Hemispheric, porous-ingrowth revision acetabular components (generally with multiple screw fixation) have demonstrated versatility and durability over 25 years. Jumbo cups (minimum diameter of 62mm in women, 66mm in men, or 10mm larger than the normal contralateral acetabulum) are utilised in the majority of revisions with acetabular bone loss, with or without bone grafting, or other augmentation. The popularity of jumbo cups is due to their relative ease of use and the reliability of the result. With up to 20-year follow-up, and failure defined as cup revision for aseptic loosening or radiographic evidence of loosening, implant survival was 97.3% (95% confidence interval, 89.6% to 99.3%) at ten years and 82.8% (95% CI, 59% to 97.6%) at fifteen years. Twenty-year survivorship with 88% free from aseptic loosening of the metal acetabular component has been reported. Instability is decreased in association with larger diameter bearings. Revisions associated with wear of non-crosslinked polyethylene increased in the second decade. Crosslinked polyethylene and ultra-porous materials will likely increase both the durability and the utility of jumbo cups

Purpose:. Acetabular bone loss during revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) poses a challenge for reconstruction as segmental and extensive cavitary defects require structural support to achieve prosthesis stability. Trabecular metal (TM) acetabular augments structurally support hemispherical cups. Positive short-term results have been encouraging, but mid- to long-term results are largely unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine the continued efficacy of TM augments in THA revisions with significant pelvic bone loss. Methods:. Radiographs and medical records of 51 patients who had undergone THA revision with the use of a TM augment were retrospectively reviewed. Acetabular defects were graded according to the Paprosky classification of acetabular deficiencies based on preoperative radiographs and operative findings. Loosening was defined radiographically as a gross change in cup position, change in the abduction angle (>5°), or change in the vertical position of the acetabular component (>8 mm) between initial postoperative and most recent follow-up radiographs (Figure 1). Results:. Eleven patients had incomplete radiographic follow-up and were excluded. The study population included 17 men and 23 women, averaging 68.1 ± 14.1 years of age (range, 37–91), with average radiographic follow-up of 19.0 months (range, 2.4–97.4). Reasons for revision included osteolysis (n = 20, 38.5%), component loosening (n = 18, 15.4%), and periprosthetic fracture (n = 6, 11.5%). All patients underwent revision THA using a TM multi-hole revision acetabular cup and TM acetabular augment(s) to fill bony defects. Morcellized allograft was used in 9 patients. There were 33 Paprosky Type IIIA and seven Paprosky Type IIIB defects. One patient with Paprosky Type IIIB had catastrophic failure of the reconstructive construct three months postoperatively. The remaining 39 acetabular revisions demonstrated signs of bony ingrowth at the latest follow-up. There were no radiolucent lines suggestive of loosening, and no significant differences in abduction angle (p = 0.78), vertical distance between the superolateral edge of the cup and the trans-ischial reference line (p = 0.96), or the vertical distance between the center of the femoral head and trans-ischial reference line (p = 0.75) between the initial postoperative and most recent follow-up radiographs (Figure 2). Discussion and Conclusion:. Achieving fixation and long-term stability in THA revisions with segmental and/or cavitary bone loss is challenging. TM augments provide a modular structural system to achieve bony ingrowth, while avoiding large structural allografts, cages, and custom implants. At latest follow-up, 39 revision hips remained well-fixed with no evidence of loosening. One patient with a significant surgical history of infection, periprosthetic femur fracture, and 2 prior revision surgeries before acetabular reconstruction had an early clinical failure. Trabecular metal augments can be used for reconstruction of acetabular bone loss with good mid-term results. Continued follow-up is warranted for radiographic evaluation of bony integration and implant stability to determine long-term survivorship of these implants

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

Uncontained acetabular defects with loss of superior iliac and posterior column support (Paprosky 3B) represent a reconstructive challenge as the deficient bone will preclude the use of a conventional hemispherical cup. Such defects can be addressed with large metallic constructs like cages with and without allograft, custom tri-flange cups, and more recently with trabecular metal augments. An underutilised alternative is impaction bone grafting, after creating a contained cavitary defect with a reinforcement mesh. This reconstructive option delivers a large volume of bone while using a small-size socket fixed with acrylic cement.

Between 2006 and 2014, sixteen patients with a Paprosky 3B acetabular defect were treated with cancellous, fresh frozen impaction grafting supported by a peripheral reinforcement mesh secured to the pelvis with screws. A cemented all polyethylene cup was used. Preoperative diagnosis was aseptic loosening (10 cemented and 6 non-cemented). The femoral component was revised in 9 patients. Postoperative course consisted of 3 months of protected weight bearing. Patients were followed clinically and radiographically.

One patient had an incomplete postoperative sciatic palsy. After a mean follow up of 40 months (24 to 104) none of the patients required re-revision. One asymptomatic patient presented with aseptic loosening 9 years postoperatively. Hardware failure was not observed. All patients had radiographic signs of graft incorporation and bone remodeling. There were no dislocations.

The early and mid-term results of revisions for large acetabular defects with this technique are encouraging. Reconstitution of hip center of rotation and bone stock with the use of a small-size implant make this technique an attractive option for these large defects. Longer follow-up is needed to assess survivability.

Impaction grafting is an excellent option for acetabular revision. It is technique specific and very popular in England and the Netherlands and to some degree in other European centers. The long term published results are excellent. It is, however, technique dependent and the best results are for contained cavitary defects. If the defect is segmental and can be contained by a single mesh and impaction grafting, the results are still quite good. If, however, there is a larger segmental defect of greater than 50% of the acetabulum or a pelvic discontinuity, other options should be considered.

Segmental defects of 25–50% can be managed by minor column (shelf) or figure of 7 structural allografts with good long term results. Porous metal augments are now a good option with promising early to mid-term results. Segmental defects of greater than 50% require a structural graft or porous augment usually protected by a cage. If there is an associated pelvic discontinuity then a cup cage is a better solution.

An important question is does impaction grafting facilitate rerevision surgery? There is no evidence to support this but some histological studies of impacted allograft would suggest that it may. On the other hand there are papers that show that structural allografts do restore bone stock for further revision surgery. Also the results of impaction grafting are best in the hands of surgeons comfortable with using cement on the acetabular side, and one of the reasons why this technique is not as popular in North America.

Aim

To introduce and promote a new technic and a new component using the 3D technology in the extreme acetabular revisions.

Instability and aseptic loosening are the two main complications after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Dual-mobility (DM) cups were shown to counteract implant instability during rTHA. To our knowledge, no study evaluated the 10-year outcomes of rTHA using DM cups, cemented into a metal reinforcement ring, in cases of severe acetabular bone loss. We hypothesized that using a DM cup cemented into a metal ring is a reliable technique for rTHA at 10 years, with few revisions for acetabular loosening and/or instability. This is a retrospective study of 77 rTHA cases with severe acetabular bone loss (Paprosky ≥ 2C) treated exclusively with a DM cup (NOVAE STICK; SERF, DÉCINES-CHARPIEU, FRANCE) cemented into a cage (Kerboull cross, Burch-Schneider, or ARM rings). Clinical scores and radiological assessments were performed preoperatively and at the last follow-up. The main endpoints were revision surgery for aseptic loosening or recurring dislocation. With a mean follow-up of 10.7 years [2.1-16.2], 3 patients were reoperated because of aseptic acetabular loosening (3.9%) at 9.6 years [7-12]. Seven patients (9.45%) dislocated their hip implant, only 1 suffered from chronic instability (1.3%). Cup survivorship was 96.1% at 10 years. No sign of progressive radiolucent lines were found and bone graft integration was satisfactory for 91% of the patients. The use of a DM cup cemented into a metal ring during rTHA with complex acetabular bone loss was associated with low revision rates for either acetabular loosening or chronic instability at 10 years. That's why we also recommend DM cup for all high risk of dislocation situations

We present the indications and outcomes of a series of custom 3D printed titanium acetabular implants used over a 9 year period at our institution (Sydney, Australia), in the setting of revision total hip arthroplasty. Individualised image-based case planning with additive manufacturing of pelvic components was combined with screw fixation and off-the-shelf femoral components to treat patients presenting with failed hip arthroplasty involving acetabular bone loss. Retrospective chart review was performed on the practices of three contributing surgeons, with an initial search by item number of the Medicare Benefits Scheme linked to a case list maintained by the manufacturer. An analysis of indications, patient demographics and clinical outcome was performed. The cohort comprised 65.2% female with a median age of 70 years (interquartile range 61–77) and a median follow up of 32.9 months (IQR 13.1 - 49.7). The indications for surgery were infection (12.5%); aseptic loosening (78.1%) and fracture (9.4%), with 65.7% of cases undergoing previous revision hip arthroplasty. A tumour prosthesis was implanted into the proximal femur in 21.9% of cases. Complications were observed in 31.3% of cases, with four cases requiring revision procedures and no deaths reported in this series. Kaplan-Meier analysis of all-cause revision revealed an overall procedure survival of 88.7% at two years (95%confidence interval 69 - 96.2) and 83.8% (95%CI 62 - 93.7) at five years, with pelvic implant-specific survival of 98% (95%CI 86.6 - 99.7) at two and five year follow up. We conclude that an individualised planning approach for custom 3D printed titanium acetabular implants can provide high overall and implant-specific survival at up to five years follow up in complex cases of failed hip arthroplasty and acetabular bone loss

THA in patients with acetabular bone defects is associated with a high risk of dislocation. Dual mobility (DM) cups are known to prevent and treat chronic instability. The aim of this study was to evaluate the dislocation rate and survival of jumbo DM cups. This was a retrospective, continuous, multicenter study of all the cases of jumbo DM cup implantation between 2010 and 2017 in patients with acetabular bone loss (Paprosky 2A: 46%, 2B: 32%, 2C: 15% and 3A: 6%). The indications for implantation were revisions for aseptic loosening of the cup (n=45), aseptic loosening of the femoral stem (n=3), bipolar loosening (n=11), septic loosening (n=10), periprosthetic fracture (n=5), chronic dislocation (n=4), intraprosthetic dislocation (n=2), cup impingement (n=1), primary posttraumatic arthroplasty (n=8), and acetabular dysplasia (n=4). The jumbo cups used were COPTOS TH (SERF), which combines press-fit fixation with supplemental fixation (acetabular hook, two superior flanges with one to four screws, two acetabular pegs). A bone graft was added in 74 cases (80%). The clinical assessment consisted of the Harris hip score. The primary endpoint was surgical revision for aseptic acetabular loosening or the occurrence of a dislocation episode. In all, 93 patients were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 5.3 ± 2.3 years [0, 10]. As of the last follow-up, the acetabular cup had been changed in five cases: three due to aseptic loosening (3.2%) and two due to infection (2.1%). The survivorship free of aseptic loosening was 96.8%. Three patients (3%) suffered a dislocation. At the last follow-up visit, the mean HSS scores were 72.15, (p < 0.05). Use of a jumbo DM cup in cases of acetabular bone defects leads to satisfactory medium-term results with low dislocation and loosening rates

Navigation in total hip arthroplasty has been shown to improve acetabular positioning and can decrease the incidence of mal-positioned acetabular components. The aim of this study was to assess two surgical guidance systems by comparing intra-operative measurements of acetabular component inclination and anteversion with a post-operative CT scan. We prospectively collected intra-operative navigation data from 102 hips receiving conventional THA or hip resurfacing arthroplasty through either a direct anterior or posterior approach. Two guidance systems were used simultaneously: an inertial navigation system (INS) and optical navigation system (ONS). Acetabular component anteversion and inclination was measured on a post-operative CT. The average age of the patients was 64 years (range: 24-92) and average BMI was 27 kg/m. 2. (range 19-38). 52% had hip surgery through an anterior approach. 98% of the INS measurements and 88% of the ONS measurements were within 10° of the CT measurements. The mean (and standard deviation) of the absolute difference between the post-operative CT and the intra-operative measurements for inclination and anteversion were 3.0° (2.8) and 4.5° (3.2) respectively for the ONS, along with 2.1° (2.3) and 2.4° (2.1) respectively for the INS. There was significantly lower mean absolute difference to CT for the INS when compared to ONS in both anteversion (p<0.001) and inclination (p=0.02). Both types of navigation produced reliable and reproducible acetabular cup positioning. It is important that patient-specific planning and navigation are used together to ensure that surgeons are targeting the optimal acetabular cup position. This assistance with cup positioning can provide benefits over free-hand techniques, especially in patients with an altered acetabular structure or extensive acetabular bone loss. In conclusion, both ONS and INS allowed for adequate acetabular positioning as measured on postoperative CT, and thus provide reliable intraoperative feedback for optimal acetabular component placement

Introduction. Revision total hip arthroplasty is a complex procedure and becoming more common. Acetabular implant loosening or fracture has previously been treated with a cup and cage construct. Recent studies have shown significant failure rates with Cup Cage constructs in more complex 3B and 3C Acetabular revisions. As a result the use of 3D printed custom made acetabular components has become more common. Method. We present 5 cases with severe acetabular bone loss that were treated with 3D printed acetabular components. The components were manufactured by OSSIS medical in New Zealand. The patient's original femoral stem was retained in all cases. Pre operatively the implant design was approved by the arthroplasty team prior to final manufacture. Implants were provided with a sterilisable model used intraoperatively for reference. Results. Five cases of 3D printed acetabular implants have been used locally for complex revision total hip arthroplasty with no immediate intraoperative or postoperative complications. Follow up of 1 – 5 years. One patient fell, five years post operatively. Sustaining a periprosthetic femur fracture requiring plate fixation, however, the acetabular component remained stable. No patient has undergone surgery for any failure of the acetabular component. Conclusions. This study shows 3D printed custom acetabular implants are efficient and effective in our hands. Early results from the design team suggest improved results compared to TM cup / cage systems. None of the implants have failed for any reason to date

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

The rate of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is approximately 1%. As the number of THAs performed each year continue to increase (550,000 by 2030), a corresponding increase in the number of hip PJI cases is likely to occur. A chronic deep infection may be treated by either chronic suppression, irrigation and debridement, single-stage exchange, or two-stage exchange. In the United States, the gold standard for chronic PJI continues to be a two-stage exchange. The benefit of an antibiotic impregnated cement is that they produce higher local concentrations of antibiotics than systemic intravenous administration. Hip spacers may be either static or articulating. Static spacers are reserved for cases of massive acetabular bone loss in which an articulating spacer is not feasible. A static spacer consists of a block of antibiotic cement in the native acetabulum and antibiotic coated rod in the femoral canal. Limb shortening, loss of soft tissue planes, and disuse osteopenia and muscle atrophy are all limitations of static spacers. In contrast, articulating spacers fulfill the goals of the interim construct during two-stage exchange which is to enhance eradication of the infecting organism through drug elution, to maintain limb length, to facilitate exposure during revision surgery, and to improve functional mobilization. Articulating spacers may be divided into three general categories based on method of spacer creation: Handmade custom spacers, prefabricated spacers, custom molded spacers (hemiarthroplasty molds and molded stem with cemented all-polyethylene cup). Handmade custom spacers are usually created with K-wire or rush rods coated with antibiotic cement. Handmade spacers are relatively simple to make, they are economical, and the amount and type of antibiotics incorporated can be customised for the infecting organism. Commercially available hemiarthroplasty spacers can be either prefabricated (Spacer G, Exactech, Gainesville. FL) or made intraoperatively (Stage One, Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN) are available in several head and stem sizes. The advantage of prefabricated spacers is that they do not require additional time to mold in the operating room. The downside of prefabricated spacers is that the antibiotic concentration and type is predetermined. A custom molded stem with cemented all-polyethylene cup can be made with off the shelf implants or used as part of a commercially available spacer (PROSTALAC, DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, IN). A common antibiotic/cement combination includes Tobramycin (3.6 g/40 g of cement) and vancomycin (1.5 g/40 g of cement). In all of these spacer constructs, the principles of using a high-elution cement mixed without a vacuum and with high doses of heat stable antibiotics are consistent. Tobramycin works synergistically to improve Vancomycin elution properties and is usually added in higher doses. Overall infection eradication is similar between all categories of spacers and range between 90–97%. Complications after placement of an articulating spacer are often specific to the type of spacer used. Handmade spaces that have K-wires for support are at risk for spacer cement fracture. Spacer dislocation is also a common complication in up to 15% of cases with all types of spacers. In addition, periprosthetic fractures can occur postoperatively in up to 10% of patients. Overall, despite this complication profile, articulating antibiotic spacers have excellent rates of infection eradication and offer improved mobilization in the interim two stage period and reduce operative time, complexity, and morbidity during reimplantation

The following papers will be discussed during this session: 1) Staph Screening and Treatment Prior to Elective TJA; 2) Unfulfilled Expectations Following TJA Procedures; 3) Thigh Pain in Short Stem Cementless Components in THR; 4) Is the Direct Anterior Approach a Risk Factor for Early Failure?; 5) THA Infection - Results of a 2nd 2-Stage Re-implantation - Clinical Trial of Articulating and Static Spacers; 6) THA Revision - Modular vs. Non Modular Fluted Tapered Stems-Total Femoral Replacement for Femoral Bone Loss - Cage + TM Augment vs. Cup Cage for Acetabular Bone Loss; 7) Do Injections Increase the Risk of Infection Prior to TKA?; 8) Long-Acting Opioid Use Predicts Perioperative Complication in TJA; 9) UKA vs. HTO in Patients Under 55 at 5–7 years; 10) Stemming Tibial Component in TKA Patients with a BMI > 30; 11) The Effect of Bariatric Surgery Prior to Total Knee Arthroplasty; 12) Oral Antibiotics and Reinfection Following Two-Stage Exchange; 13) Two-Stage Debridement with Prosthetic Retention for Acute TKA Infections; 14) Patient-Reported Outcomes Predict Meaningful Improvement after TKA; 15) Contemporary Rotating Hinge TKA; 16) Liposomal Bupivacaine in TKA; and 17) Noise Generation in Modern TKA: Incidence and Significance

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

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

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

Several risk factors can and should be addressed during first stage or spacer implantation surgery in order to minimize complications. Technical aspects as well as practical tips and pearls to overcome common nuisances such as spacer instability or femoral and acetabular bone loss will be discussed and shown with pictures. Total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is one of the most successful procedures in orthopaedics and excellent results are expected in virtually all cases. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) though unusual, is one of the most frequent and challenging complications after TJA. It is the third most common cause of revision in total hip replacement, responsible for up to 15% of all cases. In the past few years several improvements have been made in the management of an infected total hip prosthesis. Nevertheless it remains a challenging problem for the orthopaedic surgeon. Although numerous studies report favourable outcomes after one-stage revision surgery, two-stage has traditionally been considered as the gold standard for management of chronic infection. Two-stage exchange consists of debridement, resection of infected implants and usually temporary placement of an antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer before reimplantation of a new prosthesis. Spacers can be classified as static or articulating. The goals of using an articulating antibiotic loaded cement spacer are two-fold: to enhance the clearance of infection by local antibiotic therapy and dead-space management while maintaining joint function during treatment thus improving the functional outcome at reimplantation. Still, hip spacer implantation is not innocuous and there are several possible complications. Going forward, one must consider not just eradicating infection but also the importance of restoring function. In this regard using a mobile spacer adds an element of physiologic motion that both increases patient comfort between stages and facilitates re-implantation surgery. Conversely, mechanical complications are one of the major consequences of this preference. Be that as it may there are ways to minimize these problems. It is the surgeon responsibility to optimize mechanical circumstances as much as possible. I would like to thank Dr. Ricardo Sousa for his help with this work

Between 1993 and 2003, 67 consecutive revision total hip arthroplasties were performed in 65 patients, including 52 women and 13 men, using hydroxyapatite (HA) granules supported by a Kerboull-type reinforcement acetabular device. The average age at the time of index surgery was 68.6 years. The Acetabular bone loss according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) system was type II for 7 hips, type III for 58 hips, and type IV for one hip. The Kerboull-type acetabular reinforcement device used was Kerboull Cross Plate in 18 hips and KT Plate in 49 hips. HA granules of sizes 0.9 to1.2 mm (G4) and 3.0–5.0 mm (G6) were mixed in a ratio of 1:1. Autografts were used to reconstruct the major segmental defects in 7 hips. At the time of this study 30 hips were lost of follow-up. Among 30 hips 22 hips were lost of follow-up because of the death of the patients. The remaining 37 hips were examined clinically and radiologically. The mean follow-up period of the series was 12.8 years. Complications were examined and clinical evaluation was done using Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) hip score. The criterion for loosening of the acetabular component was cup migration exceeding 3 mm or angular rotation exceeding 3 degrees or breakage of the device. Among the entire series of 67 hips postoperative complications included dislocation in 3 hips, infection in 2 hips and revision in 4 hips. Two hips were revised for loosening and the other two hips were revised for infection. The JOA hip score increased from a mean value of 48.0 preoperatively to 76.8 at the last follow-up. Radiologically 5 hips were loose. Two hips among them were revised. Survival rate of the acetabular component at 10 years was 97.1% using acetabular revision for loosening as the end point and 90.6% using radiological loosening as the end point. Acetabular reconstruction with HA granules and a Kerboull-type acetabular device provided satisfactory clinical and radiographic results at 12.8 post-operative years