Introduction

Total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) is an increasingly popular treatment option for patients with end-stage ankle arthritis. However, for most implant systems, failure rates of 10–20% have been reported within the first 10 years after primary TAA. Pain is the primary symptom that indicates failure of TAA but cause of it can be difficult to establish.

In Sheffield the senior author has a long experience in the use of massive circumferential proximal femoral allografts in complex revision hip arthroplasty. Sheffield has a well established bone harvesting and banking service, essential for this type of work. We wish to present the early experience with this technique in the UK. Between April 1992 and November 1998 a total of 33 circumferential proximal femoral allografts were used by one senior surgeon. They were all fresh frozen, cadaveric grafts. This time period was selected to allow a reasonable minimum follow-up period. Seven patients had died and two were lost to follow up, leaving a total of 24 patients to review. A step cut osteotomy was utilised and augmented with a cerclage wire and strut allograft where deemed necessary. The proximal femur was retained where possible. The component was cemented into the allograft only, in the majority of the cases. A cemented, collared prosthesis was used in over 85% of cases. Average follow up was 53 months. By the time of review 2 had undergone further revision, one for sepsis, one for aseptic loosening. A further patient had had revision of the acetabular component in isolation. One patient had recurrent sepsis but is currently being managed non–operatively. One patient required secondary surgery with plate and graft for symptomatic junctional non-union. Other complications included wound drainage, delaying discharge, in three patients and one chronic sciatic nerve palsy. The trochanter was considered radiologically united in 18 patients. Junctional union was considered to have occurred in 17 patients. Allograft resorption of 100% cortical thickness was seen in only 9 patients and in only one zone in 6 of these. Oxford hip scores were collected at follow-up. We recommend this technique in cases where bone loss is catastrophic and in specialist hands only

Periprosthetic Hip Fractures (PHFs) and Complex Revision Hip Arthroplasty(CRHA) consistently present challenging management decisions. Extramedullary devices alone or in combination with strut graft or long stem prosthesis revisions (cemented and uncemented) have all been described as treatment options. A long distal locked femoral stem provides an alternative allowing immediate stability for weight bearing without impaction bone grafting or external plate fixation and strut grafting. It has a lower risk of subsidence. 24 patients underwent a Cannulok Stem procedure from 2003–2008. Each was reviewed regularly following surgery with clinical examination and Hip scores (Oxford and SF12). The indications for device use, Vancouver classification if a periprostheic fracture, radiological evidence of union and complications were all recorded from medical and radiological records. The results were then compared to similar studies. The indications for Cannulok use were periprosthetic fracture (50%), infection with bone loss (12.5%), revision for aseptic loosening (33.3%) and subtrochanteric fracture post arthrodesis and metalwork removal (4.2%). A 75% union rate was seen in periprosthetic fractures. There were 2 deaths, 2 deep infections and 1 superficial infection. The 40 mm offset stems resulted in 6 (25%) dislocations compared to 0% dislocations with the 45 mm offset stem. In addition there was 1 femoral stem revision for subsidence (no distal locking screws used) and 1 acetabular revision. There was an average follow up of 20 months. This study suggests that the Cannulok Plus femoral reinforcement stem is a potential alternative treatment option in PHFs and CRHA with acceptable complication rates

Introduction. The dual mobility cup was introduced in the 1970s to allow extensive range of motion associated with great stability thanks to double articulation; the first between the head and polyethylene, the second between the polyethylene and the cup. The original plan was to install a stainless-steel uncemented cup coated with a thin layer of alumina and a metal head of 22,2 mm with a polyethylene liner of first generation. Long term follow-up case studies are cited in the literature showing excellent results in reducing dislocations; however wearing and aseptic loosening are noted. The new dual-mobility cups, with reticular polyethylene and titanium and hydroxyapatite coating are proving as reliable as the older ones in terms of stability whilst they appear to be more durable. Furthermore, cemented dual-mobility cups are available, these are the topic of this study. One of the most frequent complications in the major revisions of hip replacement is dislocation. This study summarises our experience gathered in the use of dual-mobility cups during revisions of complex cases (GIR III-IV femoral or acetabular). Materials and Methods. Between July 2014 to March 2015, we have implanted 13 cemented cups with dual-mobility (Avantage® Biomet) each in different patients, who have undergone revision with severe ostheolysis (GIR III-IV femoral or acetabular). The mean age of patients was 71.5 years old (46 to 89). Indications for revisions were: aseptic loosening in 7 patients (two at third surgery), recurrent dislocation in 3 patients, 1 septic loosening, 1 revision after spacer removal e 1 post-traumatic. We used dual-mobility cup in revision surgery when implant stability could have been compromised due to difficult positioning of acetabular component in cases of walls defects or muscolar laxity. The patients have been evaluated clinically and radiographically. Results. In most difficult cases with a severe lack of acetabular walls (9 patients), and thus difficulties in correct cup positioning, we have choosen to implant a cemented cup inside a Burch-schneider® (Zimmer) ring; in those cases where acetabular morphology was still sufficient, a dual-mobility cup was directly cemented to the bone. No dislocations occured during the folllow-up, neither infections, neurological events or DVT. Discussion. Dual mobility cups are often used both as primary implant or as a revision cup. Dislocation rate in primary total hip replacement is comparable to other kind of cup normally used, while in revision cases, the incidence of dislocation decrease from a range of 5–30% to 1,1–5,5%. Our results are not yet comparable to those in literature due to short follow-up, but first impressions are comforting thanks to the lack of dislocation even in really severe cases. Conclusions. The dual-mobility cup in acetabular revisions, is one of the possible choice to keep in mind in more complex cases, where obtaining stability is difficult or impossible using other revision implants. In the literature, the available follow up are not yet long enough to be sure of implant longevity and so it's important to pay attention to use this cup in those patients with long life expectancy

Different techniques have been described to address massive bone loss of the acetabulum in revision hip surgery. aMace has gained popularity as it provides customization aiming to restore hip centre and provide good initial stability in cases of large non-contained defects. It takes into account quality of host bone. Its porous defect filling scaffold provides an excellent surface for osteointegration.

Our aim was to assess the short and mid-term outcomes of patients who underwent revision surgery using aMace system.

Ethical approval was obtained. A retrospective study included all patients who had aMace between June 2013 and October 2022 allowing for a minimum of 12-months follow-up. Patients’ demographics, indication, bone-loss severity, reconstruction details, re-operation, complications, mortality, pain and function were assessed.

52 cases were performed by 13 surgeons with median 51 months follow-up. Median age was 72.7 years. 86.5% were female. Average BMI was 25.3. Average ASA grade was 3.

65% were classified as Paprosky IIIB and 32% were IIIA.

73% were found to have poor bone quality on CT. Main indication for aMace was massive bone loss/discontinuity secondary to aseptic loosening in 88.5%.

77% underwent single-stage revision. 53.8% had 2 or more previous revisions. 71% underwent stem revision in the same setting. 77% received a dual mobility bearing.

Re-operation rate was 5.7% for instability and femoral PPF. LLD was reported in 9.6%.

Permanent Sciatic nerve palsy occurred in 3.8% of the cases.

30-days mortality was 1.9%.

Statistically significant post-op improvements in pain and mobility were reported (p<0.001). None of the acetabular components have been revised.

Our study shows satisfactory surgical outcomes with a relatively low complication rate and significant pain and mobility improvements in the early to mid-term stages.

We recommend these costly cases to be done in highly specialist centres adopting MDT approach.

Between April 1992 and November 1998 we used 34 massive proximal femoral allografts for femoral reconstruction at revision hip arthroplasty. Seven patients have died and two have been lost to follow-up. There were thus 25 grafts in 24 patients for review. The mean follow-up was 53 months (16 to 101). By the time of the review two patients had undergone a further revision for failure of the allograft. Another had required secondary plating and grafting at the graft-host junction for symptomatic nonunion. One had recurrence of deep sepsis and was being managed conservatively.

Trochanteric union was considered to have occurred radiologically in 16 of the 25 grafts and union at the host-graft junction in 20. Resorption of the allograft was significant in only two hips. We recommend this technique in cases in which femoral bone loss has been catastrophic.

BACKGROUND. Total hip revision surgery in cases with previous multiple reconstructive procedures is a challenging treatment due to difficulties in treatment huge bone defects with standard revision prosthetic combinations. A new specially made production system in Electron-Beam Melting (EBM) technology based on a precise analysis of patients' preoperative CT scans has been developed. METHODS. Objectives of design customization in difficult cases are to correctly evaluate patient's anatomy, to plan a surgical procedure and to obtain an optimal fixation to a poor bone stock. The 3D Printing (EBM) technology permits to create an extremely flexible patient matching implant and instrument, with material performances not viable with standard manufacturing process. Dedicated visual 3D tools and instrumentations improve implants congruency according to preoperative plan. Primary stability is enhanced and tailored on patient's anatomy by means of press-fit, iliac stems and the high friction performances of Trabecular Titanium matrix. The use of bone screws and their position is designed to enhance primary stability, even in critical bone conditions, avoiding implant stress shielding and allowing bone integration. 4 cases (2 men and 2 women) of acetabular customized implants were performed. Mean age at surgery was 51.5 years (range 25–72). Patients were reviewed clinically and radiographically at follow-up. RESULTS. No signs of miss-match between intraoperative bone conditions and pre-operative planning were observed. No additional bone grafts or further native bone removal were needed. Biomechanical parameters were restored by using internal modularity (i.e. face-changers / angled spacers). Face-changers allow to correct coverage and anteversion of the acetabular system. Incompatibility or impingement between the stems and new acetabular component was not observed and stem revision was performed in one case. On-table stability proved excellent and no intraoperative complications were observed. All patients underwent an immediate mobilization with full weight-bearing. Mean Harris Hip Score increased significantly from 13.9 (range 6.9–20.6) preoperatively to 75.8 (range 53.9–94) at last follow-up (mean 17.5, range: 10–33), showing an improvement in terms of both pain relief, function and joint mobility. Radiographically neither signs of instability, migration nor tilting were observed. No case of dislocation nor infection were recorded. CONCLUSION. A detailed anatomical reconstruction, in-depth preoperative planning, custom-implant design, high performance of the 3D-printing technology, system modularity and patient-specific surgical tools permitted an effective restoration of the biomechanical joint parameters in these complex revision cases. The optimal primary stability of the implants promoted an early osseointegration with the remaining bone stock. Further studies shall be necessary to assess the performance of these Implants at long-term follow-up

Aims

Aseptic loosening is a major cause of failure in cemented endoprosthetic reconstructions. This paper presents the long-term outcomes of a custom-designed cross-pin fixation construct designed to minimize rotational stress and subsequent aseptic loosening in selected patients. The paper will also examine the long-term survivorship and modes of failure when using this technique.

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

Purpose of the study: The pertinence of locking for major femoral revision remains a controversial issue. We conducted a retrospective multicentric study to assess the benefit and potential clinical and radiographic complications after using a long locked stem entirely coated with hydroxyapatite.

Material and methods: Our series included 77 patients (42 women, 35 men), mean age 71 years (range 34–90) reviewed at minimum one year. A modular implant was used; the long curved stem allowed total integration. Screws guaranteed distal locking. There were 71 revision THA on trochanteric-shaft fractures, three shaft nonunions, 34 aseptic loosenings, 9 septic loosening, 21 fractures on prosthesis, 6 implant failures and one instability. Seventy percent of patients had stage 3 and 4 bone lesions. Mean follow-up was 60 months.

Results: At last follow-up, 90% of patients were satisfied or very satisfied. The mean Harris function score improved from 32 to 83 and the PMA from 7 to 15. Sixty-four patients were pain free and 22% had pain solely under stress. There were 15 bone complications: dislocation (n=3), early infection (n=3 including 2 recurrences), implant failure (n=2), secondary femur fracture (n=5). Stem survival was 94% at nine years. Radiographically, total stem stability was noted in 73 patients (95%); instability was noted in four cases of fracture. Undeniable metaphyseal improvement was noted in 20% of cases, more modest improvement in 32%; the situation was considered unchanged in 31%. Locking was successful in all cases; cortical bone in contact with the locking screw was unchanged in 59 cases, slightly thickened in 16, including one case with a context of septic recurrence. The locking was dismantled in two cases (one empirically and one for pain), but the stem remained stable.

Discussion: Major damage to the femur can compromise stabilisation of the proximal or diaphyseal implants. Distal locking contributes to the initial mechanical stability, indispensable for secondary osteointegration of the implant. However, with total hydroxyapatite coating, rapid fixation in healthy zones is also crucial. Reconstruction of metaphyseal bone is not easy to quantify, but the absence of bone absorption is noteworthy.

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. Methods. A retrospective analysis of all revision hip procedures was performed at this centre over two consecutive financial years (2018 to 2020). Cases were classified according to the Revision Hip Complexity Classification (RHCC) and whether they were infected or non-infected. Patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade ≥ III or BMI ≥ 40 kg/m. 2. are considered “high risk” by the RHCC. Costs were calculated using the Patient Level Information and Costing System (PLICS), and remuneration based on Healthcare Resource Groups (HRG) data. The primary outcome was the financial difference between tariff and cost per patient episode. Results. In all, 199 revision episodes were identified in 168 patients: 25 (13%) least complex revisions (H1); 110 (55%) complex revisions (H2); and 64 (32%) most complex revisions (H3). Of the 199, 76 cases (38%) were due to infection, and 78 patients (39%) were “high risk”. Median length of stay increased significantly with case complexity from four days to six to eight days (p = 0.006) and for revisions performed for infection (9 days vs 5 days; p < 0.001). Cost per episode increased significantly between complexity groups (p < 0.001) and for infected revisions (p < 0.001). All groups demonstrated a mean deficit but this significantly increased with revision complexity (£97, £1,050, and £2,887 per case; p = 0.006) and for infected failure (£2,629 vs £635; p = 0.032). The total deficit to the NHS Trust over two years was £512,202. Conclusion. Current NHS reimbursement for rTHA is inadequate and should be more closely aligned to complexity. An increase in the most complex rTHAs at major revision centres will likely place a greater financial burden on these units. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(8):559–566

Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) can be complex and associated with significant cost, with an increasing burden within the UK and globally. Regional rTHA networks have been proposed aiming to improve outcomes, reduce re-revisions and therefore costs. The aim of this study was to accurately quantify the cost and reimbursement for the rTHA service and to assess the financial impact of case complexity at a tertiary referral centre within the NHS. A retrospective analysis of all revision hip procedures was performed over two consecutive financial years (2018–2020). Cases were classified according to the Revision Hip Complexity Classification (RHCC) and by mode of failure; infected or non-infected. Patients of ASA grade of 3 or greater or BMI over 40 are considered “high-risk” by the RHCC. Costs were calculated using PLICS and remuneration based on the HRG data. The primary outcome was the financial difference between tariff and cost per episode per patient. Comparisons between groups were analysed using analysis of variance and two-tailed unpaired t-test. 199 revision episodes were identified in 168 patients: 25 (13%) least complex revisions (H1), 110 (55%) complex revisions (H2) and 64 (32%) most complex revisions (H3). 76 (38%) cases were due to infection. 78 (39%) of patients were in the “high-risk” group. Median length of stay increased with case complexity from 4, to 6 to 8 days (p=0.17) and significantly for revisions performed for infection (9 vs 5 days; p=0.01). Cost per episode increased significantly between complexity groups (p=0.0002) and for infected revisions (p=0.003). All groups demonstrated a mean deficit, but this significantly increased with revision complexity (£301, £1,820 and £4,757 per case; p=0.02) and for infected failure (£4,023 vs £1,679; p=0.02). The total deficit to the trust for the two-years was £512,202. Current NHS reimbursement for rTHA is inadequate and should be more closely aligned to complexity. An increase in the most complex rTHA at major revision centres (MRC) will likely place a greater financial burden on these units

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 severe cases of total knee & hip arthroplasty, where off-the-shelf implants are not suitable (i.e., in cases with extended bone defects or periprosthetic fractures), 3D-printed custom-made knee & hip revision implants out of titanium or cobalt-chromium alloy represent one of the few remaining clinical treatment options. Design verification and validation of such custom-made implants is very challenging. Therefore, a methodology was developed to support surgeons and engineers in their decision on whether a developed design is suitable for the specific case. A novel method for the pre-clinical testing of 3D-printed custom-made knee implants has been established, which relies on the biomechanical test and finite element analysis (FEA) of a comparable clinically established reference implant. The method comprises different steps, such as identification of the main potential failure mechanism, reproduction of the biomechanical test of the reference implant via FEA, identification of the maximum value of the corresponding FEA quantity of interest at the required load level, definition of this value as the acceptance criterion for the FEA of the custom-made implant, reproduction of the biomechanical test with the custom-made implant via FEA, decision making for realization or re-design based on the acceptance criterion is fulfilled or not. Exemplary cases of custom-made knee & hip implants were evaluated with this new methodology. The FEA acceptance criterion derived from the reference implants was fulfilled in both custom-made implants and subsequent biomechanical tests verified the FEA results. The suggested method allows a quantitative evaluation of the biomechanical properties of custom-made knee & hip implant without performing physical bench testing. This represents an important contribution to achieve a sustainable patient treatment in complex revision total knee & hip arthroplasty with custom-made 3D printed implants in a safe and timely manner

The Revision Hip Complexity Classification (RHCC) was developed by modified Delphi system in 2022 to provide a comprehensive, reproducible framework for the multidisciplinary discussion of complex revision hip surgery. The aim of this study was to assess the validity, intra-relater and inter-relater reliability of the RHCC. Radiographs and clinical vignettes of 20 consecutive patients who had undergone revision of Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) at our unit during the previous 12-month period were provided to observers. Five observers, comprising 3 revision hip consultants, 1 hip fellow and 1 ST3-8 registrar were familiarised with the RHCC. Each revision THA case was classified on two separate occasions by each observer, with a mean time between assessments of 42.6 days (24–57). Inter-observer reliability was assessed using the Fleiss™ Kappa statistic and percentage agreement. Intra-observer reliability was assessed using the Cohen Kappa statistic. Validity was assessed using percentage agreement and Cohen Kappa comparing observers to the RHCC web-based application result. All observers were blinded to patient notes, operation notes and post-operative radiographs throughout the process. Inter-observer reliability showed fair agreement in both rounds 1 and 2 of the survey (0.296 and 0.353 respectively), with a percentage agreement of 69% and 75%. Inter-observer reliability was highest in H3-type revisions with kappa values of 0.577 and 0.441. Mean intra-observer reliability showed moderate agreement with a kappa value of 0.446 (0.369 to 0.773). Validity percentage agreement was 44% and 39% respectively, with mean kappa values of 0.125 and 0.046 representing only slight agreement. This study demonstrates that classification using the RHCC without utilisation of the web-based application is unsatisfactory, showing low validity and reliability. Reliability was higher for more complex H3-type cases. The use of the RHCC web app is recommended to ensure the accurate and reliable classification of revision THA cases

Periprosthetic femoral fractures are increasingly seen in recent years, adding considerable burden to the National Health Service. These require complex revision or fixation and prolonged post-operative care, with significant morbidity with associated costs. The purpose of this study was to assess whether the size of femoral cement mantle is associated with periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPF). This retrospective study was carried out on a cohort of 49 patients (Fracture Group - FG) who previously had a revision procedure following a proximal PPF between 2010 and 2021. Inclusion criteria – all primary cemented total hip replacements (THR). Exclusion criteria – complex primary THR, any implant malposition that required early revision surgery or any pre-fracture stem loosening. The antero-posterior (AP) radiographs from this cohort of patients were assessed and compared to an age, sex, time since THR-matched control group of 49 patients without PPF (Control Group - CG). Distal cement mantle area (DCMA) was calculated on an AP radiograph of hip; the position of the femoral stem tip prior to fracture was also recorded: valgus, varus or central. Limitations: AP radiographs only. Statistical analyses were performed using Microsoft® Excel. Chi-square test demonstrated statistically significant difference in DCMA between FG and CG. DCMA of 700 to 900 mm² appeared to be protective when compared to DCMA of 0 to 300 mm². Also, a valgus position observed in 23% in FG Vs 4 % in CG increased the risk, with a smaller area of DCMA. This study demonstrates and recommends that a size of 700 – 900 mm² of the DCMA is protective against periprosthetic fractures, which are further influenced by the positioning of the distal stem tip. This could be due to the gradual decrease in the stiffness gradient from proximal to distal around the stem tip than steep changes, thereby decreasing possibility of a stress riser just distal to the cement mantle or restrictor. Further biomechanical research specific to this finding may be helpful to validate the observation, progressing to suggest a safe standardised surgical technique

Introduction. Fracture related infections (FRI) following intramedullary nailing for tibial shaft fractures remain challenging to treat with associated high patient morbidity and healthcare costs. Recently, antibiotic-coated nails have been introduced as a strategy to reduce implant related infection rates in high-risk patients. We present the largest single-centre case series on ETN PROtect® outcomes reporting on fracture union, infection rates and treatment complications. Materials and Methods. 56 adult patients underwent surgery with ETN PROtect® between 01/09/17 and 31/12/20. Indications consisted of acute open fractures and complex revision cases (FRI, non-union surgery and re-fracture) with a mean of 3 prior surgical interventions. 51 patients had an open fracture as their index injury. We report on patient characteristics and outcomes including radiological/clinical union and deep infection. The one-year minimum follow-up rate was 87.5%. Results. One (1.8%) patient developed a deep surgical infection and associated non-union requiring further surgery. In addition, we identified three cases (5.4%) of aseptic non-union following facture treatment with ETN PROtect®. Of the 5 patients who underwent staged complex revision surgery for established FRI with ETN PROtect®, all had treatment failure with ongoing symptoms of deep infection requiring further treatment. Conclusions. Use of the ETN PROtect® nail in high-risk patients in the acute trauma setting demonstrates promising outcomes in the prevention of implant-related infection. In our limited series we have failed to observe any benefit over uncoated nails, when used in treating cases of established FRI/osteomyelitis and would therefore advise caution in their use, especially in view of the high cost

The management of severe acetabular bone defects poses a complex challenge in revision hip arthroplasty. Although biological fixation materials are currently dominant, cage has played an important role in complex acetabular revision in the past decades, especially when a biological prosthesis is not available. The purpose of this study is to report the long-term clinical and radiographic results of Paprosky type Ⅲ acetabular bone defects revised with cage and morselized allografts. We retrospectively analyzed 45 patients who underwent revision hip arthroplasty with cage and morselized allografts between January 2007 and January 2019. Forty-three patients were followed up. There were 19 Paprosky type IIIA bone defect patients and 24 Paprosky type IIIB bone defect patients and 7 patients of the 24 were also with pelvic discontinuity. Clinical assessment included Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Short Form-12 (SF-12). Radiographic assessment included cage stability, allografts incorporation, and center of rotation. All patients were followed up with a mean follow-up of 10.6 years, HHS and SF-12 improved significantly at last follow-up in comparison to the preoperative. There were 2 re-revisions, one at 5 years after surgery, another at 13.6 years after surgery. Two patients had nonprogressive radiolucency in zone III and the junction of zone II and zone III at the bone implant interface. Allografts of 40 (93%) cases incorporated fully. The combination of cage and morselized allograft is an alternative option for acetabular revision with Paprosky type III bone defects with satisfactory long-term follow-up results

Introduction and Objective. In recent years, along with the extending longevity of patients and the increase in their functional demands, the number of annually performed RSA and the incidence of complications are also increasing. When a complication occurs, the patient often needs multiple surgeries to restore the function of the upper limb. Revision implants are directly responsible for the critical reduction of the bone stock, especially in the shoulder. The purpose of this paper is to report the use of allograft bone to restore the bone stock of the glenoid in the treatment of an aseptic glenoid component loosening after a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Materials and Methods. An 86-years-old man came to our attention for aseptic glenoid component loosening after RSA. Plain radiographs showed a complete dislocation of the glenoid component with 2 broken screws in the neck of glenoid. CT scans confirmed the severe reduction of the glenoid bone stock and critical bone resorption and were used for the preoperative planning. To our opinion, given the critical bone defect, the only viable option was revision surgery with restoration of bone stock. We planned to use a bone graft harvested from distal bone bank femur as component augmentation. During the revision procedure the baseplate with a long central peg was implanted “on table” on the allograft and an appropriate osteotomy was made to customize the allograft on the glenoid defect according to the CT-based preoperative planning. The Bio-component was implanted with stable screws fixation on residual scapula. We decided not to replace the humeral component since it was stable and showed no signs of mobilization. Results. The new bio-implant was stable, and the patient gained a complete functional recovery of the shoulder. The scheduled radiological assessments up to 12 months showed no signs of bone resorption or mobilization of the glenoid component. Conclusions. The use of bone allograft in revision surgery after a RSA is a versatile and effective technique to treat severe glenoid bone loss and to improve the global stability of the implant. Furthermore, it represents a viable alternative to autologous graft since it requires shorter operative times and reduces graft site complications. There are very few data available regarding the use of allografts and, although the first studies are encouraging, further investigation is needed to determine the biological capabilities of the transplant and its validity in complex revisions after RSA