Abductor deficiency commonly contributes to total hip dislocation. Successful treatment of the deficiency can improve function, decrease pain, and decrease reliance on implants to cure recurrent dislocation. The defining physical exam findings are dependence on ambulatory assistive devices, severe limp, positive Trendelenberg sign, and inability to abduct against gravity. Three techniques have been described for chronic abductor discontinuity in which the abductors have retracted or are absent and cannot reach the greater trochanter: Vastus lateralis muscle shift, Achilles tendon allograft, and gluteus maximus muscle transfer. None of the techniques were specifically performed for dislocation. The vastus lateralis shift transfers the entire muscle proximally maintaining the neurovascular bundle. The procedure requires an incision from the hip to the knee, isolation of the neurovascular bundle, and elevation of the muscle from the femur. The authors admitted that the technique is demanding and not easily applicable to many surgeons. Repair with an Achilles allograft requires an identifiable contractile abductor mass. The allograft is looped through the abductors to bridge the gap to the trochanter. Two variations of a gluteus muscle transfer for abductor deficiency after total hip have been described. A portion of the gluteus maximus with its distal fascial portion are transferred to the greater trochanter. As far as dislocation is concerned an advantage of this technique is the use of the posterior maximus flap to fill a posterior and superior capsular defect not addressed with the other techniques. In addition the technique is easy to perform in almost all cases

Abductor deficiency after THA can result from proximal femoral bone loss, trochanteric avulsion, muscle destruction associated with infection, pseudotumor, ALTR to metal debris, or other causes. Whiteside has described a transfer of the tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus to the greater trochanter for treatment of absent abductors after THA. Transposition of the tensor muscle requires raising an anterior soft tissue flap to the lever of the interval between the tensor muscle and sartorius, which is the same interval used in an anterior approach to the hip. The muscle is transected distally and transposed posteriorly to attach to the proximal femur. This can result in soft tissue redundancy between the posterior tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus. This interval is separated and the anterior gluteus maximis also attached to the proximal femur. Relatively large unconstrained (36 mm heads) were not found to be effective in controlling dislocation in patients with abductor deficiency. In our practice, 11 patients with abductor deficiency were treated with Whiteside's tensor muscle transfer and an unconstrained large diameter femoral head. The mean pre-operative abductor strength was 2.2 and improved to 3.2 post-operatively. One patient sustained a dislocation four weeks after surgery which was treated with open reduction. All of the other hips have remained stable. The combination of a large head and tensor muscle transposition may be a viable alternative to use of a fully constrained component in patients with deficient abductors after THA

Abductor deficiency after THA can result from proximal femoral bone loss, trochanteric avulsion, muscle destruction associated with infection, pseudotumor, ALTR to metal debris, or other causes. Constrained acetabular components are indicated to control instability after THA with deficient abductors. However, the added implant constraint also results in greater stresses at the modular liner-locking mechanism of the constrained component and bone-implant fixation interface, which can contribute to mechanical failure of the constrained implant or mechanical loosening. Use of large heads has been effective in reducing the rate of dislocation after primary THA. However, relatively large (36mm) heads were not found to be effective in controlling dislocation in patients with abductor deficiency. Dual mobility implants which can provide considerably larger head diameters than 36mm may offer an advantage in improving stability in patients with abductor deficiency. However the utility of these devices in controlling instability after THA with deficient abductors has not been established. Whiteside has described a transfer of the tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus to the greater trochanter for treatment of absent abductors after THA. Transposition of the tensor muscle requires raising an anterior soft tissue flap to the lever of the interval between the tensor muscle and sartorius, which is the same interval used in an anterior approach to the hip. The muscle is transected distally and transposed posteriorly to attach to the proximal femur. This can result in soft tissue redundancy between the posterior tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus. This interval is separated and the anterior gluteus maximus also attached to the proximal femur. The transposed tensor muscle provides muscle coverage over the greater trochanter, which may be beneficial in controlling lateral hip pain. In our practice, 11 patients were treated with Whiteside's tensor muscle transfer. Six patients had absent abductors, one had an avulsed greater trochanter, and four intact but weak abductors. One patient had a muscle transposition alone, one had an ORIF of the greater trochanter and muscle transposition, two had a muscle transposition and head/liner exchange, three had a muscle transposition and cup revision, two had a femoral revision and liner exchange with muscle transposition, and two had a muscle transposition with both component revision. None of the patients had constrained components. The mean pre-operative abductor strength was 2.2 (0/5 in four patients 3/5 in four patients, and 4/5 in three patients). Pre-operative lateral hip pain was none or mild in two patients, moderate in three, and severe in six patients. Mean post-operative abductor strength was 3.2 (2/5 in four patients, 3/5 in three, 4/5 in two, 5/5 in two patients). Post-operative lateral hip pain was none in five and mild in six patients. One patient sustained a dislocation four weeks after surgery which was treated with open reduction. All of the other hips have remained stable. Treatment of patients with hip instability and abductor deficiency has generally required use of a constrained acetabular component. In our experience, transfer of the tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus to the greater trochanter can improve abductor strength by one grade and also reduce lateral hip pain. The combination of a large head and tensor muscle transposition may be a viable alternative to use of a fully constrained component in patients with deficient abductors after THA. However, the need for implant constraint should also be individualised and based on factors such as the viability of the transposed muscle, patient compliance with post-operative activity restrictions, femoral head/neck ratio, and cup position

Complete or nearly complete disruption of the attachment of the gluteus is seen in 10–20% of cases at the time of THA. Special attention is needed to identify the lesion at the time of surgery because the avulsion often is visible only after a thickened hypertrophic trochanteric bursa is removed. From 1/1/09 to 12/31/13, 525 primary hip replacements were performed by a single surgeon. After all total hip components were implanted, the greater trochanteric bursa was removed, and the gluteus medius and minimus attachments to the greater trochanter were visualised and palpated. Ninety-five hips (95 patients) were found to have damage to the muscle attachments to bone. Fifty-four hips had mild damage consisting of splits in the tendon, but no frank avulsion of abductor tendon from their bone attachments. None of these cases had severe atrophy of the abductor muscles, but all had partial fatty infiltration. All hips with this mild lesion had repair of the tendons with #5 Ticron sutures to repair the tendon bundles together, and drill holes through bone to anchor the repair to the greater trochanter. Forty-one hips had severe damage with complete or nearly complete avulsion of the gluteus medius and minimus muscles from their attachments to the greater trochanter. Thirty-five of these hips had partial fatty infiltration of the abductor muscles, but all responded to electrical stimulation. The surface of the greater trochanter was denuded of soft tissue with a rongeur, the muscles were repaired with five-seven #5 Ticron mattress sutures passed through drill holes in the greater trochanter, and a gluteus maximus flap was transferred to the posterior third of the greater trochanter and sutured under the vastus lateralis. Six hips had complete detachment of the gluteus medius and minimus muscles, severe atrophy of the muscles, and poor response of the muscles to electrical stimulation. The gluteus medius and minimus muscles were sutured to the greater trochanter, and gluteus maximus flap was transferred as in the group with functioning gluteus medius and minimus muscles. Postoperatively, patients were instructed to protect the hip for 8 weeks, then abductor exercises were started.

The normal hips all had negative Trendelenburg tests at 2 and 5 years postoperative with mild lateral hip pain reported by 11 patients at 2 years, and 12 patients at 5 years. In the group of 54 with mild abductor tendon damage that were treated with simple repair, positive Trendelenburg test was found in 5 hips at 2 years and in 8 hips at 5 years. Lateral hip pain was reported in 7 hips at 2 years, and in 22 at 5 years. In the group of 35 hips with severe avulsion but good muscle tissue, who underwent repair with gluteus maximus flap transfer, all had good abduction against gravity and negative Trendelenburg tests at 2 and 5 years postoperative, and none had lateral hip pain. Of the 6 hips with complete avulsion and poor muscle who underwent abductor muscle repair and gluteus maximus flap transfer, all had weak abduction against gravity, mildly positive Trendelenburg sign, and mild lateral hip pain at 2 and 5 years postoperative. Abductor avulsion is uncommon but not rare, and is detected during THA only by direct examination of the tendon and removal of the trochanteric bursa. Simple repair of mild abductor tendon damage did not prevent progressive abductor weakness in some hips; and the increase in number of patients with lateral hip pain from 2 to 5 years suggests progressive deterioration. Augmentation of the repair with a gluteus maximus flap appears to provide a stable reconstruction of the abductor muscles, and seemed to restore abductor function in the hips with functioning muscles.

Introduction

The results of repair and reconstruction of lesions found in the abductor muscles and tendons during posterior approach to primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) were reported in 2018. During the course of this series it became apparent that the extent of damage in the abductor tendons and muscles usually was obscured by the hypertrophic greater trochanteric bursa, especially the deep layer adherent to the greater trochanter and abductor muscles. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surgeon's ability to see these lesions during standard posterior approach, and also to describe the dissection necessary to fully expose them.

Introduction

Complete or nearly complete disruption of the gluteus attachment is seen in 10–20% of cases at the time of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Special attention is needed to identify the lesion at the time of surgery because the avulsion often is visible only after a thickened hypertrophic trochanteric bursa is removed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate a technique designed to restore abductor function by transferring the gluteus maximus to compensate for the deficient medius and minimus muscles.

Avulsion of the abductor muscles of the hip may cause severe limp and pain. Limited literature is available on treatment approaches for this problem, and each has shortcomings. This study describes a muscle transfer technique to treat complete irreparable avulsion of the hip abductor muscles and tendons.

Ten adult cadaver specimens were dissected to determine nerve and blood supply point of entry in the gluteus maximus and tensor fascia lata (TFL) and evaluate the feasibility and safety of transferring these muscles to substitute for the gluteus medius and minimus. In this technique, the anterior portion of the gluteus maximus and the entire TFL are mobilised and transferred to the greater trochanter such that the muscle fiber direction of the transferred muscles closely matches that of the gluteus medius and minimus. Five patients (five hips) were treated for primary irreparable disruption of the hip abductor muscles using this technique between January 2008 and April 2011. All patients had severe or moderate pain, severe abductor limp, and positive Trendelenburg sign. Patients were evaluated for pain and function at a mean of 28 months (range, 18–60 months) after surgery.

All patients could actively abduct 3 months post-operatively. At 1 year post-operatively, three patients had no hip pain, two had mild pain that did not limit their activity, three had no limp, and one had mild limp. One patient fell, fractured his greater trochanter, and has persistent limp and abduction weakness.

The anterior portion of the gluteus maximus and the TFL can be transferred to the greater trochanter to substitute for abductor deficiency. In this small series, the surgical procedure was reproducible and effective; further studies with more patients and longer follow-up are needed to confirm this.

Hip abductor deficiency (HAD) associated with hip arthroplasty can be a chronic, painful condition that can lead to abnormalities in gait and instability of the hip. HAD is often confused with trochanteric bursitis and patients are often delayed in diagnosis after protracted courses of therapy and steroid injection. A high index of suspicion is subsequently warranted.

Risk factors for HAD include female gender, older age, and surgical approach. The Hardinge approach is most commonly associated with HAD because of failure of repair at the time of index surgery or subsequent late degenerative or traumatic rupture. Injury to the superior gluteal nerve at exposure can also result in HAD and is more commonly associated with anterolateral approaches. Multiple surgeries, chronic infection, and chronic inflammation from osteolysis or metal debris are also risk factors especially as they can result in bone stock deficiency and direct injury to muscle. Increased offset and/or leg length can also contribute to HAD, especially when both are present.

Physical exam demonstrates abductor weakness with walking and single leg stance. There is often a palpable defect over the greater trochanter and palpation in that area usually elicits significant focal pain. Note may be made of multiple incisions. Increased leg length may be seen.

Radiographs may demonstrate avulsion of the greater trochanter or significant osteolysis. Significant polyethylene wear or a metal-on-metal implant should be considered as risk factors, as well as the presence of increased offset and/or leg length. Ultrasound or MRI are helpful in confirming the diagnosis but false negatives and positive results are possible.

Treatment is difficult, especially since most patients have failed conservative management before diagnosis of HAD is made. Surgical options include allograft and mesh reconstruction as well as autologous muscle transfers. Modest to good results have been reported, but reproducibility is challenging. In the case of increased offset and leg length, revision of the components to reduce offset and leg length may be considered. In the case of significant instability, abductor repair may require constrained or multi-polar liners to augment the surgical repair.

HAD is a chronic problem that is difficult to diagnose and treat. Detailed informed consent appropriately setting patient expectations with a comprehensive surgical plan is required if surgery is to be considered. Be judicious when offering this surgery.

Loss of the abductor portions of the gluteus medius and gluteus minimus muscles due to total hip arthroplasty (THA) causes severe limp and often instability. To minimise the risk of limp and instability the anterior half of the gluteus maximus was transferred to the greater trochanter and sutured under the vastus lateralis. A separate posterior flap was transferred under the primary flap to substitute for the gluteus minimus and capsule. To ensure tight repair, the flaps were attached and tensioned in abduction.

The technique was performed in 11 patients (11 hips) with complete loss of abductor attachment; the procedure was performed in 9 patients during THA and in 2 later as a secondary procedure. Pre-operatively, all patients had abductor lurch, positive Trendelenburg sign, and no abduction of the hip against gravity. The follow up ranged from 16 to 42 months.

Post-operatively, 9 patients had strong abduction of the hip against gravity, no abductor lurch, and negative Trendelenburg sign. One patient had weak abduction against gravity, negative Trendelenburg sign, and slight abductor lurch. One patient failed to achieve strong abduction, had severe limp after 6 months of protection and physical therapy, and was lost to follow up.

Gluteus maximus transfer can restore abductor function in THA, but it is technically demanding and requires careful, prolonged rehabilitation.

Aims

The aims of this study were to assess the exposure and preservation of the abductor mechanism during primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) using the posterior approach, and to evaluate gluteus maximus transfer to restore abductor function of chronically avulsed gluteus medius and minimus.

Aims. There is little information in the literature about the use of dual-mobility (DM) bearings in preventing re-dislocation in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to compare the use of DM bearings, standard bearings, and constrained liners in revision THA for recurrent dislocation, and to identify risk factors for re-dislocation. Methods. We reviewed 86 consecutive revision THAs performed for dislocation between August 2012 and July 2019. A total of 38 revisions (44.2%) involved a DM bearing, while 39 (45.3%) and nine (10.5%) involved a standard bearing and a constrained liner, respectively. Rates of re-dislocation, re-revision for dislocation, and overall re-revision were compared. Radiographs were assessed for the positioning of the acetabular component, the restoration of the centre of rotation, leg length, and offset. Risk factors for re-dislocation were determined by Cox regression analysis. The modified Harris Hip Scores (mHHSs) were recorded. The mean age of the patients at the time of revision was 70 years (43 to 88); 54 were female (62.8%). The mean follow-up was 5.0 years (2.0 to 8.75). Results. DM bearings were used significantly more frequently in elderly patients (p = 0.003) and in hips with abductor deficiency (p < 0.001). The re-dislocation rate was 13.2% for DM bearings compared with 17.9% for standard bearings, and 22.2% for constrained liners (p = 0.432). Re-revision-free survival for DM bearings was 84% (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77 to 0.91) compared with 74% (95% CI 0.67 to 0.81) for standard articulations, and 67% (95% CI 0.51 to 0.82) for constrained liners (p = 0.361). Younger age (hazard ratio (HR) 0.92 (95% CI 0.85 to 0.99); p = 0.031), lower comorbidity (HR 0.44 (95% CI 0.20 to 0.95); p = 0.037), smaller heads (HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.99); p = 0.046), and retention of the acetabular component (HR 8.26 (95% CI 1.37 to 49.96); p = 0.022) were significantly associated with re-dislocation. All DM bearings which re-dislocated were in patients with abductor muscle deficiency (HR 48.34 (95% CI 0.03 to 7,737.98); p = 0.303). The radiological analysis did not reveal a significant relationship between restoration of the geometry of the hip and re-dislocation. The mean mHHSs significantly improved from 43 points (0 to 88) to 67 points (20 to 91; p < 0.001) at the final follow-up, with no differences between the types of bearing. Conclusion. We found that the use of DM bearings reduced the rates of re-dislocation and re-revision in revision THA for recurrent dislocation, but did not guarantee stability. Abductor deficiency is an important predictor of persistent instability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):89–97

Management of recurrent instability of the hip requires careful assessment to determine any identifiable causative factors. While plain radiographs can give a general impression, CT is the best methodology for objective measurement. Variables that can be measured include: prosthetic femoral anteversion, comparison to contralateral native femoral anteversion, total offset from the medial wall of the pelvis to the lateral side of the greater trochanter, comparison to total offset on the contralateral side, acetabular inclination, & acetabular anteversion. Wera et al describe potential causes of instability. These are typed into I. Acetabular Component Malposition; II. Femoral Component Malposition; III. Abductor Deficiency; IV. Impingement; V. Late Wear; and VI. Unknown. Acetabular component malposition is the most common cause of instability and so measurement of cup orientation is essential. It is well known that excessive or inadequate anteversion can lead to anterior and posterior dislocation respectively but horizontal components are also associated with posterior dislocation due to deficient posterior/inferior acetabular surface. Similarly, excessive or inadequate femoral anteversion can be easily identified on CT as can insufficient total offset of the reconstructed joint compared to the contralateral side. This can be caused by medialization of the acetabular component. Abductor deficiency can be a soft-tissue cause of instability, but it certainly isn't the only one. Knowledge of the prior surgical exposure can be instructive. Anterior exposures can be prone to deficient anterior capsule just as posterior exposures can be prone to deficient posterior capsule and short rotators, while anterolateral and lateral exposures can be associated with gluteus minimus and gluteus medius compromise. Impingement, whether involving implants, bone, or soft tissue are primarily secondary to the above factors, if osteophytes were properly trimmed at the index procedure. Correction of the incorrect variables is the primary goal of revision for instability and greatly preferable to using salvage options such as dual-mobility or constrained articulations which invoke additional concerns. Ultimately though, such salvage options are necessary if the cause of the instability cannot be determined or can be determined but not corrected. Bracing, while highly inconvenient and sometimes impractical for certain patients, still has a role in specific circumstances. Formal analysis of the unstable prosthetic reconstruction is the key to successful treatment

Recurrent dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a complex, multifactorial problem that has been shown to be the most common indication for revision THA. At our center, we have tried to approach the unstable hip by identifying the primary cause of instability and correcting that at the time of revision surgery. Type 1:. Malposition of the acetabular component treated with revision of the acetabular component and upsizing the femoral head. Type 2:. Malposition of the femoral component treated with revision of the femur and upsizing the femoral head. Type 3:. Abductor deficiency treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility bearing. Type 4:. Soft tissue or bony impingement treated with removal of impingement sources and upsizing the femoral head. Type 5:. Late wear of the bearing treated with bearing surface exchange and upsizing the femoral head. Type 6:. Unclear etiology treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility articulation. These may be patients with abnormal spino-pelvic motion. The most common etiologies of instability in our experience include cup malposition (Type 1) and abductor deficiency (Type 3). We reviewed 75 hips revised for instability and at a mean 35.3 months 11 re-dislocations occurred (14.6%). Acetabular revisions were protective against re-dislocation (p<0.02). The number of previous operations (p=0.04) and previously failed constrained liners (p<0.02) were risk factors for failure. The highest risk of failure was in patients with abductor insufficiency with revisions for other etiologies having a success rate of 90%. Although instability can be multifactorial, by identifying the primary cause of instability, a rational approach to treatment can be formulated. In general the poorest results were seen in patients with abductor deficiency. Given the high rate of failure of constrained liners (9 of the 11 failures were constrained), we currently are exploring alternatives such as dual mobility articulations. Our early experience with dual mobility suggests improved results when compared to constrained liners

Recurrent dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a complex, multifactorial problem that has been shown to be the most common indication for revision THA. At our center, we have tried to approach the unstable hip by identifying the primary cause of instability and correcting that at the time of revision surgery. Type 1: Malposition of the acetabular component treated with revision of the acetabular component and upsizing the femoral head. Type 2: Malposition of the femoral component treated with revision of the femur and upsizing the femoral head. Type 3: Abductor deficiency treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility bearing. Type 4: Soft tissue or bony impingement treated with removal of impingement sources and upsizing the femoral head. Type 5: Late wear of the bearing treated with bearing surface exchange and upsizing the femoral head. Type 6: Unclear etiology treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility articulation. The most common etiologies of instability in our experience include cup malposition (Type 1) and abductor deficiency (Type 3). We reviewed 75 hips revised for instability and at a mean 35.3 months, 11 re-dislocations occurred (14.6%). Acetabular revisions were protective against re-dislocation (p<0.02). The number of previous operations (p=0.04) and previously failed constrained liners (p<0.02) were risk factors for failure. The highest risk of failure was in patients with abductor insufficiency with revisions for other etiologies having a success rate of 90%. Although instability can be multifactorial, by identifying the primary cause of instability, a rational approach to treatment can be formulated. In general, the poorest results were seen in patients with abductor deficiency. Given the high rate of failure of constrained liners (9 of the 11 failures were constrained), we currently are exploring alternatives such as dual mobility articulations. Our early experience with dual mobility suggests improved results when compared to constrained liners

Recurrent dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a complex, multifactorial problem that has been shown to be the most common indication for revision THA. At our center, we have tried to approach the unstable hip by identifying the primary cause of instability and correcting that at the time of revision surgery. Type 1: Malposition of the acetabular component treated with revision of the acetabular component and upsizing the femoral head. Type 2: Malposition of the femoral component treated with revision of the femur and upsizing the femoral head. Type 3: Abductor deficiency treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility bearing. Type 4: Soft tissue or bony impingement treated with removal of impingement sources and upsizing the femoral head. Type 5: Late wear of the bearing treated with bearing surface exchange and upsizing the femoral head. Type 6: Unclear etiology treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility articulation. The most common etiologies of instability in our experience include cup malposition (Type 1) and abductor deficiency (Type 3). We reviewed 75 hips revised for instability and at a mean 35.3 months 11 re-dislocations occurred (14.6%). Acetabular revisions were protective against re-dislocation (p<0.015). The number of previous operations (p=0.0379) and previously failed constrained liners (p<0.02) were risk factors for failure. The highest risk of failure was in patients with abductor insufficiency with revisions for other etiologies having a success rate of 90%. Although instability can be multifactorial, by identifying the primary cause of instability, a rational approach to treatment can be formulated. In general the poorest results were seen in patients with abductor deficiency. Given the high rate of failure of constrained liners (9 of the 11 failures were constrained), we currently are exploring alternatives such as dual mobility articulations

Aims

The burden of revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) continues to grow. The surgery is complex and associated with significant costs. Regional rTHA networks have been proposed to improve outcomes and to reduce re-revisions, and therefore costs. The aim of this study was to accurately quantify the cost and reimbursement for a rTHA service, and to assess the financial impact of case complexity at a tertiary referral centre within the NHS.

Aims

Modular dual mobility (MDM) acetabular components are often used with the aim of reducing the risk of dislocation in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). There is, however, little information in the literature about its use in this context. The aim of this study, therefore, was to evaluate the outcomes in a cohort of patients in whom MDM components were used at revision THA, with a mean follow-up of more than five years.

Aims

The aim of this randomized trial was to compare the functional outcome of two different surgical approaches to the hip in patients with a femoral neck fracture treated with a hemiarthroplasty.