Polyimide (MP-1, MMATech, Haifa, Israel), is a high performance aerospace thermoplastic used for its lubricity, stability, inertness and radiation resistance. A wear resistant thin robust bearing is needed for total hip arthroplasty (THR). After independent laboratory testing, in 2006, the author used the material as a bearing in two Reflection (Smith and Nephew, USA) hip surgeries. The first, a revision for polyethylene wear, survives with no evidence of wear, noise, new osteolysis or complications related to the MP-1 bearing after 16 yrs. The second donated his asymptomatic MP-1 hip at 6.5yrs for post-mortem examination. There were no osteoclasts, cellular reaction bland in contrast to that of polyethylene. In 2013 a clinical study with ethical committee approval was started using a Biolox Delta (Ceramtec, Germany) head against a polyimide liner in 97 patients. MMATech sold all liners, irradiated: steam 52:45. Sixteen were re-machined in New Zealand. Acetabular shells were Delta PF (LIMA, Italy). The liner locked by taper. The cohort consisted of 46:51 M:F, and ages 43 to 85, mean 65. Ten received cemented stems. For contralateral surgery, a ceramic or polyethylene liner was used. Initial patients were lower demand, later, more active patients, mountain-biking and running. All patients have on-going follow up, including MP-1 liner revision cases. There has been no measurable wear, or osteolysis around the acetabular components using weight-bearing radiographs. Squeaking within the first 6 weeks was noted in 39 number of cases and subtle increase in palpable friction, (passive rotation at 50 degrees flexion), but then disappeared. There were 6 revisions, four of which were related to cementless Stemsys implants (Evolutis, Italy) fixed distally with proximal linear lucencies in Gruen zones 1 and 7, and 2 and 6. No shells were revised and MP-1 liners were routinely changed to ceramic or polyethylene. The liners showed no head contact at the apex, with highly polished contact areas. There were no deep or superficial infections, but one traumatic anterior dislocation at 7 years associated with 5 mm subsidence of a non-collared stem. The initial squeaking and increased friction was due to the engineering of the liner / shell composite as implanted, not allowing adequate clearance for fluid film lubrication and contributed to by shell distortion during impaction. The revised bearings were “equatorial” rather than polar, and with lack of wear or creep this never fully resolved. Where the clearance was better, function was normal. The “slow” utilization was due to my ongoing concern with clearances not being correct. The revision of 4 Stemsys stems, tribology issues may have contributed, but non “MP-1” / Stemsys combinations outside this study have shown the same response, thought to be due to de-bonding of the hydroxyapatite coating. With correct engineering and clearances, a 3.6 mm thick MP-1 bearing, a surface Ra<0.5, steam sterilized, shows no appreciable wear, and with confidence, can be used as a high performance THR bearing

Nutritional Status and Short-Term Outcomes Following THA; Initial Metal Ion Levels Predict Risk in MoM THA; THA Bearing Surface Trends in the US ‘07- ’14; Dislocation Following Two-Stage Revision THA; Timing of Primary THA Prior to or After Lumbar Spine Fusion; Failure Rate of Failed Constrained Liner Revision; ESR and CRP vs. Reinfection Risk in Two-Stage Revision?; Mechanical Complications of THA Based on Approach; Impaction Force and Taper-Trunnion Stability in THA; TKA in Patients Less Than 50 Years of Age; Post-operative Mechanical Axis and 20-year TKA Survival and Function; Return to Moderate to High-intensity Sports after UKA; “Running Two Rooms” and Patient Safety in TJA; Varus and Implant Migration and Contact Kinematics after TKA; Quadriceps Snips in 321 Revision TKAs; Tubercle Proximalization for Patella Infera in Revision TKA; Anterior Condylar Height and Flexion in TKA; Compression Bandage Following Primary TKA; Unsupervised Exercise vs. Traditional PT After Primary TKA and UKA

Purpose of Study. To assess the results of Revision Hip Surgery in which a less invasive technique was utilized in situations where a number of different options was available. Method. The authors rely on an experience of 3,445 hip arthroplasties by a single surgeon over a period of 20 years, of which approximately 20% were revision cases. Of these 617 cases, we report on 175 in which a minimally invasive option was taken. This does not apply to the skin incision, as all cases were adequately exposed. We have adopted this term to describe cases in which a surgical options was taken that resulted in the least morbidity and the shortest surgical time. We postulated that would lead to the best outcomes with the least complications. Acetabular revisions: 1) Isolated polyethylene exchange. 2) Liner revision with cement technique in cases of cup malposition or poor locking mechanism. 3) Revision of cup with a primary prosthesis with significant medial bone loss. Stem revisions: 1) Cement on cement technique. 2) Strut graft and primary stem. Results. We found a very low complication rate utilizing these methods: Fatal pulmonary emboli: 0 Sepsis: 2 Dislocations 3 Repeat revisions 3. Conclusion. Revision surgery offers many challenges that tend to be compounded with successive operations. We believe that good results can be achieved when a philosophy of minimally invasive surgery is adopted. NO DISCLOSURES

Failed total hip arthroplasty (THA) can require novel designs of revision implants that present unique risks as well as benefits. One of our patients endured a series of hip and knee revisions. In her twenties, she experienced a failed THA, became infected and all implants removed. In her early fifties (2008), she had a proximal femoral replacement incorporating a FreedomTM cup (Biomet, Warsaw, IN). She lacked hip musculature, was a dislocation risk, and cup constraint was necessary. Our choice of Freedom cup provided a 36mm head for enhanced stability and range-of-motion, plus the polyethylene liner was not as encompassing as other constrained designs, and the external clamping ring came pre-installed. This unique design allows for ease of head insertion during surgery. Our patient also had a CompressTM fixator combined knee-arthroplasty (Biomet). This knee fixation failed in 2013 and we installed a total femur combined hinge-knee arthroplasty. The Freedom cup was kept and post-op results were satisfactory. Follow-up appeared satisfactory in 2014. Some liner eccentricity was apparent but the patient had no complaints. Radiographs in February 2016 indicated cup's locking-mechanism was possibly failing but patient had no complaints. By December follow-up of 2016, the patient claimed she had 3 falls, and her x-rays indicated a displaced head and dislodged liner. At revision, the liner appeared well-seated inside the acetabular shell. However, about 50% of the polyethylene rim was missing and the large detached circumferential fragment represented the other 50%. A new Freedom liner was installed and her follow-up appears satisfactory to date. The fractured liner was sectioned through the thinnest wall (under detached rim fragment). The most critical design section was at site of the external locking ring, this wall thickness appearing < 3mm, whereas eccentric cup dome was 7.5–8mm thick. Under the detached rim fragment, wall thickness had been reduced (in vivo) to < 1mm. Given the robust rim profile, it seemed unlikely that the liner could have been spinning. The more likely scenario was that with repeated impingement, attempted subluxations by the femoral head stressed the contra- polyethylene rim, resulting in cold flow, thinning, and rim fragmentation. Two exemplar liners were compared, one similar to our patient's and one in a thicker design. Comparison of the sectioned retrieval to the new liners confirmed major loss of circumferential polyethylene. Our learning experience was threefold; (i) if we had been aware of the thin wall limitation, possibly we could have inserted the thicker liner (larger shell), (ii) we could have been more alert to the impending liner failure (x- ray imaging), and (iii) positioning the cup in a more horizontal orientation may have been an alternate solution, i.e. more coverage (but perhaps more impingement). Use of a 32mm head would have facilitated a thicker liner but this option was unavailable. In conclusion, it was notable that this constrained liner functioned very well for 7 years in our complex case and was easily revised at 8 years to another Freedom liner

Instability after total hip arthroplasty is the primary cause for revision surgery and is a frequent complication following revision surgery for any reason (Bozic et al, JBJS 2009). Surgical management of the unstable hip has not been uniformly successful with the best results occurring in those hips in which an identifiable cause of instability can be determined (Daly & Morrey, JBJS 1992). It was these sobering findings that led to the development of and increased use of constrained acetabular components. While the results of revision surgery for instability using constrained components have been encouraging (Shapiro, Padgett, Sculco J Arthroplasty 2003) with a re-dislocation rate of less than 3%, reoperation for other reasons have noted to increase with time. The commonly used tripolar configuration has been susceptible to bearing damage at both the inner and outer bearing surface by the nature of the constrained mechanism (Shah, Padgett, Wright, J Arthroplasty 2009). In addition, we have noted instances of fixation failure directly related to the constrained acetabular device either from loss of implant fixation to the pelvis with or without cement (Yun, Padgett, Dorr, J Arthroplasty 2005). The observation of these failure modes ranging from either fixation failures to overt biomaterial failure have led us to be extremely cautious in the “routine” use of constrained liners in revision THR. Stratification of the recurrent dislocator has been nicely described by Wera et al (J Arthroplasty, 2012). The etiology of dislocation includes: acetabular malposition, femoral malposition, abductor deficiency, impingement, late bearing wear and unknown causes. Implant instability due to malposition, impingement, and poly wear should be revised as appropriate to correct the underlying problem in addition to the use of either larger diameter heads. The emerging use of dual mobility articulations remains to be determined. However, the indiscriminate use of constrained liners should be avoided as the risk of problems outweighs their benefits

Instability after total hip arthroplasty is the primary cause for revision surgery and is a frequent complication following revision surgery for any reason (Bozic et al, JBJS 2009). Surgical management of the unstable hip has not been uniformly successful with the best results occurring in those hips in which an identifiable cause of instability can be determined (Daly & Morrey, JBJS 1992). It was these sobering findings that lead to the development of and increased use of constrained acetabular components. While the results of revision surgery for instability using constrained components have been encouraging (Shapiro, Padgett, Sculco, J Arthroplasty 2003) with a re-dislocation rate of less than 3%, reoperation for other reasons have noted to increase with time. The commonly used tripolar configuration has been susceptible to bearing damage at both the inner and outer bearing surface by the nature of the constrained mechanism (Shah, Padgett, Wright, J Arthroplasty 2009). In addition, we have noted instances of fixation failure directly related to the constrained acetabular device either from loss of implant fixation to the pelvis with or without cement (Yun, Padgett, Dorr, J Arthroplasty 2005). The observation of these failure modes ranging from either fixation failures to overt biomaterial failure have lead us to be extremely cautious in the “routine” use of constrained liners in revision THR. Implant instability due to poor position should be revised as appropriate to correct alignment. The use of either larger diameter heads or the emerging use of dual mobility articulations seems more appropriate at this time

Introduction. This study was performed to evaluate the minimum 5-year clinical and radiological results of liner cementation into a stable acetabular shell using a metal-inlay, polyethylene liner during revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. Sixty-six hips (63 patients) that underwent revision THA using a metal-inlay polyethylene liner cementation were included. The causes of revision were; polyethylene wear in 37 cases, femoral stem loosening in 20 cases, ceramic head fracture in 4 cases, and recurrent dislocation in 5 cases. Clinical results were graded at final follow-up using Harris hip scores, and radiographs were evaluated to determine acetabular component inclination, the stabilities of acetabular and femoral components, correction of hip centers, and the progression of osteolysis. Results. The average follow-up was 87.3 months (range 60.1∼134.3). Mean Harris hip scores improved from 64 preoperatively to 87.6 at final follow-up. Seven cases (10.6%) of dislocations occurred after revision surgery and 2 cases (3.0%) underwent acetabular revision or soft tissue augmentation. One cemented liner (1.5%) was dislodged and acetabular revision was performed using an acetabular reinforcement ring and a morselized bone graft. Two cases (3.0%) developed an infection and both underwent debridement and prosthesis with antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement (PROSTALAC) and intravenous antibiotics. Radiographic evaluations revealed osteolytic progression in the acetabular cup in 3 cases and osteolytic progression at the femoral stem in 7 cases, but none of these 10 cases underwent revision of the acetabular or femoral component. No cases of metallosis, metallic hypersensitivity, or cancer were encountered. Conclusion. This study shows that liner cementation into a stable metal shell provides relatively good clinical results. This technique offers lower surgical morbidity, a short operation time, and rapid patient recovery. Summary. Good clinical and radiologic outcomes were obtained at more than 5-years after liner cementation into a stable acetabular shell using a metal-inlay polyethylene liner during revision THA