Aims. Periprosthetic fracture and implant loosening are two of the major reasons for revision surgery of cementless implants. Optimal implant fixation with minimal bone damage is challenging in this procedure. This pilot study investigates whether vibratory implant insertion is gentler compared to consecutive single blows for acetabular component implantation in a surrogate polyurethane (PU) model. Methods. Acetabular components (cups) were implanted into 1 mm nominal under-sized cavities in PU foams (15 and 30 per cubic foot (PCF)) using a vibratory implant insertion device and an automated impaction device for single blows. The impaction force, remaining polar gap, and lever-out moment were measured and compared between the impaction methods. Results. Impaction force was reduced by 89% and 53% for vibratory insertion in 15 and 30 PCF foams, respectively. Both methods positioned the component with polar gaps under 2 mm in 15 PCF foam. However, in 30 PCF foam, the vibratory insertion resulted in a clinically undesirable polar gap of over 2 mm. A higher lever-out moment was achieved with the consecutive single blow insertion by 42% in 15 PCF and 2.7 times higher in 30 PCF foam. Conclusion. Vibratory implant insertion may lower periprosthetic fracture risk by reducing impaction forces, particularly in low-quality bone. Achieving implant seating using vibratory insertion requires adjustment of the nominal press-fit, especially in denser bone. Further preclinical testing on real bone tissue is necessary to assess whether its viscoelasticity in combination with an adjusted press-fit can compensate for the reduced primary stability after vibratory insertion observed in this study. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2024;13(6):272–278

Aims. The main aims were to identify risk factors predictive of a radiolucent line (RLL) around the acetabular component with an interface bioactive bone cement (IBBC) technique in the first year after THA, and evaluate whether these risk factors influence the development of RLLs at five and ten years after THA. Methods. A retrospective review was undertaken of 980 primary cemented THAs in 876 patients using cemented acetabular components with the IBBC technique. The outcome variable was any RLLs that could be observed around the acetabular component at the first year after THA. Univariate analyses with univariate logistic regression and multivariate analyses with exact logistic regression were performed to identify risk factors for any RLLs based on radiological classification of hip osteoarthritis. Results. RLLs were detected in 27.2% of patients one year postoperatively. In multivariate regression analysis controlling for confounders, atrophic osteoarthritis (odds ratio (OR) 2.17 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04 to 4.49); p = 0.038) and 26 mm (OR 3.23 (95% CI 1.85 to 5.66); p < 0.001) or 28 mm head diameter (OR 3.64 (95% CI 2.07 to 6.41); p < 0.001) had a significantly greater risk for any RLLs one year after surgery. Structural bone graft (OR 0.19 (95% CI 0.13 to 0.29) p < 0.001) and location of the hip centre within the true acetabular region (OR 0.15 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.24); p < 0.001) were significantly less prognostic. Improvement of the cement-bone interface including complete disappearance and poorly defined RLLs was identified in 15.1% of patients. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis for the acetabular component at ten years with revision of the acetabular component for aseptic loosening as the end point was 100.0% with a RLL and 99.1% without a RLL (95% CI 97.9 to 100). With revision of the acetabular component for any reason as the end point, the survival rate was 99.2% with a RLL (95% CI 97.6 to 100) and 96.5% without a RLL (95% CI 93.4 to 99.7). Conclusion. This study demonstrates that acetabular bone quality, head diameter, structural bone graft, and hip centre position may influence the presence of the any RLL. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2021;2(5):278–292

Orientation of the acetabular component influences wear, range of movement and the incidence of dislocation after total hip replacement (THR). During surgery, such orientation is often referenced to the anterior pelvic plane (APP), but APP inclination relative to the coronal plane (pelvic tilt) varies substantially between individuals. In contrast, the change in pelvic tilt from supine to standing (dPT) is small for nearly all individuals. Therefore, in THR performed with the patient supine and the patient’s coronal plane parallel to the operating table, we propose that freehand placement of the acetabular component placement is reliable and reflects standing (functional) cup position. We examined this hypothesis in 56 hips in 56 patients (19 men) with a mean age of 61 years (29 to 80) using three-dimensional CT pelvic reconstructions and standing lateral pelvic radiographs. We found a low variability of acetabular component placement, with 46 implants (82%) placed within a combined range of 30° to 50° inclination and 5° to 25° anteversion. Changing from the supine to the standing position (analysed in 47 patients) was associated with an anteversion change < 10° in 45 patients (96%). dPT was < 10° in 41 patients (87%). In conclusion, supine THR appears to provide reliable freehand acetabular component placement. In most patients a small reclination of the pelvis going from supine to standing causes a small increase in anteversion of the acetabular component. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1326–31

A variety of radiological methods of measuring version of the acetabular component after total hip replacement (THR) have been described. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of six methods (those of Lewinnek; Widmer; Hassan et al; Ackland, Bourne and Uhthoff; Liaw et al; and Woo and Morrey) that are currently in use. In 36 consecutive patients who underwent THR, version of the acetabular component was measured by three independent examiners on plain radiographs using these six methods and compared with measurements using CT scans. The intra- and interobserver reliabilities of each measurement were estimated. All measurements on both radiographs and CT scans had excellent intra- and interobserver reliability and the results from each of the six methods correlated well with the CT measurements. However, measurements made using the methods of Widmer and of Ackland, Bourne and Uhthoff were significantly different from the CT measurements (both p < 0.001), whereas measurements made using the remaining four methods were similar to the CT measurements. With regard to reliability and convergent validity, we recommend the use of the methods described by Lewinnek, Hassan et al, Liaw et al and Woo and Morrey for measurement of version of the acetabular component

Objectives. The determination of the volumetric polyethylene wear on explanted material requires complicated equipment, which is not available in many research institutions. Our aim in this study was to present and validate a method that only requires a set of polyetheretherketone balls and a laboratory balance to determine wear. Methods. The insert to be measured was placed on a balance, and a ball of the appropriate diameter was inserted. The cavity remaining between the ball and insert caused by wear was filled with contrast medium and the weight of the contrast medium was recorded. The volume was calculated from the known density of the liquid. The precision, inter- and intraobserver reliability, were determined by four investigators on four days using nine inserts with specified wear (0.094 ml to 1.626 ml), and the intra-class correlation coefficient was calculated. The feasibility of using this method in routine clinical practice and the time required for measurement were tested on 84 explanted inserts by one investigator. Results. In order to get the mean for all investigators and determinations, the deviation between the measured and specified wear was -0.08 ml . (sd. 0.12; -0.21 to 0.11). The interobserver reliability was 0.989 ml (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.964 to 0.997) and the intraobserver reliability was 0.941 for observer 1 (95% CI 0.846 to 0.985), 0.983 for observer 2 (95% CI 0.956 to 0.995), 0.939 for observer 3 (95% CI 0.855 to 0.984), and 0.934 for observer 4 (95% CI 0.790 to 0.984). The mean time required to examine the samples was two minutes . (sd. 2; 1 to 5). Conclusion. The method presented here was shown to be sufficiently precise for many settings and is a cost-effective and quick method of determining the volumetric wear of explanted acetabular components. However, the measurement of wear for scientific purposes will probably continue to involve more accurate and dedicated laboratory equipment. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2017;6:530–534

Aims. In metal-on-metal (MoM) hip arthroplasties and resurfacings, mechanically induced corrosion can lead to elevated serum metal ions, a local inflammatory response, and formation of pseudotumours, ultimately requiring revision. The size and diametral clearance of anatomical (ADM) and modular (MDM) dual-mobility polyethylene bearings match those of Birmingham hip MoM components. If the acetabular component is satisfactorily positioned, well integrated into the bone, and has no surface damage, this presents the opportunity for revision with exchange of the metal head for ADM/MDM polyethylene bearings without removal of the acetabular component. Methods. Between 2012 and 2020, across two centres, 94 patients underwent revision of Birmingham MoM hip arthroplasties or resurfacings. Mean age was 65.5 years (33 to 87). In 53 patients (56.4%), the acetabular component was retained and dual-mobility bearings were used (DM); in 41 (43.6%) the acetabulum was revised (AR). Patients underwent follow-up of minimum two-years (mean 4.6 (2.1 to 8.5) years). Results. In the DM group, two (3.8%) patients underwent further surgery: one (1.9%) for dislocation and one (1.9%) for infection. In the AR group, four (9.8%) underwent further procedures: two (4.9%) for loosening of the acetabular component and two (4.9%) following dislocations. There were no other dislocations in either group. In the DM group, operating time (68.4 vs 101.5 mins, p < 0.001), postoperative drop in haemoglobin (16.6 vs 27.8 g/L, p < 0.001), and length of stay (1.8 vs 2.4 days, p < 0.001) were significantly lower. There was a significant reduction in serum metal ions postoperatively in both groups (p < 0.001), although there was no difference between groups for this reduction (p = 0.674 (cobalt); p = 0.186 (chromium)). Conclusion. In selected patients with Birmingham MoM hips, where the acetabular component is well-fixed and in a satisfactory position with no surface damage, the metal head can be exchanged for polyethylene ADM/MDM bearings with retention of the acetabular prosthesis. This presents significant benefits, with a shorter procedure and a lower risk of complications. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(6):514–523

We analysed the results of different strategies in the revision of primary uncemented acetabular components reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. The aim was to compare the risk of further acetabular revision after isolated liner exchange and complete component revision. The results of exchanging well-fixed components were also compared with those of exchanging loose acetabular components. The period studied was between September 1987 and April 2005. The following groups were compared: group 1, exchange of liner only in 318 hips; group 2, exchange of well-fixed components in 398; and group 3, exchange of loose components in 933. We found that the risk of a further cup revision was lower after revision of well-fixed components (relative risk from a Cox model (RR) = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.37% to 0.87%) and loose components (RR = 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.39% to 0.80%), compared with exchange of the liner in isolation. The most frequent reason for a further acetabular revision was dislocation, accounting for 61 (28%) of the re-revisions. Other reasons for further revision included pain in 27 (12%), loosening in 24 (11%) and infection in 20 (9%). Re-revisions because of pain were less frequent when complete component (fixed or loose) revision was undertaken compared with isolated exchange of the liner (RR = 0.20 (95% confidence interval 0.06% to 0.65%) and RR = 0.10 (95% confidence interval 0.03% to 0.30%), respectively). The risk of further acetabular revision for infection, however, did not differ between the groups. In this study, exchange of the liner only had a higher risk of further cup revision than revision of the complete acetabular component. Our results suggest that the threshold for revising well-fixed components in the case of liner wear and osteolysis should be lowered

Aims. Dislocation remains a leading cause of failure following revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). While dual-mobility (DM) bearings have been shown to mitigate this risk, options are limited when retaining or implanting an uncemented shell without modular DM options. In these circumstances, a monoblock DM cup, designed for cementing, can be cemented into an uncemented acetabular shell. The goal of this study was to describe the implant survival, complications, and radiological outcomes of this construct. Methods. We identified 64 patients (65 hips) who had a single-design cemented DM cup cemented into an uncemented acetabular shell during revision THA between 2018 and 2020 at our institution. Cups were cemented into either uncemented cups designed for liner cementing (n = 48; 74%) or retained (n = 17; 26%) acetabular components. Median outer head diameter was 42 mm. Mean age was 69 years (SD 11), mean BMI was 32 kg/m. 2. (SD 8), and 52% (n = 34) were female. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods. Mean follow-up was two years (SD 0.97). Results. There were nine cemented DM cup revisions: three for periprosthetic joint infection, three for acetabular aseptic loosening from bone, two for dislocation, and one for a broken cup-cage construct. The two-year survivals free of aseptic DM revision and dislocation were both 92%. There were five postoperative dislocations, all in patients with prior dislocation or abductor deficiency. On radiological review, the DM cup remained well-fixed at the cemented interface in all but one case. Conclusion. While dislocation was not eliminated in this series of complex revision THAs, this technique allowed for maximization of femoral head diameter and optimization of effective acetabular component position during cementing. Of note, there was only one failure at the cemented interface. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(4):352–358

In metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements or resurfacings, mechanical induced corrosion can lead to a local inflammatory response, pseudo tumours and elevated serum metal ions, requiring revision surgery. The size and diametral clearance of Anatomic (ADM) and Modular (MDM) Dual Mobility bearings matches that of certain MOM components. Presenting the opportunity for revision with exchange of the metal head for ADM/MDM bearings without removal of the acetabular component if it is well-fixed and appropriately positioned. Between 2012 and 2020, across two centres, 94 patients underwent revision of a MoM hip replacement or resurfacing. The mean age was 65.5 (33–87) years. In 53 patients (56.4%), the acetabular component was retained, and dual mobility bearings were used (DM); in 41 (43.6%) the acetabulum was revised (AR). DM was only considered where the acetabular component was satisfactorily positioned and well-integrated into bone, with no surface damage. Patients underwent clinical and radiographic follow-up to at least one-year (mean 42.4 (12–96) months). One (1.1%) patient died before one-year, for reasons unrelated to the surgery. In the DM group, two (3.8%) patients underwent further surgery; one (1.9%) for dislocation and one (1.9%) for infection. In the AR group, four (12.2%) underwent further procedures; two (4.9%) for loosening of the acetabular component and two (4.9%) following dislocations. There were no other dislocations in either group. In the DM group, operative time (68.4 v 101.5 mins, p<0.001), postoperative drop in haemoglobin (16.6 v 27.8 g/L, p<0.001), and length of stay (1.8 v 2.4 days, p<0.001) were significantly lower. There was a significant reduction in serum metal ions postoperatively in both groups (p<0.001 both Cobalt and Chromium) although there was no difference between groups for this reduction (p=0.674 Cobalt; p=0.186 Chromium). In selected patients with MoM hip arthroplasty, where the acetabular component is well-fixed, in a satisfactory position and there is no surface damage, the metal head can be exchanged for ADM/MDM bearings with retention of the acetabular prosthesis. Presenting significant benefits through a less invasive procedure, and a low risk of complications, including dislocation

Aims. To determine if primary cemented acetabular component geometry (long posterior wall (LPW), hooded, or offset reorientating) influences the risk of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for instability or loosening. Methods. The National Joint Registry (NJR) dataset was analyzed for primary THAs performed between 2003 and 2017. A cohort of 224,874 cemented acetabular components were included. The effect of acetabular component geometry on the risk of revision for instability or for loosening was investigated using log-binomial regression adjusting for age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, indication, side, institution type, operating surgeon grade, surgical approach, polyethylene crosslinking, and prosthetic head size. A competing risk survival analysis was performed with the competing risks being revision for other indications or death. Results. The distribution of acetabular component geometries was: LPW 81.2%; hooded 18.7%; and offset reorientating 0.1%. There were 3,313 (1.5%) revision THAs performed, of which 815 (0.4%) were for instability and 838 (0.4%) were for loosening. Compared to the LPW group, the adjusted subhazard ratio of revision for instability in the hooded group was 2.31 (p < 0.001) and 4.12 (p = 0.047) in the offset reorientating group. Likewise, the subhazard ratio of revision for loosening was 2.65 (p < 0.001) in the hooded group and 13.61 (p < 0.001) in the offset reorientating group. A time-varying subhazard ratio of revision for instability (hooded vs LPW) was found, being greatest within the first three months. Conclusion. This registry-based study confirms a significantly higher risk of revision after cemented THA for instability and for loosening when a hooded or offset reorientating acetabular component is used, compared to a LPW component. Further research is required to clarify if certain patients benefit from the use of hooded or offset reorientating components, but we recommend caution when using such components in routine clinical practice. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1669–1677

Aims. Various surgical techniques have been described for total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with Crowe type III dislocated hips, who have a large acetabular bone defect. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical results of patients in whom anatomical reconstruction of the acetabulum was performed using a cemented acetabular component and autologous bone graft from the femoral neck. Methods. A total of 22 patients with Crowe type III dislocated hips underwent 28 THAs using bone graft from the femoral neck between 1979 and 2000. A Charnley cemented acetabular component was placed at the level of the true acetabulum after preparation with bone grafting. All patients were female with a mean age at the time of surgery of 54 years (35 to 68). A total of 18 patients (21 THAs) were followed for a mean of 27.2 years (20 to 33) after the operation. Results. Radiographs immediately after surgery showed a mean vertical distance from the centre of the hip to the teardrop line of 21.5 mm (SD 3.3; 14.5 to 30.7) and a mean cover of the acetabular component by bone graft of 46% (SD 6%; 32% to 60%). All bone grafts united without collapse, and only three acetabular components loosened. The rate of survival of the acetabular component with mechanical loosening or revision as the endpoint was 86.4% at 25 years after surgery. Conclusion. The technique of using autologous bone graft from the femoral neck and placing a cemented acetabular component in the true acetabulum can provide good long-term outcomes in patients with Crowe type III dislocated hips. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(2):299–304

Aims. Uncemented metal acetabular components show good osseointegration, but material stiffness causes stress shielding and retroacetabular bone loss. Cemented monoblock polyethylene components load more physiologically; however, the cement bone interface can suffer fibrous encapsulation and loosening. It was hypothesized that an uncemented titanium-sintered monoblock polyethylene component may offer the optimum combination of osseointegration and anatomical loading. Methods. A total of 38 patients were prospectively enrolled and received an uncemented monoblock polyethylene acetabular (pressfit) component. This single cohort was then retrospectively compared with previously reported randomized cohorts of cemented monoblock (cemented) and trabecular metal (trabecular) acetabular implants. The primary outcome measure was periprosthetic bone density using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry over two years. Secondary outcomes included radiological and clinical analysis. Results. Although there were differences in the number of males and females in each group, no significant sex bias was noted (p = 0.080). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in age (p = 0.910) or baseline lumbar bone mineral density (BMD) (p = 0.998) found between any of the groups (pressfit, cemented, or trabecular). The pressfit implant initially behaved like the trabecular component with an immediate fall in BMD in the inferior and medial regions, with preserved BMD laterally, suggesting lateral rim loading. However, the pressfit component subsequently showed a reversal in BMD medially with recovery back towards baseline, and a continued rise in lateral BMD. This would suggest that the pressfit component begins to reload the medial bone over time, more akin to the cemented component. Analysis of postoperative radiographs revealed no pressfit component subsidence or movement up to two years postoperatively (100% interobserver reliability). Medial defects seen immediately postoperatively in five cases had completely resolved by two years in four patients. Conclusion. Initially, the uncemented monoblock component behaved similarly to the rigid trabecular metal component with lateral rim loading; however, over two years this changed to more closely resemble the loading pattern of a cemented polyethylene component with increasing medial pelvic loading. This indicates that the uncemented monoblock acetabular component may result in optimized fixation and preservation of retroacetabular bone stock. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(5):872–880

Aims. Appropriate acetabular component placement has been proposed for prevention of postoperative dislocation in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Manual placements often cause outliers in spite of attempts to insert the component within the intended safe zone; therefore, some surgeons routinely evaluate intraoperative pelvic radiographs to exclude excessive acetabular component malposition. However, their evaluation is often ambiguous in case of the tilted or rotated pelvic position. The purpose of this study was to develop the computational analysis to digitalize the acetabular component orientation regardless of the pelvic tilt or rotation. Methods. Intraoperative pelvic radiographs of 50 patients who underwent THA were collected retrospectively. The 3D pelvic bone model and the acetabular component were image-matched to the intraoperative pelvic radiograph. The radiological anteversion (RA) and radiological inclination (RI) of the acetabular component were calculated and those measurement errors from the postoperative CT data were compared relative to those of the 2D measurements. In addition, the intra- and interobserver differences of the image-matching analysis were evaluated. Results. Mean measurement errors of the image-matching analyses were significantly small (2.5° (SD 1.4°) and 0.1° (SD 0.9°) in the RA and RI, respectively) relative to those of the 2D measurements. Intra- and interobserver differences were similarly small from the clinical perspective. Conclusion. We have developed a computational analysis of acetabular component orientation using an image-matching technique with small measurement errors compared to visual evaluations regardless of the pelvic tilt or rotation. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(7):360–367

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

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in the rate of wear between acetabular components positioned within and outside the ‘safe zones’ of anteversion and inclination angle. Patients and Methods. We reviewed 100 hips in 94 patients who had undergone primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) at least ten years previously. Patients all had the same type of acetabular component with a bearing couple which consisted of a 28 mm cobalt-chromium head on a highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) liner. A supine radiostereometric analysis (RSA) examination was carried out which acquired anteroposterior (AP) and lateral paired images. Acetabular component anteversion and inclination angles were measured as well as total femoral head penetration, which was divided by the length of implantation to determine the rate of polyethylene wear. Results. The mean anteversion angle was 19.4° (-15.2° to 48°, . sd. 11.4°), the mean inclination angle 43.4° (27.3° to 60.5°, . sd. 6.6°), and the mean wear rate 0.055 mm/year (. sd. 0.060). Exactly half of the hips were positioned inside the ‘safe zone’. There was no difference (median difference, 0.012 mm/year; p = 0.091) in the rate of wear between acetabular components located within or outside the ‘safe zone’. When compared to acetabular components located inside the ‘safe zone’, the wear rate was no different for acetabular components that only achieved the target anteversion angle (median difference, 0.012 mm/year; p = 0.138), target inclination angle (median difference, 0.013 mm/year; p = 0.354), or neither target (median difference, 0.012 mm/year; p = 0.322). Conclusion. Placing the acetabular component within or outside the ‘safe zone’ did not alter the wear rate of HXLPE at long-term follow-up to a level that risked osteolysis. HXLPE appears to be a forgiving bearing material in terms of articular surface wear, but care must still be taken to position the acetabular component correctly so that the implant is stable. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:891-7

Aims. To investigate the extent of bone development around the scaffold of custom triflange acetabular components (CTACs) over time. Methods. We performed a single-centre historical prospective cohort study, including all patients with revision THA using the aMace CTAC between January 2017 and March 2021. A total of 18 patients (18 CTACs) were included. Models of the hemipelvis and the scaffold component of the CTACs were created by segmentation of CT scans. The CT scans were performed immediately postoperatively and at least one year after surgery. The amount of bone in contact with the scaffold was analyzed at both times, and the difference was calculated. Results. The mean time between the implantation and the second CT scan was two years (1 to 5). The mean age of the patients during CTAC implantation was 75 years (60 to 92). The mean scaffold-bone contact area increased from 16% (SD 12.6) to 28% (SD 11.9). The mean scaffold-bone distance decreased from a mean of 6.5 mm (SD 2.0) to 5.5 mm (SD 1.6). None of the CTACs were revised or radiologically loose. Conclusion. There was a statistically significant increase of scaffold-bone contact area over time, but the total contact area of the scaffold in relation to the acetabular bone remained relatively low. As all implants remained well fixed, the question remains to what extend the scaffold contributes to the observed stability, in relation to the screws. A future design implication might be an elimination of the bulky scaffold component. This design modification would reduce production costs and may optimize the primary fit of the implant. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(4):359–364

The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register has shown that several designs of uncemented femoral stems give good or excellent survivorship. The overall findings for uncemented total hip replacement however, have been disappointing because of poor results with the use of metal-backed acetabular components. In this study, we exclusively investigated the medium-to long-term performance of primary uncemented metal-backed acetabular components. A total of 9113 primary uncemented acetabular components were implanted in 7937 patients between 1987 and 2007. These were included in a prospective, population-based observational study. All the implants were modular and metal-backed with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene liners. The femoral heads were made of stainless steel, cobalt-chrome (CoCr) alloy or alumina ceramic. In all, seven different designs of acetabular component were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier survivorship method and Cox regression analysis. Most acetabular components performed well up to seven years. When the endpoint was revision of the acetabular component because of aseptic loosening, the survival ranged between 87% and 100% at ten years. However, when the endpoint was revision for any reason, the survival estimates were 81% to 92% for the same implants at ten years. Aseptic loosening, wear, osteolysis and dislocation were the main reasons for the relatively poor overall performance of the acetabular components. Prostheses with alumina heads performed slightly better than those with stainless steel or CoCr alloy in subgroups. Whereas most acetabular components performed well at seven years, the survivorship declined with longer follow-up. Fixation was generally good. None of the metal-backed uncemented acetabular components with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene liners in our study had satisfactory long-term results because of high rates of wear, osteolysis, aseptic loosening and dislocation

Aims. Custom triflange acetabular components (CTACs) play an important role in reconstructive orthopaedic surgery, particularly in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) and pelvic tumour resection procedures. Accurate CTAC positioning is essential to successful surgical outcomes. While prior studies have explored CTAC positioning in rTHA, research focusing on tumour cases and implant flange positioning precision remains limited. Additionally, the impact of intraoperative navigation on positioning accuracy warrants further investigation. This study assesses CTAC positioning accuracy in tumour resection and rTHA cases, focusing on the differences between preoperative planning and postoperative implant positions. Methods. A multicentre observational cohort study in Australia between February 2017 and March 2021 included consecutive patients undergoing acetabular reconstruction with CTACs in rTHA (Paprosky 3A/3B defects) or tumour resection (including Enneking P2 peri-acetabular area). Of 103 eligible patients (104 hips), 34 patients (35 hips) were analyzed. Results. CTAC positioning was generally accurate, with minor deviations in cup inclination (mean 2.7°; SD 2.84°), anteversion (mean 3.6°; SD 5.04°), and rotation (mean 2.1°; SD 2.47°). Deviation of the hip centre of rotation (COR) showed a mean vector length of 5.9 mm (SD 7.24). Flange positions showed small deviations, with the ischial flange exhibiting the largest deviation (mean vector length of 7.0 mm; SD 8.65). Overall, 83% of the implants were accurately positioned, with 17% exceeding malpositioning thresholds. CTACs used in tumour resections exhibited higher positioning accuracy than rTHA cases, with significant differences in inclination (1.5° for tumour vs 3.4° for rTHA) and rotation (1.3° for tumour vs 2.4° for rTHA). The use of intraoperative navigation appeared to enhance positioning accuracy, but this did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion. This study demonstrates favourable CTAC positioning accuracy, with potential for improved accuracy through intraoperative navigation. Further research is needed to understand the implications of positioning accuracy on implant performance and long-term survival. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):260–268

There remains concern with the use of constrained liners (CL) implanted at the time of acetabular cup revision in revision total hip replacement (rTHA). The aim of this study was to determine the implant survival in rTHA when a CL was implanted at the same time as acetabular cup revision. We reviewed our institutional database to identify all consecutive rTHAs where a CL was implanted simultaneously at the time acetabular cup revision from 2001 to 2021. One-hundred and seventy-four revisions (173 patients) were included in the study. Mean follow-up of 8.7 years (range two – 21.7). The most common indications for rTHA were instability (35%), second-stage periprosthetic joint infection (26.4%), and aseptic loosening (17.2%). Kaplan Meier Analysis was used to determine survival with all-cause re-revision and revision for cup aseptic loosening (fixation failure) as the endpoints. A total of 32 (18.3%) patients underwent re-revision at a mean time of 2.9 years (range 0.1 – 14.1). The most common reasons for re-revision were instability (14), periprosthetic joint infection (seven), and loosening of the femoral component (four). Three (1.7%) required re-revision due to aseptic loosening of the acetabular component (fixation failure) at a mean of two years (0.1 – 5.1). Acetabular component survival free from re-revision due to aseptic loosening was 98.9% (95% CI 97.3 – 100) at five-years and 98.1% (95% CI 95.8 – 100) at 10-years. There were no acetabular component fixation failures in modern highly porous shells. CLs implanted at the time acetabular cup revision in rTHA have a 98.1% 10-year survival free from acetabular cup aseptic loosening (fixation failure). There were no cup fixation failures in modern highly porous shells. Thus, when necessary, implanting a CL during revision of an acetabular component with stable screw fixation is safe with an extremely low risk of cup fixation failure

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