Aims. Pelvic discontinuity is a challenging acetabular defect without a consensus on surgical management. Cup-cage reconstruction is an increasingly used treatment strategy. The present study evaluated implant survival, clinical and radiological outcomes, and complications associated with the cup-cage construct. Methods. We included 53 cup-cage construct (51 patients) implants used for hip revision procedures for pelvic discontinuity between January 2003 and January 2022 in this retrospective review. Mean age at surgery was 71.8 years (50.0 to 92.0; SD 10.3), 43/53 (81.1%) were female, and mean follow-up was 6.4 years (0.02 to 20.0; SD 4.6). Patients were implanted with a Trabecular Metal Revision Shell with either a ZCA cage (n = 12) or a TMARS cage (n = 40, all Zimmer Biomet). Pelvic discontinuity was diagnosed on preoperative radiographs and/or intraoperatively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed, with failure defined as revision of the cup-cage reconstruction. Results. The five-year all-cause survival for cup-cage reconstruction was 73.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 61.4 to 85.4), while the ten- and 15-year survival was 63.7% (95% CI 46.8 to 80.6). Survival due to aseptic loosening was 93.4% (95% CI 86.2 to 100.0) at five, ten, and 15 years. The rate of revision for aseptic loosening, infection, and dislocation was 3/53 (5.7%), 7/53 (13.2%), and 6/53 (11.3%), respectively. The mean leg length discrepancy improved (p < 0.001) preoperatively from a mean of 18.2 mm (0 to 80; SD 15.8) to 7.0 mm (0 to 35; SD 9.8) at latest follow-up. The horizontal and vertical hip centres improved (p < 0.001) preoperatively from a mean of 9.2 cm (5.6 to 17.5; SD 2.3) to 10.1 cm (6.2 to 13.4; SD 2.1) and 9.3 cm (4.7 to 15.8; SD 2.5) to 8.0 cm (3.7 to 12.3; SD 1.7), respectively. Conclusion. Cup-cage reconstruction provides acceptable outcomes in the management of pelvic discontinuity. One in four constructs undergo revision within five years, most commonly for periprosthetic joint infection, dislocation, or aseptic loosening. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):66–73

Aims. Pelvic discontinuity is a rare but increasingly common complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA). This single-centre study evaluated the performance of custom-made triflange acetabular components in acetabular reconstruction with pelvic discontinuity by determining: 1) revision and overall implant survival rates; 2) discontinuity healing rate; and 3) Harris Hip Score (HHS). Methods. Retrospectively collected data of 38 patients (39 hips) with pelvic discontinuity treated with revision THA using a custom-made triflange acetabular component were analyzed. Minimum follow-up was two years (mean 5.1 years (2 to 11)). Results. There were eight subsequent surgical interventions. Two failures (5%) of the triflange acetabular components were both revised because of deep infection. There were seven (18%) patients with dislocation, and five (13%) of these were treated with a constraint liner. One patient had a debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) procedure. In 34 (92%) hips the custom-made triflange component was considered stable, with a healed pelvic discontinuity with no aseptic loosening at midterm follow-up. Mean HHS was 80.5 (48 to 96). Conclusion. The performance of the custom triflange implant in this study is encouraging, with high rates of discontinuity healing and osteointegration of the acetabular implant with no aseptic loosening at midterm follow-up. However, complications are not uncommon, particularly instability which we successfully addressed with constrained liners. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(11):867–876

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 use of ilioischial cage reconstruction for pelvic discontinuity has been replaced by the Trabecular Metal (Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana) cup-cage technique in our institution, due to the unsatisfactory outcome of using a cage alone in this situation. We report the outcome of 26 pelvic discontinuities in 24 patients (20 women and four men, mean age 65 years (44 to 84)) treated by the cup-cage technique at a mean follow-up of 82 months (12 to 113) and compared them with a series of 19 pelvic discontinuities in 19 patients (18 women and one man, mean age 70 years (42 to 86)) treated with a cage at a mean follow-up of 69 months (1 to 170). The clinical and radiological outcomes as well as the survivorship of the groups were compared. In all, four of the cup-cage group (15%) and 13 (68%) of the cage group failed due to septic or aseptic loosening. The seven-year survivorship was 87.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 71 to 103) for the cup-cage group and 49.9% (95% CI 15 to 84) for the cage-alone group (p = 0.009). There were four major complications in the cup-cage group and nine in the cage group. Radiological union of the discontinuity was found in all successful cases in the cup-cage group and three of the successful cage cases. Three hips in the cup-cage group developed early radiological migration of the components, which stabilised with a successful outcome. Cup-cage reconstruction is a reliable technique for treating pelvic discontinuity in mid-term follow-up and is preferred to ilioischial cage reconstruction. If the continuity of the bone graft at the discontinuity site is not disrupted, early migration of the components does not necessarily result in failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:195–200

Aims. Severe acetabular bone loss and pelvic discontinuity (PD) present particular challenges in revision total hip arthroplasty. To deal with such complex situations, cup-cage reconstruction has emerged as an option for treating this situation. We aimed to examine our success in using this technique for these anatomical problems. Patients and Methods. We undertook a retrospective, single-centre series of 35 hips in 34 patients (seven male, 27 female) treated with a cup-cage construct using a trabecular metal shell in conjunction with a titanium cage, for severe acetabular bone loss between 2011 and 2015. The mean age at the time of surgery was 70 years (42 to 85) and all patients had an acetabular defect graded as Paprosky Type 2C through to 3B, with 24 hips (69%) having PD. The mean follow-up was 47 months (25 to 84). Results. The cumulative five-year survivorship of the implant with revision for any cause was 89% (95% confidence interval (CI) 72 to 96) with eight hips at risk. No revision was required for aseptic loosening; however, one patient with one hip (3%) required removal of the ischial flange of the cage due to sciatic nerve irritation. Two patients (6%; two hips) suffered from hip dislocation, whereas one patient (one hip) required revision surgery with cement fixation of a dual-mobility acetababular component into a well-fixed cup-cage construct. Two patients (6%; two hips) developed periprosthetic infection. One patient was successfully controlled with a two-stage revision surgery, while the other patient underwent excision arthroplasty due to severe medical comorbidities. For the whole series, the Harris Hip Score significantly improved from a mean of 30 (15 to 51) preoperatively to 71 (40 to 89) at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Our findings suggest that cup-cage reconstruction is a viable option for major segmental bone defects involving the posterior column and PD. It allows adequate restoration of the acetabulum centre with generally good stability and satisfactory postoperative function. Instability and infection remain drawbacks in these challenging revision cases. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1442–48

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

Pelvic discontinuity represents a rare but challenging problem for orthopaedic surgeons. It is most commonly encountered during revision total hip replacement, but can also result from an iatrogentic acetabular fracture during hip replacement. The general principles in management of pelvic discontinuity include restoration of the continuity between the ilium and the ischium, typically with some form of plating. Bone grafting is frequently required to restore pelvic bone stock. The acetabular component is then impacted, typically using an uncemented, trabecular metal component. Fixation with multiple supplemental screws is performed. For larger defects, a so-called ‘cup–cage’ reconstruction, or a custom triflange implant may be required. Pre-operative CT scanning can greatly assist in planning and evaluating the remaining bone stock available for bony ingrowth. Generally, good results have been reported for constructs that restore stability to the pelvis and allow some form of biologic ingrowth. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:109–13

Pelvic discontinuity is defined as a separation of the ilium superiorly from the ischiopubic segment inferiorly. In 2018, the main management options include the following: 1) hemispheric acetabular component with posterior column plating, 2) cup-cage construct, 3) pelvic distraction, and 4) custom triflange construct. A hemispheric acetabular component with posterior column plating is a good option for acute pelvic discontinuities. However, healing potential is dependent on host's biology and characteristic of the discontinuity. The plate should include 3 screws above and 3 screws below the discontinuity with compression in between. In addition, the hemispherical acetabular component should have at least 50% host bone contact with 3–4 screws superior and 2–3 screws inferior to the discontinuity. On the other hand, a cup-cage construct can be used in any pelvic discontinuity. This includes a highly porous acetabular component placed on remaining host bone. Occasionally, highly porous metal augments are used to fill the remaining bone defects. A supplemental cage is placed over the acetabular component, spanning the discontinuity from the ilium to the ischium. A polyethylene liner is then cemented into place with antibiotic-loaded bone cement. Rarely, pelvic distraction may be needed. With this technique, pelvic stability is obtained via distraction of the discontinuity by elastic recoil of the pelvis and by fixing the superior hemipelvis and inferior hemipelvis to a highly porous metal cup or augment with screws, thereby unitizing the superior and inferior aspects of the pelvis. In essence, the cup acts as a segmental replacement of the acetabulum, with healing occurring to the cup or augment, resulting in a unitised hemipelvis. Frequently, the discontinuity itself does not achieve bony healing. Finally, custom triflange constructs are being utilised with increasing frequency. Triflange cups are custom-designed, porous and/or hydroxyapatite coated, titanium acetabular components with iliac, ischial, and pubic flanges. Rigid fixation promotes healing of the discontinuity and biologic fixation of the implant. It requires a CT scan, dedicated preoperative design, and fabrication costs

Aims. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and radiological results of patients who were revised using a custom-made triflange acetabular component (CTAC) for component loosening and pelvic discontinuity (PD) after previous total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. Data were extracted from a single centre prospective database of patients with PD who were treated with a CTAC. Patients were included if they had a follow-up of two years. The Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), modified Oxford Hip Score (mOHS), EurQol EuroQoL five-dimension three-level (EQ-5D-3L) utility, and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), including visual analogue score (VAS) for pain, were gathered at baseline, and at one- and two-year follow-up. Reasons for revision, and radiological and clinical complications were registered. Trends over time are described and tested for significance and clinical relevance. Results. A total of 18 females with 22 CTACs who had a mean age of 73.5 years (SD 7.7) were included. A significant improvement was found in HOOS (p < 0.0001), mOHS (p < 0.0001), EQ-5D-3L utility (p = 0.003), EQ-5D-3L NRS (p = 0.013), VAS pain rest (p = 0.008), and VAS pain activity (p < 0.0001) between baseline and final follow-up. Minimal clinically important improvement in mOHS and the HOOS Physical Function Short Form (HOOS-PS) was observed in 16 patients (73%) and 14 patients (64%), respectively. Definite healing of the PD was observed in 19 hips (86%). Complications included six cases with broken screws (27%), four cases (18%) with bony fractures, and one case (4.5%) with sciatic nerve paresthesia. One patient with concurrent bilateral PD had revision surgery due to recurrent dislocations. No revision surgery was performed for screw failure or implant breakage. Conclusion. CTAC in patients with THA acetabular loosening and PD can result in stable constructs and significant improvement in functioning and health-related quality of life at two years' follow-up. Further follow-up is necessary to determine the mid- to long-term outcome. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(2):53–61

This report reviews the long-term results of treating acetabula with unusually severe problems, such as pelvic discontinuity or major column loss after failed total hip arthroplasty (THA) and reconstruction problems. Loss of acetabular bone stock results from removal of bone during the original procedure, prosthetic failure, and osteolysis. In massive structural failure, the acetabular rim, quadrilateral plate, and associated columns become deficient. At worst, this may be combined with pelvic discontinuity and disruption of the ilium and ischium. Prosthetic protrusio may result from fixation loss and be associated with scarring of the femoral vessels, femoral nerve, ureter and bowel. A variety of implants has been used to in ace-tabular reconstruction. The results are often poor because of insufficient bone stock to support the implant. In a consecutive series of 251 THA revisions done between 1988 and 1996, 17 patients were treated for major pelvic column loss, pelvic discontinuity or both. In five patients, a posterolateral approach without trochanteric osteotomy was used. The extensile triradiate approach with ilioinguinal extension was used in 12 patients in whom severe prosthetic protrusio increased the risk of intrapelvic iatrogenic injury. A long anterior column pelvic plate was applied. A posteriorly placed AO 4.5-mm pelvic reconstruction plate with 10 to 12 holes was used in nine cases of pelvic discontinuity and in five cases of posterior column bone loss. This plate extended from the most inferior extent of the ischium across the wall of the posterior column to a point high on the ilium. Anterior column fixation was done in eight of nine cases of pelvic discontinuity and all three cases of anterior column deficiency. This called for an 8 to 12-hole 3.5-mm AO pelvic reconstruction plate that extended from the pubic symphysis across the pelvic rim. This spanned the anterior column defect, ranging from 4 cm to 8 cm, to the medial wall of the ilium. Bulk allograft was used in 16 of the 17 patients. The patient in whom allograft was not used had pelvic discontinuity following pelvic irradiation. Whole pelvic acetabular transplants were used in seven with severe bone loss or following resection for chondrosarcoma and the other for pigmented or villonodular synovitis. Posterior segmental acetabular allograft was used in two cases of posterior column absence. Femoral heads were used in two posterior column defects, three pelvic discontinuities with anterior column defect, and two anterior column defects. Acetabular components were cemented in six of seven whole bulk ace-tabular transplants, six of nine pelvic discontinuities and two anterior column defects. Cemented implants were classified as loose if there was a complete radiolucent line at the bone cement interface, measurable component migration or measurable change in position. Uncemented acetabular components were considered loose if component migration had occurred or screws had broken. Pelvic plates were considered loose if there was measurable migration or change in plate position or if fixation screws had backed out or broken. Radiographic union was considered present when bridging callus or trabecular bone was visible across the discontinuity site. Junctional healing was considered probable when radiographs did not show obvious signs of failure. Grafts were considered unhealed if there was obvious displacement, bone gaps or hardware breakage. Seven of the nine patients with pelvic discontinuity had late evidence of healing of the fracture and allograft consolidation. One underwent removal of the graft at three weeks after developing acute postoperative infection: early junctional healing of a whole bulk acetabular allograft required an osteotomy to break up the interface. Another patient, who underwent removal of the graft and implant at three months for chronic infection, had consolidation of a whole bulk ace-tabular allograft. One patient underwent revision of a pressfitted acetabular component at 60 months, and the pelvic discontinuity was solidly united. In a fourth patient, explored at 124 months for loosening of a cemented cup, there was near complete dissolution of the graft posterior acetabular wall and a loose posterior pelvic plate. In a patient with pelvic discontinuity after radiation therapy for uterine carcinoma, satisfactory healing of the pelvic discontinuity was confirmed at 32 months, when excisional arthroplasty for late chronic infection followed urinary sepsis. Seven patients had major column loss with severe cavitary defects. Consolidation of the allograft was noted in all seven within the first 12 months of follow-up. Revision (47%) was required for infection in three patients, implant loosening in four, and recurrent implant dislocation in one. The four loose cups were revised to a cemented all-polyethylene component. All four implants had been placed on less than 50% host bone. None of the four has required subsequent revision. Dislocation postoperatively occurred in eight patients. In six, the extensile triradiate approach had been used. This approach led to dislocation in 50%. The main reasons for using the extensile triradiate approach were to avoid catastrophic injuries by direct exposure of vital structures and to allow stable anterior column plate fixation. In that no neurovascular injuries occurred and stable durable allograft consolidation and healing of pelvic discontinuity took place, these goals were largely met. Three patients developed late sciatic palsy. In one, plaster immobilisation had possibly caused direct pressure over the fibular head and led to chronic peroneal palsy. The other two underwent additional exploration of the sciatic nerve for late entrapment caused by migration of screws from the posterior column plate. Two patients developed bladder infections postoperatively. Another developed superficial phlebitis of the lower leg. Acetabular revision for loosening was necessary in three of seven cementless implants, while only two of 10 cemented implants failed. The acetabular component should be cemented into the allograft when more than 50% of the prosthetic interface is non-viable. Virtually all graft material, including dense cortical grafts, may ultimately fail if used for implant fixation. Patients should be told about the inevitable risks. However, techniques used led to stable healing of the pelvic discontinuity in most cases. Long pelvic plates that securely stabilise the pelvis and allografts carefully opposed to host bone may explain the relative success in this series

Stabilisation of a pelvic discontinuity with a posterior column plate with or without an associated acetabular cage sometimes results in persistent micromotion across the discontinuity with late fatigue failure and component loosening. Acetabular distraction offers an alternative technique for reconstruction in cases of severe bone loss with an associated pelvic discontinuity. We describe the technique of acetabular distraction with porous tantalum components and evaluate its survival, function and complication rate in patients undergoing revision surgery for chronic pelvic discontinuity. Between 2002 and 2006, we treated 28 patients with a chronic pelvic discontinuity acetabular reconstruction using acetabular distraction. A porous tantalum elliptical acetabular component was used alone or with an associated modular porous tantalum augment in all patients. Three patients died and five patients were lost to follow-up before two years. The remaining twenty patients were followed semiannually for a minimum of two years (average, 4.5 years; range, 2–7 years) with clinical pain and walking scores as well as radiographic evaluation for loosening, migration or failure. In the remaining twenty patients available for follow-up, one patient did require re-revision for aseptic loosening. Fifteen patients remained radiographically stable at last follow-up. Four patients had early migration of their acetabular component but thereafter remained radiographically stable and clinically asymptomatic. The average improvement using the modified Merle d'Aubigne – Postel pain and ambulation score was 6.6 (range, 3.3–9.6). There were no postoperative dislocations; however, we did encounter one infection, one vascular injury and one bowel injury. In this series, the use of acetabular distraction with porous tantalum components provides a biologic alternative to cage constructs with more predictable clinical results (average follow-up 4.5 years) for reconstruction of severe acetabular defects with associated pelvic discontinuity

Stabilisation of a chronic pelvic discontinuity with a posterior column plate with or without an associated acetabular cage sometimes results in persistent micromotion across the discontinuity with late fatigue failure and component loosening. We believe that these chronic discontinuities are really chronic fracture non-unions incapable of healing. Acetabular distraction offers an alternative technique for reconstruction in cases of severe bone loss with an associated pelvic discontinuity. We describe the technique of acetabular distraction with porous tantalum components and evaluate its survival, function and complication rate in patients undergoing revision surgery for chronic pelvic discontinuity. Between 2002 and 2006, we treated 28 patients with a chronic pelvic discontinuity acetabular reconstruction using acetabular distraction. A porous tantalum elliptical acetabular component was used alone or with an associated modular porous tantalum augment in all patients. Three patients died and five patients were lost to follow up before two years. The remaining twenty patients were followed semiannually for a minimum of two years (average, 5.5 years; range, 2–9 years) with clinical pain and walking scores as well as radiographic evaluation for loosening, migration or failure. In the remaining twenty patients available for follow up, one patient did require re-revision for aseptic loosening. Fifteen patients remained radiographically stable at last follow up. Four patients had early migration of their acetabular component but thereafter remained radiographically stable and clinically asymptomatic. The average improvement using the modified Merle d'Aubigne – Postel pain and ambulation score was 6.6 (range, 3.3–9.6). There were no post-operative dislocations; however, we did encounter one infection, one vascular injury and one bowel injury. In this series, the use of acetabular distraction with porous tantalum components provides a biologic alternative to cage constructs with more predictable clinical results (average follow up 5.5 years) for reconstruction of severe acetabular defects with associated pelvic discontinuity

Introduction. During revision total hip arthroplasty, successful treatment of acetabular bone loss with an associated chronic pelvic discontinuity is dependent upon the remaining bone stock, stability of the construct, potential for biologic fixation, and healing of the discontinuity. Several techniques have been described for the treatment of this clinical entity; the authors recommend the use of acetabular distraction technique in conjunction with a jumbo cup with or without augments. The authors recently evaluated the minimum two-year follow-up of acetabular distraction technique for the treatment of chronic pelvic discontinuity. In the process, a chronic pelvic discontinuity classification was created based on the type of reconstruction required. The purpose of this study is to introduce the initial observations of this novel classification system. Methods. Patients from two academic institutions undergoing acetabular distraction for chronic pelvic discontinuity were identified between January 2002 and December 2013 with minimum 2-year follow-up. Radiographs at latest follow-up were compared to serial radiographs from the index surgery. Data was collected by chart review in accordance with institutional IRB protocol from both institutions. Results. A cohort of 32 patients had minimum 2-year (range, 2.1–13.3 years) follow-up. Mean patient age was 67 years (range, 44–86) and 87% were female. All patients had a chronic pelvic discontinuity with the following bone loss patterns: 7 (22%) type IIC, 5 (15%) type IIIA and 20 (63%) type IIIB. At time of final follow-up, radiographs demonstrated 22 of 32 patients (69%) had evidence of a healed discontinuity. Chronic Pelvic Discontinuity Classification. The classification mirrors the Paprosky classification and requires a more complex reconstruction with each progressive type. For the 20 patients with a type IIIB acetabular bone loss pattern, the new classification was applied. The distribution of classification types was as follows: type I 6 (30%); type II 5 (25%); type IIIA 4 (20%); type IIIB 5 (25%); and type IV 0. Overall, 70% (14) patients required the use of an augment for acetabular reconstruction. Conclusions. Acetabular distraction has been established as an effective method by which to treat chronic pelvic discontinuity. The new classification helps to determine the complexity of reconstruction required for each discontinuity, especially when assessing the most severe acetabular defects (Paprosky IIIB). The authors advocate acetabular distraction with a jumbo cup and modular porous metal augments as the preferred treatment for acetabular bone loss with associated chronic pelvic discontinuity. According to the new classification, the likelihood of utilizing augment(s) increases with severity of bone loss. Future studies are required to validate this new chronic pelvic discontinuity classification

Uncemented hemispherical sockets are the implant of choice for most acetabular revisions. Several studies at mid-term document good clinical results, and furthermore, the implants are both versatile and technically straightforward to insert. When bone loss is present, the indications for uncemented sockets are expanded by using jumbo uncemented cups or uncemented cups placed at a high hip center. The main limitation of uncemented hemispherical cups is the need to place them on sufficient host bone to provide initial mechanical stability with a high, long-term likelihood of biologic fixation. The amount of host bone needed to meet these criteria has been debated. One rule of thumb that has been used is 50% surface area contact of the shell with host bone. However, for large sockets with a large surface area, a smaller percentage of the surface in contact with host bone may prove acceptable, provided the shell has host bone support in key areas including a peripheral rim fit and support in the dome of the socket. When these criteria cannot be fulfilled, an alternative method of acetabular reconstruction must be considered. These alternatives include structural bone grafts, impaction grafting, and anti-protrusio cages. Anti-protrusio cages have the advantage of distributing forces over a large surface area of native bone, resisting migration, and being compatible with either bulk or particulate graft in massive acetabular deficiencies. These implants do not provide for biologic fixation and thus their use probably is best restricted to situations in which porous coated implants are not likely to work. Pelvic discontinuity is a specific form of acetabular bone deficiency in which there is a transverse fracture of the acetabulum. Usually this occurs in association with marked acetabular bone loss and represents a stress fracture through deficient bone. Preoperative findings suggestive of pelvic discontinuity include: medial/lateral offset of the superior pelvis relative to the inferior hemipelvis, malrotation of the inferior hemipelvis relative to superior hemipelvis, or visible fracture line demonstrating the pelvic discontinuity. Judet films and true lateral radiographs of the hip can be helpful to delineate the presence of pelvic discontinuity. The treatment principles for pelvic discontinuity include the following: 1.) gain stable fixation of the new acetabular implant. When the bone deficiency is relatively modest this may be possible with a hemispherical uncemented socket. Frequently, however, bone deficiency is massive and an anti-protrusio cage is necessary; 2.) restore pelvic continuity and stability. Usually this is possible with just a posterior column plate; 3.) bone graft large defects using particulate versus structural bone graft. In massive deficiencies structural bone grafts have the advantage of bridging the discontinuity and allowing healing of the native pelvis to the structural graft inferiorly and superiorly which may promote healing of the discontinuity. The results of treatment of pelvic discontinuity are dependent on the severity of bone loss and whether or not the pelvis had previous therapeutic radiation; milder bone loss is associated with better results; and more severe bone loss and previous therapeutic pelvic radiation with worse results. Surgery for pelvic discontinuity is complex and the most common complications include recurrent instability, infection, and sciatic neuropathy

In our center the cup cage reconstruction is our most common technique where a cage is used, especially if there is a pelvic discontinuity. Cup Cage Construct – in this construct there must be enough bleeding host bone to stabilise the ultraporous cup which functions like a structural allograft supporting and eventually taking the stress off the cage. This construct is ideal for pelvic discontinuity with the ultraporous cup, i.e., bridging and to some degree distracting the discontinuity. If, however, the ultra-porous cup cannot be stabilised against some bleeding host bone, then a conventional stand-alone cage must be used. 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 acetabular revision surgery. Reconstruction by the use of ilio-ischial cages combined with trabecular metal acetabular components and morsellised bone (the component-cage technique) is a relatively new method of treatment. The trabecular cup provides a good environment for bone graft remodeling and eventual bone or fibrous ingrowth. The cage protects the trabecular metal cup until stabilisation occurs. The cage not only protects the cup but places the articulating center at the correct level. We reviewed a consecutive series of 32 cases of acetabular revision reconstructions with pelvic discontinuity who had been treated by the cup-cage technique. The mean follow-up was 38 months (24.0 to 68.0). Failure was defined as a migration of a component of >5mm. In 29 hips there was no clinical or radiological evidence of loosening at the last follow-up. The Harris hip scores improved significantly from 44.6 (sd 10.4) to 78.7 (sd 10.4) points (p<0.001). In three hips (11.5%) the construct migrated at one year after surgery. The complications included two cases of dislocations, one of infection and one of partial palsy of the peroneal nerve. Our findings indicated that the treatment of pelvic discontinuity by the component-cage construct is a reliable option

Pelvic discontinuity remains one of the most difficult reconstructive challenges during acetabular revision. Bony defects are extremely variable and remaining bone quality may be extremely poor. Careful pre-operative imaging with plain radiographs, oblique views, and CT scanning is recommended to improve understanding of the remaining bone stock. It is wise to have several options available intra-operatively including metal augments, jumbo cups, and cages. Various treatment options have been used with variable success. The principles of management include restoration of acetabular stability by “connecting” the ilium to the ischium, and by (hopefully) allowing some bony ingrowth into a porous surface to allow longer-term construct stability. Posterior column plates can be useful to stabilise the pelvis, and can supplement a trabecular metal uncemented acetabular component. Screws into the dome and into the ischium are used to span the discontinuity. More severe defects may require so-called “cup-cage” constructs or trabecular metal augmentation distraction techniques. The most severe defects typically necessitate custom triflange components. Triflange constructs allow broad based contact with remaining bone stock, and can span surprisingly large defects. Recent cost analyses have shown that custom triflange constructs are comparable to cup-cage-augment reconstructions. The results of these various solutions to manage pelvic discontinuity is extremely variable, however, it is fair to conclude that constructs that allow some bony ingrowth have demonstrated improved survivorship when compared to historical treatments such as bulk allografts protected by cages. The author prefers a posterior column plate and a trabecular metal cup for simple discontinuities, a cup-cage for larger defects, and a custom triflange for the most severe defects. Pre-operative imaging is critical to guide this decision-making, and careful attention to detail is important to obtain a stable, durable construct

The advent of trabecular metal (TM) augments has revolutionized the management of severe bone defects during acetabular reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) with the use of TM augments for reconstruction of Paprosky 3A, 3B defects and defects associated with pelvic discontinuity. A retrospective study was conducted of the cases performed at four centers between August 2007 and January 2015. Patients treated with TM augments for Paprosky 3A, 3B or chronic pelvic discontinuity were included in the study. All surgeries were performed through a posterior approach. A total of 57 patients (Male 34 (69%), Female 23(31%)), mean age 54 years (range, 28–94 years), with minimum follow up of one-year were included and evaluated using intention to treat analysis. There were 44 (77%) patients with a 3A defect, 11(19%) patients with a 3B defect (6 had an associated pelvic discontinuity), and 2 (3.5%) with a 2C defect and associated pelvic discontinuity. The mean follow-up was 37 months (range, 12–96 months). One (2%) patient died after 8 years of unrelated causes. Three (5.5%) patients had acetabular component loosening requiring revision; Two failures were (3.5%) due to aseptic loosening and one (2%) due to septic loosening. Fifty-four patients had a radiologically stable integration of the components at latest follow-up - survivorship was 94.7%. The results of this multi-center study demonstrate encouraging short and mid-term results for the use of TM augments in the management of Grade 3A and 3B defects, and defects associated with a chronic pelvic discontinuity

The treatment of severe acetabular bone loss is challenging, especially in the setting of an associated chronic pelvic discontinuity. There are several available treatment options for chronic pelvic discontinuity, each of which has its own disadvantages. One of the major difficulties with this entity, regardless of the reconstructive technique chosen, is the inability to obtain reproducible healing of the discontinuity. We evaluated the use of acetabular distraction, a technique which achieves peripheral or lateral distraction and central or medial compression across the discontinuity. We recommend acetabular distraction to allow for implantation of a stable construct, achieve biologic fixation and increase the likelihood of discontinuity healing. In this multi-center trial, 32 patients that underwent acetabular revision for a chronic pelvic discontinuity using acetabular distraction were radiographically evaluated at a minimum of 25 months (range, 25 to 160 months). The study cohort was categorized according to the Paprosky acetabular bone loss classification: seven (22%) type IIC, five (16%) type IIIA, and 20 (62%) type IIIB defects. Fourteen (70%) of the 20 patients with a type IIIB acetabular bone loss pattern required use of augments for acetabular reconstruction. Of the 32 patients, 1 (3%) patient required a revision for aseptic loosening, 2 (6%) patients had evidence of radiographic loosening but were not revised, and 3 (9%) patients had migration of the acetabular component into a more stable position. Radiographically, 22 (69%) of the cohort demonstrated healing of the discontinuity. The Kaplan-Meier construct survivorship was 83.3% when using aseptic acetabular loosening as an end-point. During this study, the authors created a new pelvic discontinuity classification based on the type of reconstruction required. The classification mirrors the Paprosky acetabular bone loss classification. A Type I chronic pelvic discontinuity required jumbo cup reconstruction without augments. A type II discontinuity required the use of an augment for an extracavitary defect. A type III discontinuity required an augment for an intracavitary defect. Type III defects were further subdivided into type IIIA and IIIB discontinuity. Type IIIA discontinuities utilized an augment to reconstruct the anterosuperior and/or posteroinferior column defect for primary stability of the overall construct. Type IIIB discontinuities utilized augments to reconstruct the anterosuperior and/or posteroinferior column defect for primary stability as well as a posterosuperior augment for supplemental fixation. All augments were unitized to the cup with cement. Type IV defects were massive defects that required the use of two orange-slice augments, secured together with screws and placed centrally to restore the defect, and a cup implanted and unitized to the augments with cement. According to this new classification, the discontinuity reconstructions in our study were classified as follows: 12 (38%) type I, 8 (25%) type II, 6 (19%) type IIIA, 6 (19%) type IIIB, and 0 as type IV. Acetabular distraction technique demonstrates favorable radiographic outcomes with reproducible discontinuity healing in a majority of cases. This alternative technique allows for biologic fixation and intra-operative customization of the construct to be implanted based on the bone loss pattern present following component removal

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

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

Aims. The aim of this study was to examine the results of the acetabular distraction technique in achieving implantation of a stable construct, obtaining biological fixation, and producing healing of chronic pelvic discontinuity at revision total hip arthroplasty. Patients and Methods. We identified 32 patients treated between 2006 and 2013 who underwent acetabular revision for a chronic pelvic discontinuity using acetabular distraction, and who were radiographically evaluated at a mean of 62 months (25 to 160). Of these patients, 28 (87.5%) were female. The mean age at the time of revision was 67 years (44 to 86). The patients represented a continuous series drawn from two institutions that adhered to an identical operative technique. Results. Of the 32 patients, one patient required a revision for aseptic loosening, two patients had evidence of radiographic loosening but were not revised, and three patients had migration of the acetabular component into a more stable configuration. Radiographically, 22 (69%) of the cohort demonstrated healing of the discontinuity. The Kaplan–Meier construct survivorship was 83.3% when using revision for aseptic acetabular loosening as an endpoint. At the time when one patient failed due to aseptic loosening (at 7.4 years), there were a total of seven patients with a follow-up of seven years or longer who were at risk of failure. Conclusion. The acetabular distraction technique demonstrates encouraging radiographic outcomes, with healing of the discontinuity in over two-thirds of our series. This surgical technique permits biological fixation and intraoperative customization of the construct to be implanted based on the pattern of the bone loss identified following component removal. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:909–14

Revision surgery for pelvic discontinuity in the presence of bone loss is challenging. The cup-cage reconstruction option has become popular for the management of pelvic discontinuity in the recent years. The aim of this study was to review the clinical, radiological and patient reported outcomes with the use of cup cage construct for pelvic discontinuity at our institution. Twenty-seven patients (27 cup-cage reconstructions) were identified at median 6-year (minimum 2 year, maximum 10 years) follow up. Eight were female patients. The median age was 77 years [mean 72, range 37–90, SD 13.6]. There were 5 deaths and 2 were lost to follow up. Two patients were converted to excision arthroplasty; one for infection and one for failure of the construct. A further 3 patients required revision for instability but the cup cage construct was not revised (2 revisions of cemented cups to a constrained cup and one revision of proximal modular component of the femoral prosthesis). Revision of the cup cage construct was not necessary in any of these cases. We noted excellent pain relief (mean WOMAC pain 85.6) and good functional outcome (mean WOMAC function 78.2, mean UCLA 5, mean OHS 78.6). Patient satisfaction with regards pain relief; function and return to activities were noted to be excellent. Radiological changes were noted in further 4 patients (cup migration in one case; fracture of ischial spike in one case and breakage of the cage screws in 2 patients). No migration of the construct was noted in any of the cases. In conclusion, the cup cage construct is an excellent method of dealing with complex pelvic discontinuity. Our study suggests a low failure rate; high patient satisfaction and pain relief and moderate functional outcome at median 6 year follow up

Acetabular distraction for the treatment of chronic pelvic discontinuity was first described by Sporer and Paprosky. The authors advocate the posterolateral approach for exposure of the posterior ilium and posterior column, The patient is secured in the lateral decubitus position. Following a systematic approach to surgical exposure, acetabular component removal should be performed with “cup out” osteotomes resulting in minimal iatrogenic bone loss. Following component removal and confirmation of a chronic discontinuity determine the integrity of the remaining AS and PI columns. If porous metal augments are needed for primary stabilization, the augments are placed prior to cup insertion for reconstruction of the AS and/or PI column. Next, Kirschner (K) wires (size 2.4) are placed in the remaining AS and PI bone so that the distractor can be secured in an extra-acetabular position. The distractor is placed over the K-wires allowing for lateral or peripheral acetabular distraction and resultant medial or central compression at the discontinuity. With the distractor in an extra-acetabular position, hemispherical reamers are used until an interference fit is achieved between the native or augmented AS and PI columns. The acetabulum should be reamed on reverse to avoid excessive removal of host bone. When the proper acetabular component size has been reached, the reamer will disengage from the reamer handle and the reamer can be used as a surrogate acetabular shell; when the acetabulum is maximally distracted, the entire construct will move as a unit. Crushed cancellous allograft is used to bone graft the discontinuity and reamed on reverse. A revision tantalum cup is inserted with continual distraction using the distractor. Cement is applied to the augment surface prior to cup insertion in order to utilise the construct. Following cup insertion, the distractor and K-wires are removed. Adjuvant screw fixation is performed, with a minimum of 4 screws, and placing at least one of the screws inferiorly for fixation in the superior public ramus or ischium to prevent abduction failure of the construct. In the setting of severely osteoporotic bone and inadequate screw fixation, an augment placed posterosuperiorly can be used for supplemental fixation. This augment is also unitised to the cup with cement at the same time as the liner is cemented into the cup. Bone wax is placed over the exposed tantalum surface of the posterosuperior augment to minimise soft-tissue ingrowth into the augment

Pelvic discontinuity (PD) is a detrimental complication following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and radiological results of patients with PD who were revised using a custom-made triflange acetabular component (CTAC). This is a single centre prospective study of patients with PD following THA who were treated with a CTAC. The Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), modified Oxford Hip Score (mOHS), EurQol five-dimension three-level (EQ-5D-3L) utility, and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS), including visual analogue score (VAS) for pain, were gathered at baseline, and at one- and two-year follow-up. Clinical and radiological complications, including reasons for revisions were registered. Trends over time are described and tested for significance and clinical relevance. 18 females with 22 CTACs were included with a mean age of 73.5 years (SD 7.7). There were significant improvements between baseline and final follow-up in HOOS (p<0.01), mOHS (p<0.01), EQ-5D-3L utility (p<0.01), EQ-5D-3L NRS (p<0.01), VAS pain rest (p<0.01), and VAS pain activity (p<0.01). A minimal clinically important improvement in mOHS and the HOOS was observed in 16 patients (73%) and 14 patients (64%), respectively. Definite healing of the PD was observed in 19 hips (86%). Complications included six cases with broken screws (27%), four cases (18%) with bony fractures, and one case (4.5%) with sciatic nerve paresthesia. One patient with concurrent bilateral PD had revision surgery due to recurrent dislocations. No revision surgery was performed for screw failure or implant breakage. This is the first prospective assessment in clinical outcome of patients with PD who were treated with a CTAC. We have demonstrated that CTAC in patients with THA acetabular loosening and PD can result in stable constructs with no mechanical failures. Moreover, clinically relevant improvements in health-related quality of life at two years’ follow-up was observed

Purpose: Pelvic discontinuity associated with bone loss is a complex challenge in acetabular revision surgery. Reconstruction with anti protrusion cages, Trabecular Metal (Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana) cups and morselized bone (Cup-Cage) constructs is a relatively new technique used by the authors for the past 6 years. The purpose of the study was to examine the clinical outcome of these patients. Method: Thirty-two consecutive acetabular revision reconstructions in 30 patients with pelvic discontinuity and bone loss treated by cup cage technique between January 2003 and September 2007 were reviewed. Average clinical and radiological follow up was 38.5 ± 19 months (range 12 – 68, median 34.5). Failure was defined as component migration > 5mm. Results: In 29 (90.6%) patients there was no clinical or radiographic evidence indicative of loosening at latest follow up. Harris Hip Scores improved significantly (p< 0.001) from 46.6 ± 10.4 to 78.7 ± 10.4 at 2 year follow up. In 3 patients the construct migrated at 1 year post surgery. One construct was revised to anti protrusion cage with a structural graft while the other was revised to a large Trabecular Metal cup. The third patient is scheduled for revision. Complications included 2 dislocations, 1 infection and 1 partial peroneal nerve palsy. Two patients died due to unrelated reasons at 1 and 3 years post surgery, respectively. Conclusion: Treatment of pelvic discontinuity by Cup-Cage construct is a reliable option based on preliminary results which suggest restoration of the pelvic mechanical stability. However, patients should be followed closely in order to detect cup migration until satisfactory bony ingrowth into the cup takes place

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

Aim. Until now, there has been no consensus as to whether stemmed acetabular components are appropriate for use in patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) who have major acetabular defects or pelvic discontinuity. We wished to address this deficiency in the literature. Patients and Methods. We carried out a retrospective study of 35 patients (six men and 29 women) with a mean age of 68 years (37 to 87), with major acetabular defects who underwent revision THA between 2000 and 2012. Results. At a mean follow-up of 63 months (24 to 141), a total of 15 patients (43%) had required at least one further operation. Six implants (17%) loosened aseptically, four (11%) were further revised for infection and two (6%) for technical failure. By taking revision for any reason as the endpoint, the rate of survival of the implant was 61% after five years; by taking revision for aseptic loosening as the end point, it was 78%. The cumulative five-year survival for aseptic loosening was 94% in patients without pelvic discontinuity, and 56% in those with pelvic discontinuity. Conclusion. These results indicate a significantly worse survival in patients with pelvic discontinuity (p = 0.020) and we advise caution in the use of the pedestal component in patients with major acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity who require revision THA. As a result of these findings we have stopped using this implant and prefer to use particulate bone grafts protected with an anti-protrusion cage and posterior column plate fixation, if necessary. Take home message: Based on these poor results, we advise caution if using the pedestal component in patients with major acetabular defects with the presence of a pelvic discontinuity. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:772–9

The advent of modular porous metal augments has ushered in a new form of treatment for acetabular bone loss. The function of an augment can be seen as reducing the size of a defect or reconstituting the anterosuperior/posteroinferior columns and/or allowing supplementary fixation. Depending on the function of the augment, the surgeon can decide on the sequence of introduction of the hemispherical shell, before or after the augment. Augments should always, however, be used with cement to form a unit with the acetabular component. Given their versatility, augments also allow the use of a hemispherical shell in a position that restores the centre of rotation and biomechanics of the hip. Progressive shedding or the appearance of metal debris is a particular finding with augments and, with other radiological signs of failure, should be recognized on serial radiographs. Mid- to long-term outcomes in studies reporting the use of augments with hemispherical shells in revision total hip arthroplasty have shown rates of survival of > 90%. However, a higher risk of failure has been reported when augments have been used for patients with chronic pelvic discontinuity. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(4):312–318

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

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

Despite considerable legacy issues, Girdlestone's Resection Arthroplasty (GRA) remains a valuable tool in the armoury of the arthroplasty surgeon. When reserved for massive lysis in the context of extensive medical comorbidities which preclude staged or significant surgical interventions, and / or the presence of pelvic discontinuity, GRA as a salvage procedure can have satisfactory outcomes. These outcomes include infection control, pain control and post-op function. We describe a case series of 13 cases of GRA and comment of the indications, peri, and post-operative outcomes. We reviewed all cases of GRA performed in our unit during an 8 year period, reviewing the demographics, indications, and information pertaining to previous surgeries, and post op outcome for each. Satisfaction was based on a binary summation (happy/unhappy) of the patients’ sentiments at the post-operative outpatient consultations. 13 cases were reviewed. They had a mean age of 75. The most common indication was PJI, with 10 cases having this indication. The other three cases were performed for avascular necrosis, pelvic osteonecrosis secondary to radiation therapy and end stage arthritis on a background of profound learning disability in a non-ambulatory patient. The average number of previous operations was 5 (1-10). All 13 patients were still alive post girdlestone. 7 (54%) were satisfied, 6 were not. 3 patients were diabetic. 5 patients developed a sinus tract following surgery. With sufficient pre-op patient education, early intensive physiotherapy, and timely orthotic input, we feel this procedure remains an important and underrated and even compassionate option in the context of massive lysis and / or the presence of pelvic discontinuity / refractory PJI. GRA should be considered not a marker of failure but as a definitive procedure that gives predictability to patients and surgeon in challenging situations

Cup-cage constructs are one of several methods commonly used to treat severe acetabular bone loss during contemporary revision total hip arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to provide a long-term results of the technique with emphasis on implant survivorship, radiographic results, and clinical outcomes for both full and half cup-cage reconstructions. We identified 57 patients treated with a cup-cage reconstruction for major acetabular bone loss between 2002–2012. All patients had Paprosky Type 2B through 3B bone loss, with 60% having an associated pelvic discontinuity. Thirty-one patients received a full cup-cage construct, and 26 a half cup-cage. Mean age at reconstruction was 66 years, 75% were female, and the mean BMI was 27 kg/m. 2. Mean follow-up was 10 years. The 10-year cumulative incidences of any revision were 14% and 12% for the full and half cup-cage construct groups, respectively. Of the 9 revisions, 3 were for dislocation, 2 for aseptic loosening and construct failure (both were pelvic discontinuities), 1 for adverse local tissue reaction, and 1 for infection with persistent pelvic discontinuity. The 10-year cumulative incidences of revision for aseptic loosening were 4.5% and 5% for the full and half cup-cage constructs, respectively. Of the unrevised cases, incomplete and non-progressive zone 3 radiolucent lines were observed in 10% of patients in each group. Three patients experienced partial motor and sensory sciatic nerve palsies (2 in the full and 1 in the half cup-cage group). Both the full and half cup-cage cohorts demonstrated significantly improved Harris hip scores. Full and half cup-cage reconstructions for major acetabular defects were successful at 10 years in regards to acetabular fixation without appreciable differences between the two techniques. However, zone 3 radiolucent lines were not uncommon in association with discontinuities, and dislocation continues to be a problem

Introduction. Pelvic discontinuity is a challenging complication. One treatment option that has garnered enthusiasm is acetabular distraction. This method obtains stability via distraction of the discontinuity and placement of an oversized socket (± augments) and elastic recoil of the pelvis. The aims of this study were to report implant survivorship, radiographic results, clinical outcomes, and complications of acetabular distraction for pelvic discontinuity in the largest series to date. Methods. We retrospectively identified all revision THAs with a Paprosky 3B defect and pelvic discontinuity between 2005 and 2017. Of the 162 patients, 32 were treated with distraction. The mean distraction achieved was 5mm (range, 3–8mm). In addition to distraction with a hemispherical cup, augments were utilized in 3 and cages in 19. The mean age at revision was 68 years with 75% female. Mean follow-up was 3 years. Results. The 2-year survivorships free from revision for aseptic loosening, revision, and reoperation were 95%, 75%, and 69%, respectively. There were 3 revisions including one for instability, one for infection, and one for aseptic loosening. At last follow-up, 16 patients had radiographic evidence of cup osteointegration to ilium and ischium, 13 to ilium only, and 3 without evidence of osteointegration (two distracted 3mm and one distracted 6mm). 19 discontinuity lines persisted while 13 had radiographically healed. Only those with osteointegration to both ilium and ischium had evidence of bone graft consolidation and discontinuity line healing. Mean HHS improved from 43 preoperatively to 77 postoperatively (p<0.0001). The most common complication was a postoperative sciatic nerve plasy in 4 patients (13%) of which 3 partially recovered. Conclusion. Pelvic discontinuities treated with acetabular distraction had a 2-year survivorship free from aseptic looseing of 95%. While nearly 2/3. rd. of discontinuity lines persisted, 91% of patients had radiographic evidence of osteointegration of the acetabular component. However, 13% of patients had a sciatic nerve palsy. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Acetabular bone loss is a challenging problem facing the revision total hip replacement surgeon. Reconstruction of the acetabulum depends on the presence of anterosuperior and posteroinferior pelvic column support for component fixation and stability. The Paprosky classification is most commonly used when determining the location and degree of acetabular bone loss. Augments serve the function of either providing primary construct stability or supplementary fixation. . When a pelvic discontinuity is encountered we advocate the use of an acetabular distraction technique with a jumbo cup and modular porous metal acetabular augments for the treatment of severe acetabular bone loss and associated chronic pelvic discontinuity. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):36–42

A pelvic discontinuity occurs when the superior and inferior parts of the hemi-pelvis are no longer connected, which is difficult to manage when associated with a failed total hip replacement. Chronic pelvic discontinuity is found in 0.9% to 2.1% of hip revision cases with risk factors including severe pelvic bone loss, female gender, prior pelvic radiation and rheumatoid arthritis. Common treatment options include: pelvic plating with allograft, cage reconstruction, custom triflange implants, and porous tantalum implants with modular augments. The optimal technique is dependent upon the degree of the discontinuity, the amount of available bone stock and the likelihood of achieving stable healing between the two segments. A method of treating pelvic discontinuity using porous tantalum components with a distraction technique that achieves both initial stability and subsequent long-term biological fixation is described. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):73–7

The custom triflange acetabular component has been advocated for severe acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity, cases in which a porous-coated hemisphere will not work. These are AAOS type III or IV defects, or alternatively classified as Paprosky 3B. Many have a pelvic discontinuity. A preoperative CT of the pelvis is sent to the manufacturer who generates a one to one scale 3D model of the hemipelvis. If the visualised defect cannot be treated with traditional methods then a triflanged component is created. Initial rigid fixation is obtained with screw fixation to the ilium and ischium. Subsequent bone ingrowth can provide long term fixation. The goal is to span the acetabular defect and obtain fixation to ilium and ischium with a third flange which rests on the pubis. Christie first reported on 67 hips (half with a discontinuity) with a mean follow-up of 53 months. No components were removed. There was an 8% reoperation for dislocation, 6% partial sciatic nerve palsy. Dennis reported 26 hips with a mean 54 month follow-up. Eighty-eight percent were considered successful. Taunton reported 57 cases with a pelvic discontinuity treated with a triflange at mean follow-up of 65 months. Eighty-one percent had a stable component and a healed pelvic discontinuity. The primary disadvantage of the technique is the preoperative time required to manufacture the device – typically 4–8 weeks

Acetabular components used to treat large defects are at greater risk of loosening. Porous tantalum acetabular components have reported the most promising early to midterm revision rates. Early stability of acetabular components used at revision THR was shown to be a good predictor of later loosening. The primary aim was to assess the migration of porous acetabular component used to reconstruct severe acetabular defects. Secondarily, we investigated the effect of acetabular defect severity and type of component fixation on migration. Radiosterometric analysis was used to measure migration at a mean follow-up of four years, (range 2–10) in 59 reconstructions of severe acetabular defects with porous tantalum components. Acetabular component fixation was classified as superior if augmented with screws through cup, augments or cage in the ilium only. Fixation was classified as combined, superior and inferior, if flanges and/or screws were also placed in the ischium and or pubis. Acceptable limits of proximal migration were defined as ≤1mm within 2 years and ≤2.5mm at any time point. Eight hips had reconstruction of Paprosky II defects with superior fixation only. The mean proximal migration of the eight acetabular components was 0.25mm (0.08–0.40) at 2 years and 0.29mm (0.10–0.81) at last follow-up. Fifty-one hips had reconstruction of Paprosky III defects. Seven of these reconstructions exceeded the migration thresholds. Five reconstructions (four with superior fixation and one cup cage construct with no inferior screw fixation) of hips with pelvic discontinuity developed pain and were re-revised for loosening. Two reconstructions are asymptomatic and migrated 2.68mm (cup-cage construct with superior screws) and 2.86mm (no pelvic discontinuity, superior fixation) at final follow-up. The mean proximal migration of the 51 Paprosky III reconstructions was 0.99mm (0.03 to 16.4) at 2 years and 1.92mm (0.01 to 29.4) at last follow-up. The mean proximal translation at 2 years of the 11 reconstructions with inferior screw fixation was 0.2mm (−0.6 to 0.7mm), compared with 0.9mm (−0.6 to 16.4mm) for the reconstructions without inferior screw fixation. In conclusion, when used to reconstruct Paprosky II defects, porous tantalum acetabular components provide component stability similar to a good performing primary THR. These implants achieve adequate stability when used to treat Paprosky III defects, including those with pelvic discontinuity. For the most severe defects, combined fixation with inferior screws is recommended, particularly when reconstructing hips with pelvic discontinuity

The custom triflange acetabular component has been advocated for severe acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity, cases in which a porous-coated hemisphere will not work. These are AAOS type III or IV defects, or alternatively classified as Paprosky 3B. Many have a pelvic discontinuity. A pre-operative CT of the pelvis is sent to the manufacturer who generates a one-to-one scale 3D model of the hemipelvis. The surgeon can review either a pdf file or an actual model. If the visualised defect cannot be treated with traditional methods then a triflanged component is created. The components have backside porous and hydroxyapatite coating. Initial rigid fixation is obtained with screw fixation to the ilium and ischium. Subsequent bone ingrowth can provide long term fixation. The goal is to span the acetabular defect and obtain fixation to the ilium and ischium with a third arm which rests on the pubis. Christie first reported on 67 hips (half with a discontinuity) with a mean follow-up of 53 months. No components were removed. There was an 8% reoperation for dislocation, 6% partial sciatic nerve palsy. 46% walked without support. Dennis reported 26 hips with a mean 54 month follow-up. Eighty-eight percent were considered successful. One implant was removed and left with a resection arthroplasty and 2 others had loose components but refused reoperation. Loosening of the ischial screws was a sign of failure in the three cases. Taunton reported 57 cases with a pelvic discontinuity treated with a triflange at mean follow-up of 65 months. Eighty-one percent had a stable component and a healed pelvic discontinuity. These authors also compared a custom triflange to a trabecular metal cup-cage construct finding similar implant costs of $12,500 and $11,250, respectively. All advocates of custom triflange acetabular components believe the results are similar or superior to other options in these very challenging cases at early follow-up. The primary disadvantage of the technique is the pre-operative time required to manufacture the device – typically 4–8 weeks

The custom triflange acetabular component has been advocated for severe acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity, cases in which a porous-coated hemisphere will not work. These are AAOS type III or IV defects, or alternatively classified as Paprosky 3B. Many have a pelvic discontinuity. A preoperative CT of the pelvis is sent to the manufacturer who generates a one-to-one scale 3D model of the hemipelvis. The surgeon can review either a pdf file or an actual model. If the visualised defect cannot be treated with traditional methods then a triflanged component is created. The components have backside porous and hydroxyapatite coating. Initial rigid fixation is obtained with screw fixation to the ilium and ischium. Subsequent bone ingrowth can provide long term fixation. The goal is to span the acetabular defect and obtain fixation to ilium and ischium with a third arm which rests on the pubis. Christie first reported on 67 hips (half with a discontinuity) with a mean follow-up of 53 months. No components were removed. There was an 8% reoperation for dislocation, 6% partial sciatic nerve palsy. 46% walked without support. Dennis reported 26 hips with a mean 54 month follow-up. 88% were considered successful. One implant was removed and left with a resection arthroplasty and 2 others had loose components but refused reoperation. Loosening of the ischial screws was a sign of failure in the three cases. Taunton reported 57 cases with a pelvic discontinuity treated with a triflange at mean follow-up of 65 months. 81% has a stable component and a healed pelvic discontinuity. These authors also compared a custom triflange to a trabecular metal cup-cage construct finding similar implant costs of $12,500 and $11,250, respectively. All advocates of custom triflange acetabular components believe the results are similar or superior to other options in these very challenging cases at early follow-up. The primary disadvantage of the technique is the preoperative time required to manufacture the device – typically 4–8 weeks

We retrospectively reviewed 44 consecutive patients (50 hips) who underwent acetabular re-revision after a failed previous revision that had been performed using structural or morcellised allograft bone, with a cage or ring for uncontained defects. Of the 50 previous revisions, 41 cages and nine rings were used with allografts for 14 minor-column and 36 major-column defects. We routinely assessed the size of the acetabular bone defect at the time of revision and re-revision surgery. This allowed us to assess whether host bone stock was restored. We also assessed the outcome of re-revision surgery in these circumstances by means of radiological characteristics, rates of failure and modes of failure. We subsequently investigated the factors that may affect the potential for the restoration of bone stock and the durability of the re-revision reconstruction using multivariate analysis. At the time of re-revision, there were ten host acetabula with no significant defects, 14 with contained defects, nine with minor-column, seven with major-column defects and ten with pelvic discontinuity. When bone defects at re-revision were compared with those at the previous revision, there was restoration of bone stock in 31 hips, deterioration of bone stock in nine and remained unchanged in ten. This was a significant improvement (p <  0.001). Morselised allografting at the index revision was not associated with the restoration of bone stock. . In 17 hips (34%), re-revision was possible using a simple acetabular component without allograft, augments, rings or cages. There were 47 patients with a mean follow-up of 70 months (6 to 146) available for survival analysis. Within this group, the successful cases had a minimum follow-up of two years after re-revision. There were 22 clinical or radiological failures (46.7%), 18 of which were due to aseptic loosening. The five and ten year Kaplan–Meier survival rate was 75% (95% CI, 60 to 86) and 56% (95% CI, 40 to 70) respectively with aseptic loosening as the endpoint. The rate of aseptic loosening was higher for hips with pelvic discontinuity (p = 0.049) and less when the allograft had been in place for longer periods (p = 0.040). . The use of a cage or ring over structural allograft bone for massive uncontained defects in acetabular revision can restore host bone stock and facilitate subsequent re-revision surgery to a certain extent. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:319–24

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. (B). Conventional cage in combination with a porous augment where contact with bleeding host bone can be with the ilium and then by the use of cement that construct can be unified. The augment provides contact with bleeding host bone and if and when ingrowth occurs, the stress is taken off the cage. (C). Cup-Cage Construct – in this construct there must be enough bleeding host bone to stabilise the ultra-porous cup which functions like a structural allograft supporting and eventually taking the stress off the cage. This construct is ideal for pelvic discontinuity with the ultra-porous cup, i.e., bridging and to some degree distracting the discontinuity. If, however, the ultra-porous cup cannot be stabilised against some bleeding host bone, then a conventional stand-alone cage must be used. 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

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. (B) Conventional cage in combination with a porous augment where contact with bleeding host bone can be with the ilium and then by the use of cement that construct can be unified. The augment provides contact with bleeding host bone and if and when ingrowth occurs, the stress is taken off the cage. (C) Cup Cage Construct – in this construct there must be enough bleeding host bone to stabilise the ultra-porous cup which functions like a structural allograft supporting and eventually taking the stress off the cage. This construct is ideal for pelvic discontinuity with the ultra-porous cup, i.e., bridging and to some degree distracting the discontinuity. If, however, the ultra-porous cup cannot be stabilised against some bleeding host bone, then a conventional stand-alone cage must be used. 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

Aims. Few reconstructive techniques are available for patients requiring complex acetabular revisions such as those involving Paprosky type 2C, 3A and 3B deficiencies and pelvic discontinuity. Our aim was to describe the development of the patient specific Triflange acetabular component for use in these patients, the surgical technique and mid-term results. We include a description of the pre-operative CT scanning, the construction of a model, operative planning, and surgical technique. All implants were coated with porous plasma spray and hydroxyapatite if desired. Patients and Methods. A multicentre, retrospective review of 95 complex acetabular reconstructions in 94 patients was performed. A total of 61 (64.2%) were female. The mean age of the patients was 66 (38 to 85). The mean body mass index was 29 kg/m. 2. (18 to 51). Outcome was reported using the Harris Hip Score (HHS), complications, failures and survival. Results. The mean follow-up was 3.5 years (1 to 11). The mean HHS improved from 46 (15 to 90) pre-operatively to 75 (14 to 100). A total of 21 hips (22%) had at least one complication with some having more than one; including dislocation (6%), infection (6%), and femoral complications (2%). The implant was subsequently removed in five hips (5%), only one for suspected aseptic loosening. Conclusion. The Triflange patient specific acetabular component provides predictable fixation with complication rates which are similar to those of other techniques. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B(1 Supple A):50–4

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

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

The treatment of extensive bone loss and massive acetabular defects is a challenging procedure, especially in cases with concomitant pelvic discontinuity (PD). Pelvic discontinuity describes the separation of the ilium proximally from the ischio-pubic region distally. The appropriate treatment strategy is to restore a stable continuity between the ischium and the ilium to reconstruct the anatomical hip center. Several treatment options such as antiprotrusio cages, metal augments, reconstruction cages with screw fixation, structural allograft with plating, jumbo cups, oblong cups and custom-made triflange acetabular components have been described as possible treatment options. Cage and/or ring constructs or acetabular allograft are commonly used techniques with unsatisfactory results and high failure rates. More favorable results have been presented with custom triflange acetabular components (CTAC), although the results are still unsatisfactory. Three-dimensional printing technology (3DP) has already become part of the surgical practice. In this context, preliminary clinical and radiological results using a 3D-printed custom acetabular component in the management of extensive acetabular defects are presented. The overall complication rate was 33.3 %. In one out of 15 patients (6.6 %), implant-associated complication occurred revealing an overall implant-associated survival rate of 93.3%. The 3D-printed custom acetabular component suggests a promising future, although the manufacturing process has high costs and the complication rate is still high

An uncemented hemispherical acetabular component is the mainstay of acetabular revision and gives excellent long-term results. Occasionally, the degree of acetabular bone loss means that a hemispherical component will be unstable when sited in the correct anatomical location or there is minimal bleeding host bone left for biological fixation. On these occasions an alternative method of reconstruction has to be used. A major column structural allograft has been shown to restore the deficient bone stock to some degree, but it needs to be off-loaded with a reconstruction cage to prevent collapse of the graft. The use of porous metal augments is a promising method of overcoming some of the problems associated with structural allograft. If the defect is large, the augment needs to be protected by a cage to allow ingrowth to occur. Cup-cage reconstruction is an effective method of treating chronic pelvic discontinuity and large contained or uncontained bone defects. . This paper presents the indications, surgical techniques and outcomes of various methods which use acetabular reconstruction cages for revision total hip arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):73–7

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