) over 10 years. Indications include aseptic loosening (63%), instability (15%) and infection (13%). Of these, 12% (n=28) had further re-revision for infection (54%) and instability (21%). Median time to re-revision was 156 days (range 11 – 2022). No cases of re-revision were due to failure of bony ingrowth or acetabular component loosening. Ethnicity, smoking status, and age were not risk factors for re-revision procedures. Additionally, previous prosthetic joint infection, ethnicity, sex and age were not significant risk factors for re-revision due to infection. Implant survivorship was 80% at 1 year, 71% at 5 years and 64% at 10 years. Discussion. Main indications for re-revision were infection and instability. Demographic factors and co-morbidities did not correlate with increased re-revision risk. Survivorship is poorer compared to cumulative survivorship reported by the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR). Explanations are multifactorial and possibly contributed by underestimation of true revision rates by registry data. Conclusions. We need to identify alternate causes for poorer survivorship and review the role of TM implants in acetabular revision within our specified population

Aims. The purpose of this study is to report our updated results at a minimum follow-up of 30 years using a first generation uncemented tapered femoral component in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. The original cohort consisted of 145 consecutive THAs performed by a single surgeon in 138 patients. A total of 37 patients (40 hips) survived a minimum of 30 years, and are the focus of this review. The femoral component used in all cases was a first-generation Taperloc with a non-modular 28 mm femoral head. Clinical follow-up at a minimum of 30 years was obtained on every living patient. Radiological follow-up at 30 years was obtained on all but four. Results. Seven femoral components (18%) required revision, and none for septic loosening. Four well fixed stems were removed during acetabular revision and three were revised for late infection. One femoral component (3%) was loose by radiological criteria. The mean Harris Hip Score improved from 47 points (SD 4.62) preoperatively to 83 points (SD 9.27) at final follow-up. With revision for any reason as the endpoint, survival of the femoral component was 80% (95% confidence interval (CI) 61% to 90%) at 32 years. With revision for aseptic loosing femoral component, survival was 99% (95% CI 93% to 99%). Conclusion. With regards to aseptic loosening, the Taperloc femoral component provides excellent fixation at a mean follow-up of 32 years. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(2):79–86

Aims. This study reports the results of 38 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in 33 patients aged less than 50 years, using the JRI Furlong hydroxyapatite ceramic (HAC)-coated femoral component. Methods. We describe the survival, radiological, and functional outcomes of 33 patients (38 THAs) at a mean follow-up of 27 years (25 to 32) between 1988 and 2018. Results. Of the surviving 30 patients (34 THAs), there were four periprosthetic fractures: one underwent femoral revision after 21 years, two had surgical fixation as the stem was deemed stable, and one was treated nonoperatively due to the patient’s comorbidities. The periprosthetic fracture patients showed radiological evidence of change in bone stock around the femoral stem, which may have contributed to the fractures; this was reflected in change of the canal flare index at the proximal femur. Two patients (two hips) were lost to follow-up. Using aseptic loosening as the endpoint, 16 patients (18 hips; 48%) needed acetabular revision. None of the femoral components were revised for aseptic loosening, demonstrating 100% survival. The estimate of the cumulative proportion surviving for revisions due to any cause was 0.97 (standard error 0.03). Conclusion. In young patients with high demands, the Furlong HAC-coated femoral component gives excellent long-term results. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):286–293

Aims. Modular dual mobility (MDM) acetabular components are often used with the aim of reducing the risk of dislocation in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). There is, however, little information in the literature about its use in this context. The aim of this study, therefore, was to evaluate the outcomes in a cohort of patients in whom MDM components were used at revision THA, with a mean follow-up of more than five years. Methods. Using the database of a single academic centre, 126 revision THAs in 117 patients using a single design of an MDM acetabular component were retrospectively reviewed. A total of 94 revision THAs in 88 patients with a mean follow-up of 5.5 years were included in the study. Survivorship was analyzed with the endpoints of dislocation, reoperation for dislocation, acetabular revision for aseptic loosening, and acetabular revision for any reason. The secondary endpoints were surgical complications and the radiological outcome. Results. The overall rate of dislocation was 11%, with a six-year survival of 91%. Reoperation for dislocation was performed in seven patients (7%), with a six-year survival of 94%. The dislocations were early (at a mean of 33 days) in six patients, and late (at a mean of 4.3 years) in four patients. There were three intraprosthetic dissociations. An outer head diameter of ≥ 48 mm was associated with a lower risk of dislocation (p = 0.013). Lumbrosacral fusion was associated with increased dislocation (p = 0.004). Four revision THAs (4%) were further revised for aseptic acetabular loosening, and severe bone loss (Paprosky III) at the time of the initial revision was significantly associated with further revision for aseptic acetabular loosening (p = 0.008). Fourteen acetabular components (15%) were re-revised for infection, and a pre-revision diagnosis of reimplantation after periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) was associated with subsequent PJI (p < 0.001). Two THAs had visible metallic changes on the backside of the cobalt chromium liner. Conclusion. When using this MDM component in revision THA, at a mean follow-up of 5.5 years, there was a higher rate of dislocation (11%) than previously reported. The size of the outer bearing was related to the risk of dislocation. There was a low rate of aseptic acetabular loosening. Longer follow-up of this MDM component and evaluation of other designs are warranted. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):66–72

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

The benefit of using acetabular screws in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been questioned in recent years. The disadvantages of using screws include increased operative time, risk of injury to surrounding neurovascular structures and metal ware breakage. Recent large registry studies have reported that screws do not confer a protective effect against acetabular loosening or the presence of osteolysis. Other studies have even described an increased risk of aseptic acetabular loosening with the selective use of screws. We report findings from a multicentre cohort study. This large cohort study compared clinical outcomes between primary acetabular components that were inserted with and without screws. Independent variables included the presence (or absence) of screws, the total number of screws used and the cumulative screw length (CSL). Outcome measures included all-cause revision, acetabular component revision and acetabular component loosening. Statistical software (Stata/IC 13.1 for Mac [64-bit Intel]) was used to conduct all statistical analyses. A p-value < 0 .05 taken to be significant. There were 4,583 THAs performed in total. Screws were used in 15.9% (n=733). At a mean follow-up of 5.2 years, the all-cause revision rate in the screw cohort was 1.5% compared to 0.83% in the no screw cohort (p=0.085). There was no difference in acetabular component revision rates for screws (3/733, 0.41%) versus no screws (12/3,850, 0.31%) (p=0.439). The rate of acetabular loosening noted during the time of revision surgery was significantly higher when screws were used in the index procedure (2/733, 0.2%) compared to the no screw cohort (1/3,850, 0.02%) (p=0.017). There was no difference in outcomes when stratifying by the number of screws used or the cumulative screw length. Primary acetabular components do not require screws for fixation. All cause revision rates and acetabular component revision rates are comparable for the screw and the no screw cohorts. The rate of acetabular component loosening, as observed during revision surgery, is significantly higher when screws are used in the index total hip replacement

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

Dual mobility (DM) components are increasingly used to prevent and treat dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Intraprosthetic dissociation (IPD) is a known rare complication of these implants and has reportedly decreased with modern implants. The purpose of this paper is to report the diagnosis and treatment of modern DM IPD. 1453 DM components were implanted between 2010 and 2021. 695 in primary and 758 in revision THA. 49 hips sustained a dislocation of the large head and 5 sustained an IPD at presentation. 6 additional IPD occurred at the time of reduction of large head. The average age was 64, 54% were female and the mean follow-up was three years. Of the 11 IPD, 8 had a history of instability, 5 had abductor insufficiency, 4 had prior lumbar fusion, and 3 were conversions from fracture. The overall IPD incidence was 0.76%. Ten of the 11 DM IPD were missed at initial presentation or at the time of reduction, and all were discharged with presumed reduction. The mean time from IPD to surgical treatment was 3 weeks. One patient died with an IPD at 5 months. A DM head was reimplanted in six, two underwent revision of the acetabular component with exchange of DM head, and four were revised to a constrained liner. The re-revision rate was 55% at a mean 1.8 years. None of the patients who underwent cup revision required subsequent re-revision while half of the constrained liners and exchange of DM heads required re-revision. The overall rate of DM dislocation or IPD is low. It is critical to identify an IPD on radiographs as it was almost universally missed at presentation or when it occurred iatrogenically. For patients presenting with IPD, the surgeon should consider acetabular revision and conversion to a constrained liner or a larger DM, with special attention to removing impinging structures that could increase the risk of re-dislocation

We report the outcome of 320 primary Total Hip Arthroplasties (THA) with minimum 10-year follow-up (range 10–17 years, mean 12.6 years), performed by a single surgeon in Tauranga New Zealand, with the Exeter Contemporary Flanged all-polyethylene cup and Exeter femoral stem via a posterior approach. The aim of the study is to compare the results with the published results from the design centre and create a baseline cohort for further outcomes research in this centre. All patients were prospectively followed at 6 weeks, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, (and 15 years when available). Of 333 cases that matched the inclusion criteria, 13 procedures in 12 patents were excluded because of concomitant bone grafting and/or supplementary cage fixation, leaving 320 primary THA procedures in 280 patients, including 26 bilateral procedures in 13 patients. Mean follow-up of the surviving cases was 12.6 (range 5.0-17.1) years. There were 12 revisions – 2 for fracture, 5 for instability, 1 for impingement pain and 4 for infection. There were no revisions for aseptic cup loosening. Kaplan-Meier survivorship with revision for aseptic loosening as the endpoint was 100% at 15.0 years (with minimum 40 cases remaining at risk). All-cause acetabular revision in 12 cases result in a Kaplan-Meier survival of 95.9% (95% CI: 93.5 to 98.3%). Cemented THA with the Exeter Contemporary Flanged cup and the Exeter stem is a durable combination with results that can be replicated outside of the design centre. The Exeter Contemporary Flanged cup has excellent survivorship at 15 years when used with the Exeter stem. Cemented THA with well-proven components should be considered the benchmark against which newer designs and materials should be compared

First-time revision acetabular components have a 36% re-revision rate at 10 years in Australia, with subsequent revisions known to have even worse results. Acetabular component migration >1mm at two years following revision THA is a surrogate for long term loosening. This study aimed to measure the migration of porous tantalum components used at revision surgery and investigate the effect of achieving press-fit and/or three-point fixation within acetabular bone. Between May 2011 and March 2018, 55 patients (56 hips; 30 female, 25 male) underwent acetabular revision THR with a porous tantalum component, with a post-operative CT scan to assess implant to host bone contact achieved and Radiostereometric Analysis (RSA) examinations on day 2, 3 months, 1 and 2 years. A porous tantalum component was used because the defects treated (Paprosky IIa:IIb:IIc:IIIa:IIIb; 2:6:8:22:18; 13 with pelvic discontinuity) were either deemed too large or in a position preventing screw fixation of an implant with low coefficient of friction. Press-fit and three-point fixation of the implant was assessed intra-operatively and on postoperative imaging. Three-point acetabular fixation was achieved in 51 hips (92%), 34 (62%) of which were press-fit. The mean implant to host bone contact achieved was 36% (range 9-71%). The majority (52/56, 93%) of components demonstrated acceptable early stability. Four components migrated >1mm proximally at two years (1.1, 3.2, 3.6 and 16.4mm). Three of these were in hips with Paprosky IIIB defects, including 2 with pelvic discontinuity. Neither press-fit nor three-point fixation was achieved for these three components and the cup to host bone contact achieved was low (30, 32 and 59%). The majority of porous tantalum components had acceptable stability at two years following revision surgery despite treating large acetabular defects and poor bone quality. Components without press-fit or three-point fixation were associated with unacceptable amounts of early migration

The best treatment method of large acetabular bone defects at revision THR remains controversial. Some of the factors that need consideration are the amount of residual pelvic bone removed during revision; the contact area between the residual pelvic bone and the new implant; and the influence of the new acetabular construct on the centre of rotation of the hip. The purpose of this study was to compare these variables in two of the most used surgical techniques used to reconstruct severe acetabular defects: the trabecular metal acetabular revision system (TMARS) and a custom triflanged acetabular component (CTAC). Pre- and post-operative CT-scans were acquired from 11 patients who underwent revision THR with a TMARS construct for a Paprosky IIIB defect, 10 with pelvic discontinuity, at Royal Adelaide Hospital. The CT scans were used to generate computer models to virtually compare the TMARS and CTAC constructs using a semi-automated method. The TMARS construct model was calculated using postoperative CT scans while the CTAC constructs using the preoperative CT scans. The bone contact, centre of rotation, inclination, anteversion and reamed bone differences were calculated for both models. There was a significant difference in the mean amount of bone reamed for the TMARS reconstructions (15,997 mm. 3. ) compared to the CTAC reconstructions (2292 mm. 3. , p>0.01). There was no significant difference between overall implant bone contact (TMARS 5760mm. 2. vs CTAC 5447mm. 2. , p=0.63). However, there was a significant difference for both cancellous (TMARS 4966mm. 2. vs CTAC 2887mm. 2. , p=0.008) and cortical bone contact (TMARS 795mm. 2. vs CTAC 2560mm. 2. , p=0.001). There was no difference in inclination and anteversion achieved. TMARS constructs resulted on average in a centre of rotations 7.4mm more lateral and 4.0mm more posterior. Modelling of two different reconstructions of Paprosky IIIB defects demonstrated potential important differences between all variables investigated

Aims. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of a lateral rim mesh on the survival of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) in young patients, aged 50 years or younger. Patients and Methods. We compared a study group of 235 patients (257 hips) who received a primary THA with the use of impaction bone grafting (IBG) with an additional lateral rim mesh with a group of 306 patients (343 hips) who received IBG in the absence of a lateral rim mesh during the same period from 1988 to 2015. In the mesh group, there were 74 male and 183 female patients, with a mean age of 35 years (13 to 50). In the no-mesh group, there were 173 male and 170 female patients, with a mean age of 38 years (12.6 to 50). Cox regression analyses were performed to study the effect of a lateral rim mesh on acetabular component survival. Kaplan–Meier analyses with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed to estimate the survival of the acetabular implant. Results. The hazard ratio for the use of lateral rim mesh, adjusted for potential confounders, for acetabular revision for any reason was 0.50 (95% CI 0.13 to 1.93; p = 0.31) and for acetabular revision for aseptic loosening was 0.29 (95% CI 0.020 to 4.04; p = 0.35). The Kaplan–Meier analysis showed a ten-year survival for aseptic loosening of the acetabular of 98% (95% CI 95 to 100, n = 65 at risk) in the mesh group and 94% (89 to 98, n = 76 at risk) in the no-mesh group. The 15-year survival for aseptic acetabular loosening was 90% (81 to 100, n = 35 at risk) in the mesh group and 85% (77 to 94, n = 45 at risk) in the no-mesh group (p = 0.23). Conclusion. This study shows that the use of a lateral rim mesh in primary THA in young patients is not associated with a higher risk of revision of the acetabular component. Therefore, we consider a lateral rim mesh combined with IBG to be effective in reconstructing segmental acetabular defects in primary THA

Aims. Bone stock restoration of acetabular bone defects using impaction bone grafting (IBG) in total hip arthroplasty may facilitate future re-revision in the event of failure of the reconstruction. We hypothesized that the acetabular bone defect during re-revision surgery after IBG was smaller than during the previous revision surgery. The clinical and radiological results of re-revisions with repeated use of IBG were also analyzed. Methods. In a series of 382 acetabular revisions using IBG and a cemented component, 45 hips (45 patients) that had failed due to aseptic loosening were re-revised between 1992 and 2016. Acetabular bone defects graded according to Paprosky during the first and the re-revision surgery were compared. Clinical and radiological findings were analyzed over time. Survival analysis was performed using a competing risk analysis. Results. Intraoperative bone defect during the initial revision included 19 Paprosky type IIIA and 29 Paprosky type IIIB hips; at re-revision, seven hips were Paprosky type II, 27 type IIIA and 11 were type IIIB (p = 0.020). The mean preoperative Harris Hip Score was 45.4 (SD 6.4), becoming 80.7 (SD 12.7) at the final follow-up. In all, 12 hips showed radiological migration of the acetabular component, and three required further revision surgery. The nine-year cumulative failure incidence (nine patients at risk) of the acetabular component for further revision surgery was 9.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9 to 21.0) for any cause, and 7.5% (95% CI 1.9 to 18.5) for aseptic loosening. Hips with a greater hip height had a higher risk for radiological migration (odds ratio 1.09, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.17; p = 0.008). Conclusion. Bone stock restoration can be obtained using IBG in revision hip surgery. This technique is also useful in re-revision surgery; however, a better surgical technique including a closer distance to hip rotation centre could decrease the risk of radiological migration of the acetabular component. A longer follow-up is required to assess potential fixation deterioration. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):492–499

Aims. The use of trabecular metal (TM) shells supported by augments has provided good mid-term results after revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with a bony defect of the acetabulum. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term implant survivorship and radiological and clinical outcomes after acetabular revision using this technique. Patients and Methods. Between 2006 and 2010, 60 patients (62 hips) underwent acetabular revision using a combination of a TM shell and augment. A total of 51 patients (53 hips) had complete follow-up at a minimum of seven years and were included in the study. Of these patients, 15 were men (29.4%) and 36 were women (70.6%). Their mean age at the time of revision THA was 64.6 years (28 to 85). Three patients (5.2%) had a Paprosky IIA defect, 13 (24.5%) had a type IIB defect, six (11.3%) had a type IIC defect, 22 (41.5%) had a type IIIA defect, and nine (17%) had a type IIIB defect. Five patients (9.4%) also had pelvic discontinuity. Results. The overall survival of the acetabular component at a mean of ten years postoperatively was 92.5%. Three hips (5.6%) required further revision due to aseptic loosening, and one (1.9%) required revision for infection. Three hips with aseptic loosening failed, due to insufficient screw fixation of the shell in two and pelvic discontinuity in one. The mean Harris Hip Score improved significantly from 55 (35 to 68) preoperatively to 81 points (68 to 99) at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The reconstruction of acetabular defects with TM shells and augments showed excellent long-term results. Supplementary screw fixation of the shell should be performed in every patient. Alternative techniques should be considered to address pelvic disconinuity. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:311–316

Previous work has demonstrated increased implant failure in patients with DDH compared to osteoarthritis with historic methods and implants. This study examines outcomes of modern total hip arthroplasty (THA) techniques using uncemented fixation and cross-linked PE (XLPE) bearings for DDH. A consecutive series of 879 patients with DDH who underwent primary THA with uncemented components and a XLPE bearing at a single institution between 1999 and 2016 were identified. Mean age at index arthroplasty was 51 years, with 78% females. Mean follow-up was 8 years. 5- and 10-year survivorships free of revision were 98.4% and 98%, respectively. 5- and 10-year survivorships free of reoperation for any reason were 97% and 96%, respectively. Survivorship free of acetabular revision for aseptic loosening was 99.8% at 5 and 10 years, while survivorships free of femoral revision for aseptic loosening were 99.7% at 5 years and 99.5% at 10 years. Survivorship free of reoperation for PE damage (2 liner fractures, 2 rim damage from impingement) was 99.3% at 10 years. There were no revisions for bearing surface wear or osteolysis. 13% of patients experienced complications (4% dislocation, 3.3% wound complication rate). Ten-year survivorship free of reoperation for instability was 99.2%. 8 patients developed infection requiring operation (<1%). 100 patients had a prior pelvic osteotomy (11%), which did not increase rate of complications (p=0.22) or reoperations (p=0.51). Fixation with modern uncemented implants has dramatically reduced implant loosening in patients with DDH, and the use of XLPE bearings has markedly reduced revision for PE wear/osteolysis in this young patient population, leading to dramatically improved mid/long-term survivorship compared to historic series

Aims. The aim of this study was to report the initial results of the Exeter V40 stem, which became available in 2000. Patients and Methods. A total of 540 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) were performed in our unit using this stem between December 2000 and May 2002. Our routine protocol is to review patients postoperatively and at one, five, and ten years following surgery. Results. A total of 145 patients (26.9%) died before ten years and of the remaining 395 stems, 374 (94.7%) remain in situ. A total of 21 well-fixed stems (5.3%) were revised. Ten were exchanged using a cement-in-cement technique to facilitate acetabular revision. Three were revised for infection, one for instability, one for fracture of the stem, and six following a periprosthetic fracture. An additional 16 acetabular components (4.1%) were revised; five for aseptic loosening and 11 for instability. There were no revisions for aseptic loosening of the stem, and no evidence of aseptic loosening in any hip. The fate of every stem is known and all patients remain under review. Survivorship, with revision of the stem for aseptic loosening as the endpoint, was 100%. At 13.5 years, the Kaplan–Meier survival rate for all-cause revision of the stem was 96.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 94.8 to 98.8) and all-cause revision (including acetabular revision, infection, and instability) was 91.2% (95% CI 88.3 to 94.1). Conclusion. No stem was revised for aseptic loosening in this series. The contemporary Exeter V40 stem continues to perform well, and survival has remained comparable with that of the Exeter Universal stem. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1002–9

First-time revision acetabular components have a 36% re-revision rate at 10 years in Australia, with subsequent revisions known to have even worse results. Acetabular component migration >1mm at two years following revision THA is a surrogate for long term loosening. This study aimed to measure the migration of porous tantalum components used at revision surgery and investigate the effect of achieving press-fit and/or three-point fixation within acetabular bone. Between May 2011 and March 2018, 55 patients (56 hips; 30 female, 25 male) underwent acetabular revision THR with a porous tantalum component, with a post-operative CT scan to assess implant to host bone contact achieved and Radiostereometric Analysis (RSA) examinations on day 2, 3 months, 1 and 2 years. A porous tantalum component was used because the defects treated (Paprosky IIa:IIb:IIc:IIIa:IIIb; 2:6:8:22:18; 13 with pelvic discontinuity) were either deemed too large or in a position preventing screw fixation of an implant with low coefficient of friction. Press-fit and three-point fixation of the implant was assessed intra-operatively and on postoperative imaging. Three-point acetabular fixation was achieved in 51 hips (92%), 34 (62%) of which were press-fit. The mean implant to host bone contact achieved was 36% (range 9–71%). The majority (52/56, 93%) of components demonstrated acceptable early stability. Four components migrated >1mm proximally at two years (1.1, 3.2, 3.6 and 16.4mm). Three of these were in hips with Paprosky IIIB defects, including 2 with pelvic discontinuity. Neither press-fit nor three-point fixation was achieved for these three components and the cup to host bone contact achieved was low (30, 32 and 59%). The majority of porous tantalum components had acceptable stability at two years following revision surgery despite treating large acetabular defects and poor bone quality. Components without press-fit or three-point fixation were associated with unacceptable amounts of early migration

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of aseptic loosening after the use of a cemented acetabular component and a Trabecular Metal (TM) acetabular component (Zimmer Inc., Warsaw, Indiana) at acetabular revision with bone impaction grafting. Patients and Methods. A total of 42 patients were included in the study. Patients were randomised to receive an all- polyethylene cemented acetabular component (n = 19) or a TM component (n = 23). Radiostereometric analysis and conventional radiographic examinations were performed regularly up to two years post-operatively or until further revision. Results. The proximal migration was significantly higher in the cemented group. At two years, the median proximal migration was 1.45 mm and 0.25 mm in the cemented and TM groups, respectively (p = 0.02). One cemented component was revised due to dislocation. There were no revisions in the TM group. Conclusion. Lower proximal migration in the TM group suggests that this design might be associated with a lower risk of aseptic loosening in the long term compared with an all polyethylene cemented component. Longer follow-up is required to confirm the clinical advantages of using this component at acetabular revision. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:880–6

Introduction. Primary stability is an important factor for long-term implant survival in total hip arthroplasty. In revision surgery, implant fixation becomes especially challenging due the acetabular bone defects, which are often present. Previous studies on primary stability of revision components often applied simplified geometrical defect shapes in a variety of sizes and locations. The objectives of this study were to (1) develop a realistic defect model in terms of defect volume and shape based on a clinically existing acetabular bone defect, (2) develop a surrogate acetabular test model, and (3) exemplarily apply the developed approach by testing the primary stability of a pressfit-cup with and without bone graft substitute (BGS). Materials & Methods. Based on clinical computed tomography data and a method previously published [1], volume and shape information of a representative defect, chosen in consultation with four senior hip revision surgeons, was derived. Volume and shape of the representative defect was approximated by nine reaming procedures with hemispherical acetabular reamers, resulting in a simplified defect with comparable volume (18.9 ml original vs. 18.8 ml simplified) and shape. From this simplified defect (Defect D), three additional defect models (Defect A, B, C) were derived by excluding certain reaming procedures, resulting in four defect models to step-wise test different acetabular revision components. A surrogate acetabular model made of 20 PCF polyurethane foam with the main support structures was developed [2]. For the exemplary test, three series for Defect A were defined: Native (acetabulum without defect), Empty (defect acetabulum without filling), Filled (defect acetabulum with BGS filling). All series were treated with a pressfit-cup and subjected to dynamic axial load in direction of maximum resultant force during level walking. Minimum load was 300 N and maximum load was increased step-wise from 600 N to 3000 N. Total relative motion between cup and foam, consisting of inducible displacement and migration, was assessed with the optical measurement system gom Aramis (gom GmbH, Braunschweig, DE). Results. Total relative motion increased with increasing load, with a maximum of 0.63 mm for Native, 0.86 mm for Filled, and 1.9 mm for Empty. At load stage 1800 N, total relative motion in Empty was 11.0-fold increased in comparison to Native, but could be reduced to a 3.3-fold increase in Filled. Discussion. The objective of this study was to develop a simplified, yet realistic and modular defect model which could be used to step-wise test different treatment strategies. Applicability of the developed test setup was shown by assessing primary stability of a pressfit-cup in a native, empty, and filled situation. The presented method could potentially be used as a modular test setup to compare different acetabular revision components in a standardized way. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Introduction. Acetabular revision surgery is challenging due to severe bone defects. Burch-Schneider anti-protrusion cages (BS cage: Zimmer-Biomet) is one of the options for acetabular revision, however higher dislocation rate was reported. A computed tomography (CT)-based navigation system indicates us the planned direction for implantation of a cemented acetabular cup during surgery. A large diameter femoral head is also expected to reduce the dislocation rate. The purpose of this study is to investigate short-term results of BS cage in acetabular revision surgery combined with the CT-based navigation system and the use of large diameter femoral head. Methods. Sixteen hips of fifteen patients who underwent revision THA using allografts and BS cage between September 2013 and December 2017 were included in this study with the follow-up of 2.7 (0.1–5.0) years. There were 12 women and three men with a mean age of 78.6 years (range, 59–61 years). The cause of acetabular revision was aseptic loosening in all hips. The failed acetabular cup was carefully removed, and acetabular bone defect was graded using the Paprosky classification. Structural allografts were morselized and packed for all medial or contained defects. In some cases, solid allograft was implanted for segmental defects. BS cage was molded to optimize stability and congruity to the acetabulum and fixed with 6.5 mm titanium screws to the iliac bone. The inferior flange was slotted into the ischium. The upside-down trial cup was attached to a straight handle cup positioner with instrumental tracker (Figure 1) and placed on the rim of the BS cage to confirm the direction of the target angle for cement cup implantation under the CT-based navigation system (Stryker). After removing the cement spacer around the X3 RimFit cup (Stryker) onto the BS cage for available maximum large femoral head, the cement cup was implanted with confirming the direction of targeting angle. Japanese Orthopedic Association score (JOA score) of the hip was used for clinical assessment. Implant position, loosening, and consolidation of allograft were assessed using anterior and lateral radiographies of the pelvis. Results. Fifteen hips had a Paprosky IIIB defect, and one hip had a pelvic discontinuity. JOA score significantly improved postoperatively. No radiolucent lines and no displacement of BS cage could be found in 9 of 15 hips. Consolidation of allografts above the protrusion cage was observed in these patients. Displacement of BS cage (>5mm) was observed in 6 hips and displacement was stopped with allograft consolidation in 5 of 6 hips. The other patient showed lateral displacement of BS cage and underwent revision surgery. Average cup inclination and anteversion angles were 37.7±5.0 degree and 24.6±7.2 degree, respectively. 12 of 16 patients were included in Lewinnek's safe zone. One patient with 32 mm diameter of the femoral head had dislocation at 17 days postoperatively. All patients who received ≥36mm diameter of femoral head showed no dislocation. Conclusions. CT-based navigation system and the use of large femoral head may influence the prevention of dislocation in the acetabular revision surgery with BS cage for severe acetabular bone defects

Introduction. The mid- or long-term results of acetabular revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) in Korea are rare. The purpose of this study is to report the mid-term radiographic results (> 5 years) of acetabular revision THA with porous-coated cementless Trilogy. ®. cup (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA). Materials and Methods. Between 1999 and 2010, 77 patients (79 hips) had underwent acetabular revision THA with Trilogy. ®. cup. Eight patients (8 hips) were excluded due to death before 5-year follow-up, and 22 patients (23 hips) were excluded due to less than 5-year follow-up or follow-up loss. Forty-seven patients (48 hips) were included in our study. The mean age was 57.9 years (range, 36 to 76 years) and the mean follow-up was 9.8 years (range 5.0 to 16.2 years). The causes of revision were aseptic loosening in 40 hips, and septic loosening in 8 hips, respectively. Both acetabular and femoral revisions were performed in 14 hips and isolated acetabular revision was done in 34 hips. Preoperetive acetabular bone defect according to Paprosky classification was; 1 in type I, 6 in IIA, 11 in IIB, 9 in IIC, 15 in IIIA, and 6 in IIIB. Results. Radiolucent lines less than 2mm were found in 2 hips; one in zone I, another in zone I, II, III. Four hips (1 in type IIC, 1 in IIIA and 2 in IIIB) showed cup migration greater than 5 mm accompanying change of position greater than 5 degrees. However, these patients did not complain pain and showed fixation by secondary stabilization. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship with aseptic loosening as the end point at 10 years was 92.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82.6 – 100) and at 15 years was 83.8 % (95% CI, 69.1 – 98.6), respectively. Non-recurrent dislocations occurred in 4 hips. There were no other complication such as sciatic nerve palsy, infection and deep vein thrombosis. Conclusion. Mid-term radiographic results (>5 years) of acetabular revision THA with porous-coated cementless Trilogy. ®. cup showed durable longevity. However, other options such as anti-protrusio cage or cup-cage construct should be considered in severe acetabular bone defect

Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a challenging scenario following complex primary THA for developmental dysplasia of hip (DDH). Our study envisages the long-term outcomes of revision DDH and the role of lateral structural support in socket fixation in these young patients who may require multiple revisions in their life-time. Hundred and eighteen consecutive cemented revision THAs with minimum follow up of 5 years following primary diagnosis of DDH operated between January 1974 and December 2012 were analysed for their clinical and radiological outcomes. The mean follow-up of 118 patients was 11.0 years (5.1–39.6 years). The Kaplan Mier survivorship at 11 years with end point as revision for any reason was 89.8% (CI 81.1–98.4). Of 118 revisions, 88 acetabular revisions were for aseptic loosening. Out of the acetabular revisions, 21 had pre-existing structural bone grafts from primary surgery, of which only 3 needed structural re-grafting during revision. Amongst the remaining 18 hips, the lateral support from the previous graft facilitated revision with no requirement of additional structural graft. Sixty-three hips did not have any form of grafting during primary operation. Amongst them, 35 had bone grafting in revision surgery (18 structural grafting). This study reports the largest number of revision THAs with primary diagnosis of DDH with the longest follow up. In our experience, the lateral support from the structural graft done in primary operation appears to have provided benefit in subsequent revision socket fixation

The ‘jumbo’ acetabular component is now commonly used in acetabular revision surgery where there is extensive bone loss. It offers high surface contact, permits weight bearing over a large area of the pelvis, the need for bone grafting is reduced and it is usually possible to restore centre of rotation of the hip. Disadvantages of its use include a technique in which bone structure may not be restored, a risk of excessive posterior bone loss during reaming, an obligation to employ screw fixation, limited bone ingrowth with late failure and high hip centre, leading to increased risk of dislocation. Contraindications include unaddressed pelvic dissociation, inability to implant the component with a rim fit, and an inability to achieve screw fixation. Use in acetabulae with < 50% bone stock has also been questioned. Published results have been encouraging in the first decade, with late failures predominantly because of polyethylene wear and aseptic loosening. Dislocation is the most common complication of jumbo acetabular revisions, with an incidence of approximately 10%, and often mandates revision. Based on published results, a hemispherical component with an enhanced porous coating, highly cross-linked polyethylene, and a large femoral head appears to represent the optimum tribology for jumbo acetabular revisions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):64–7

Introduction. Cementless acetabular fixation in total hip replacement (THA) is reliable and has been the fixation method of choice in the United States for decades. While revision for failure of osseointegration or early loosening is relatively rare, recurrent dislocation remains a leading cause of early revision. Novel acetabular implants and those offered by smaller companies often lack constrained or dual mobility liners, which may result in revision of well-fixed, well-positioned cups in cases of recurrent dislocation. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of THA with three different acetabular cups with differing fixation surfaces. One hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated cup (Trident, Stryker, Kalamazoo, MI, USA) offered dual mobility or constrained liner options. The other cups were a novel highly porous cup (Restoris PST, Stryker, Kalamazoo, MI, USA), and a Calcium Phosphate (CaP)-coated cup (Trinity, Corin, Cirincester, UK), neither of which offered dual mobility or constrained options at the time of investigation. Endpoints of interest were: clinical and radiographic outcomes including evidence of osseointegration, overall reoperations, reoperations for acetabular fixation failure, and reoperations to address dislocation in which a well-positioned shell was revised due to the lack of dual mobility or constrained options. Methods. A retrospective review of 370 acetabular cups implanted in 328 patients for THA by a single surgeon between February 2013 and June 2016 was performed. There were 100 Trident cups (Stryker, Kalamazoo, MI, USA), 105 Restoris PST Acetabular Cups (Stryker, Kalamazoo, MI, USA), and 165 Trinity Acetabular Cups (Corin, Cirincester, UK). Patient records were reviewed for post-operative complications, clinical outcomes scores and radiographic signs of acetabular osseointegration at minimum 1-year follow-up. Results. Despite differences in fixation surface, there was no difference in Harris Hip Scores at minimum 1-year follow-up and all three cohorts had 100% 1-year survivorship free of revision for failure of acetabular fixation. No cup showed signs of acetabular migration or loosening. Overall reoperation rates were low, ranging from 2.4%-3.8% (p=0.81). Femoral fractures and fixation problems were the most common cause of reoperation, occurring in nearly 2% of cases (n=7), but did not differ between groups. Reoperation for infection occurred in less than 1% of cases (n=3) and did not differ between groups. Revision for recurrent dislocation occurred in 1% of cases (n=4). All occurred with cups lacking dual mobility or constrained options. In all 4 cases the acetabular component was within the Lewinnek “safe zone” and deemed well positioned. In one revision, a lipped liner and longer head were used given concerns about the risk of acetabular component revision due to poor bone stock. In the remaining revisions, the well-positioned cup was revised to allow for the use of constrained or dual mobility implants. Conclusion. All acetabular revisions in our cohort were related to instability or infection, while none were related to acetabular fixation. Subsequent to this experience and analysis, we are wary to select any “new and improved” acetabular cup that does not have an option for a constrained or dual mobility liner, even when enabling technology makes us confident of safe-zone placement. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Background. Ultraporous metals have now been used in acetabular reconstruction for two decades with excellent survival. The purpose of this study is to evaluate a newer porous metal made from Ti6Al4V titanium alloy in complex primary and revision hip arthroplasty. Methods. A retrospective review as performed on all total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures in which a G7 Osseo-Ti (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN) acetabular component was used between 2015 and 2017. Patients with 2-year minimum follow-up or failure were included, yielding a cohort of 123 patients (126 hips). There were 50 male patients (41%; 51 hips) and 73 females (59%; 75 hips). Mean age was 65 years (range, 43–88) and mean BMI was 30.7 kg/m. 2. (range, 18–56). Indications for ultraporous metal components were in hips with compromised bone stock or severe acetabular deformity. Procedures were 35 complex primary THA and 91 revision THA that included 12 conversions and 24 reimplantations as part of 2-staged exchange for treatment of infection. Results. With an average 3.3-year follow-up (range, 2–5 years), 1 hip in the primary series (2.9%) and 4 hips in the revision series (4.4%) were revised for aseptic loosening of the acetabular component. Three of these re-revisions required custom triflange devices. Five patients (4%) failed for periprosthetic infection, which included 1 primary THA done for rheumatoid arthritis and post-radiation necrosis, and 4 second-stage reimplantation revision THAs for prior infection. Two revision patients, one done for active instability and one multiply revised, subsequently dislocated and required liner revision to constrained constructs. Kaplan-Meier analysis to endpoint of acetabular revision for aseptic loosening was 96.6% (±3.4%) in the primary series and 95.3% (±2.3%) in the revision series. Conclusion. This three-dimensionally printed ultraporous titanium acetabular component demonstrated promising early results in complex primary and revision total hip arthroplasty

Highly porous tantalum cups have been used in complex acetabular revisions for nearly 20 years but reports of long term results are limited. This study was designed to report ten year results of revision using a single porous tantalum cup design with special attention to re-operation for any reason, all-cause revision, and revision for aseptic loosening. Retrospective review of all revision THA cases performed from 1999–2006 using a highly porous tantalum acetabular component design with multiple screw holes and a cemented polyethylene liner (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN). Our institutional medical record and total joint registry were used to assess follow-up and xrays were reviewed. The Paprosky classification system was used to rate acetabular bone loss. Radiographic loosening was defined as new/progressive radiolucencies in all 3 acetabular zones, or cup migration (>2mm). Kaplan-Meier survivorship was used to assess survivorship free of cup revision/removal for any reason, and free of revision for aseptic loosening. Between 1999 and 2006 this tantalum cup was used in 916 revisions. Mean age: 66 (±6), BMI: 29 (±6), and male: 42%. Indications for revision: aseptic loosening 346 (38%), osteolysis 240 (26%), and infected arthroplasty 168 (18%). Large (3A or 3B) bone defects were present in 260, and pelvic discontinuity in 61. Reoperation for any reason: 133 (15%), but 84 of 133 cases did not require cup revision for instability (38) or femoral failure (24). Tantalum cup removal/revision was required in 49 (5.3%) for deep infection (39) and recurrent dislocation (6), and aseptic loosening (4). 10 year survivorship free of cup revision for any reason: 95% and for aseptic loosening: 99%. Radiographic review (mean 10 years): suspicious for aseptic loosening in another 4 cups. A highly porous tantalum acetabular component with multiple screws and a cemented polyethylene insert provided durable long term fixation for an array of acetabular revision problems. Long term aseptic loosening was very rare (<1%) and cup removal was mainly related to deep infection, and rarely dislocation

Aims. To report our experience with trunnion corrosion following metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty, in particular to report the spectrum of presentation and determine the mean time to presentation. Patients and Methods. We report the presenting symptoms and signs, intraoperative findings, and early results and complications of operative treatment in nine patients with a mean age of 74 years (60 to 86). The onset of symptoms was at a mean of seven years (3 to 18) after index surgery. Results. Patients presented with a variety of symptoms including pain, limp and rash. The preoperative mean serum cobalt level was 7.1 ppb (2.2 to 12.8) and mean serum chromium level was 2.2 ppb (0.5 to 5.2). Metal artifact reduction sequence (MARS) MRI showed fluid collection and possible pseudotumour formation in five hips, fluid collection in two hips, and synovitis/debris in one hip, with no MRI in one patient. Acetabular revision was performed in three patients, six patients underwent liner and head exchange only. The postoperative metal levels decreased in all patients: mean cobalt 0.5 ppb (0 to 1.8) and mean chromium 0.9 ppb (0 to 2.6) at a mean of five months (3 to 8) postoperatively. Seven patients had good pain relief and no complications at one year. There were two major complications requiring reoperation: acute infection at six weeks, for which the patient required two-stage reimplantation; and recurrent dislocation, for which the patient was revised to a dual mobility component. Conclusion. Trunnion corrosion in metal-on-polyethylene THA has a range of presenting symptoms, and may present later than previously described. A high index of suspicion is warranted, and serum cobalt and chromium levels are recommended for diagnosis. Patients should be counselled about possible postoperative complications. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:898–902

Several methods of treatment are available in the revision of loose acetabular components associated with significant bone loss. Jumbo cups are the preferred treatment for large acetabular defects with segmental and cavitary defects. By definition, a jumbo cup has a minimum diameter of 62 mm in women, 66 mm in men, or is greater than 10 mm larger than the normal contralateral acetabulum. They are easier to use and less expensive than cages, bulk supporting allografts, or custom cups. Proper technique is for bone to be moved, not removed. The acetabulum is reamed larger to gain more host-bone surface area. The acetabulum should then accommodate the large shell and maximise the shell host-bone contact for long-term biological fixation. The preferred shell is one with high porosity to maximise the potential area for bone ingrowth when less bone contact is present. At least 50% host-bone to shell contact is ideal but not mandatory. The larger surface area of a jumbo cup provides more opportunity for bone ingrowth. Therefore having an initially stable cup is more important than the amount of host-bone contact. Jumbo cups are only contraindicated in acetabulae that lack the superior lateral acetabulum and the posterior column. In that situation, fortunately uncommon, a cup/ cage reconstruction is used. We reported a retrospective review of 690 acetabular revisions performed from 1986–2005. Jumbo cups were used in 196 (28%) of all the acetabular revisions and greater than 95% of the cases with large defects. This is the largest series or revisions with jumbo cups reported. Significant bony deficiencies were present; 68% were Paprosky type II and 25% were Paprosky type III. The average follow-up for the jumbo cups was ten years. Five revisions and two resection arthroplasties were performed for failure. The probability of survival of the jumbo cups was 98% at four years and 96% at 16 years. Porous jumbo cup acetabular revision with supplemental screw fixation provides good to excellent intermediate- and long-term outcomes

Although cement in cement acetabular revision is a recognised option in the presence of a well-fixed cement mantle, partial cement mantle retention is not normally recommended or practiced. However, when revising a cemented acetabular cup it is not infrequent to be faced with loose superolateral cement but well-fixed medial cement. Removal of the well-fixed cement can be time consuming and destructive. An alternative would be to retain this cement and incorporate it into the reconstruction. This study assesses the practice and results of partial cement mantle retention (PCR) at acetabular revision. We retrospectively identified a cohort of 28 hips in 26 patients using the PCR technique from 1. st. January 2000 to 1. st. January 2013. This represented 3.3% of cup revisions where a cemented cup was used. The area of cement loss was reconstructed in one of three ways: re-cementing into drill holes (6 cases); impaction grafting of the defect (8 cases); or use of a trabecular metal wedge (14 cases). 24 hips had a minimum 2-year follow up (mean 6 years). There were no subsequent revisions for aseptic loosening. One acetabulum was later revised for dislocation and X-rays were lost in one patient leaving 22 patients with x-ray available and retained implants. Two of these cases showed progression of lucent lines, which were not clinically significant. Retaining well-fixed medial cement during socket revision appears to be a reasonable reconstruction option in carefully selected cases

Background. Hip resurfacing has resurged in the last decade due to a renewed interest in metal on metal bearing. One of the proposed advantages is ease of revision of the femoral component. Short term functional results after femoral revision are similar to those after conventional total hip replacement. Survival and function after revision of the acetabular component only or of both components have not been reported. We aimed to assess hip function and implant survival after revision of the acetabular component for failed Birmingham hip resurfacing (BHR). Methods. The Oswestry Outcome Centre collected data prospectively on 5000 patients who underwent hip resurfacing between 1997 and 2002. Of these, 182 hips were revised: 42% had revision of the femoral component only, 8% revision of the acetabular component only, and 50% revision of both components. This study analyzed patients who had revision of the acetabular component, either in isolation or in combination with the femoral component. Results. In the isolated acetabular revision group the median Harris Hip Score was 74 at a mean of 4.5 years post-revision. In the both components revision group the median Harris hip score was 85 at a mean of 4 years. There was no significant difference in function between the groups. Kaplan-Meier survivor ship analysis after revision showed an average survival of 91% at 10 years. There was a significant difference between survival of isolated acetabular revision (75%) and both component revision (96%). Conclusions. Revision total hip replacement subsequent to failure of hip resurfacing has good outcome and good midterm survival. Isolated acetabular revision and revision of both components had similar function but survival was significantly worse in the isolated acetabular revision group

Introduction and Objective. The surgical strategy for acetabular component revision is determined by available host bone stock. Acetabular bone deficiencies vary from cavitary or segmental defects to complete discontinuity. For segmental acetabular defects with more than 50% of the graft supporting the cup it is recommended the application of reinforcement ring or ilioischial antiprotrusio devices. Acetabular reconstruction with the use of the antiprotrusion cage (APC) and allografts represents a reliable procedure to manage severe periprosthetic deficiencies with highly successful long-term outcomes in revision arthroplasty. Objective. We present our experience, results, critical issues and technical innovations aimed at improving survival rates of antiprotrusio cages. Materials and Methods. From 2004 to 2019 we performed 69 revisions of the acetabulum using defrosted morcellized bone graft and the Burch Schneider anti-protrusion cage. The approach was direct lateral in 25 cases, direct anterior in 44. Patients were re-evaluated with standard radiography and clinical examination. Results. Eight patients died from causes not related to surgery, and two patients were not available for follow up. Five patients were reviewed for, respectively, non-osseointegration of the ring, post-traumatic loosening with rupture of the screws preceded by the appearance of supero-medial radiolucency, post-traumatic rupture of the distal flange, post-traumatic rupture of the cemented polyethylene-ceramic insert, and dislocation treated with new dual-mobility insert. Among these cases, the first three did not show macroscopic signs of osseointegration of the ring, and the only areas of stability were represented by the bone-cement contact at the holes in the ring. Although radiographic studies have shown fast remodeling of the bone graft and the implant survival range from 70% to 100% in the 10-year follow up, the actual osseointegration of the ring has yet to be clarified. To improve osseointegration of the currently available APC whose metal surface in contact with the bone is sandblasted, we combined the main features of the APC design long validated by surgical experience with the 3D-Metal Technology for high porosity of the external surface already applied to and validated with the press fit cups. The new APC design is produced with the 3D-Metal technology using Titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V ELI) that Improves fatigue resistance, primary stability and favorable environment for bone graft ingrowth. We preview the results of the first cases with short-term follow up. Conclusions. Acetabular reconstruction with impacted morcellized bone graft and APC is a current and reliable surgical technique that allows the restoration of bone loss with a high survival rate of the implant in the medium to long term. The new 3D Metal Cage is designed to offer high friction for the initial stability. The high porosity of the 3D Metal structure creates a favorable environment for bone growth, thus providing valid secondary fixation reproducing the results achieved with the 3D metal press fit cup

Using the Mayo Clinic definition (>62mm in women and >66mm in men), the “jumbo acetabular component” is the most successful method for acetabular revisions now, even in hips with severe bone loss. There are numerous advantages: surface contact is maximised; weight-bearing is distributed over a large area of the pelvis; the need for bone grafting is reduced; and usually, hip center of rotation is restored. The possible disadvantages of jumbo cups include: may not restore bone stock; may ream away posterior column or wall; screw fixation required; the possibility of limited bone ingrowth and late failure; and a high rate of dislocation due to acetabular size:femoral head ratio. The techniques for a successful jumbo revision acetabular component involve: sizing-“reaming” of the acetabulum, careful impaction to achieve a “press-fit”, and multiple screw fixation. We recommend placement of an ischial screw in addition to dome and posterior column screw fixation. Cancellous allograft is used for any cavitary defects. The contra-indications for a jumbo acetabular cup are: pelvic dissociation; inability to get a rim fit; and inability to get screw fixation. If stability cannot be achieved with the jumbo cup alone, then use of augment(s), bulk allograft, or cup-cage construct should be considered. Using titanium fiber-metal mesh components, we reported the 15-year survival of 129 revisions. There was 3% revision for deep infection and only 3% revision for aseptic loosening. There were 13 reoperations for other reasons: wear, lysis, dislocation, femoral loosening, and femoral fracture fixation. The survival was 97.3% at 10 years, but it dropped to 82.8% at 15 years. Late loosening of this fiber metal mesh component is likely related to polyethylene wear and loss of fixation. Dislocation is the most common complication of jumbo acetabular revisions, approximately 10%, and these are multifactorial in etiology and often require revision. Based on our experience, we now recommend use of an acetabular component with an enhanced porous coating (tantalum), highly crosslinked polyethylene, and large femoral heads or dual mobility for all jumbo revisions

Aims

In metal-on-metal (MoM) hip arthroplasties and resurfacings, mechanically induced corrosion can lead to elevated serum metal ions, a local inflammatory response, and formation of pseudotumours, ultimately requiring revision. The size and diametral clearance of anatomical (ADM) and modular (MDM) dual-mobility polyethylene bearings match those of Birmingham hip MoM components. If the acetabular component is satisfactorily positioned, well integrated into the bone, and has no surface damage, this presents the opportunity for revision with exchange of the metal head for ADM/MDM polyethylene bearings without removal of the acetabular component.

We undertook a cemental unipolar proximal femoral endoprosthetic replacement in 131 patients with a mean age of 50 years (2 to 84). Primary malignant tumours were present in 54 patients and 67 had metastatic disease. In addition, eight patients had either lymphoma or myeloma and two had non-oncological disorders. The mean follow-up was 27 months (0 to 180). An acetabular revision was required later in 14 patients, 12 of whom had been under the age of 21 years at the time of insertion of their original prosthesis. The risk of acetabular revision in patients over 21 years of age was 8% at five years compared with 36% in those aged under 21 years. All the unipolar hips in this younger age group required revision within 11 years of the initial operation. We conclude that unipolar replacement should not be used in younger patients and should be avoided in patients with a life expectancy of more than five years

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.

This review summarises the technique of impaction grafting with mesh augmentation for the treatment of uncontained acetabular defects in revision hip arthroplasty. The ideal acetabular revision should restore bone stock, use a small socket in the near-anatomic position, and provide durable fixation. Impaction bone grafting, which has been in use for over 40 years, offers the ability to achieve these goals in uncontained defects. The precepts of modern, revision impaction grafting are that the segmental or cavitary defects must be supported with a mesh; the contained cavity is filled with vigorously impacted morselised fresh-frozen allograft; and finally, acrylic cement is used to stabilise the graft and provide rigid, long-lasting fixation of the revised acetabular component. Favourable results have been published with this technique. While having its limitations, it is a viable option to address large acetabular defects in revision arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(1 Supple A):25–30

Between 1980 and 2000, 63 support rings were used in the management of acetabular deficiency in a series of 60 patients, with a mean follow-up of 8.75 years (2 months to 23.8 years). There was a minimum five-year follow-up for successful reconstructions. The indication for revision surgery was aseptic loosening in 30 cases and infection in 33. All cases were Paprosky III defects; IIIA in 33 patients (52.4%) and IIIB in 30 (47.6%), including four with pelvic dissociation. A total of 26 patients (43.3%) have died since surgery, and 34 (56.7%) remain under clinical review. With acetabular revision for infection or aseptic loosening as the definition of failure, we report success in 53 (84%) of the reconstructions. A total of 12 failures (19%) required further surgery, four (6.3%) for aseptic loosening of the acetabular construct, six (9.5%) for recurrent infection and two (3.2%) for recurrent dislocation requiring captive components. Complications, seen in 11 patients (18.3%), included six femoral or sciatic neuropraxias which all resolved, one grade III heterotopic ossification, one on-table acetabular revision for instability, and three early post-operative dislocations managed by manipulation under anaesthesia, with no further instability. We recommend support rings and morcellised bone graft for significant acetabular bone deficiency that cannot be reconstructed using mesh

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.