Aims. The main advantage of 3D-printed, off-the-shelf acetabular implants is the potential to promote enhanced bony fixation due to their controllable porous structure. In this study we investigated the extent of osseointegration in retrieved 3D-printed acetabular implants. Methods. We compared two groups, one made via 3D-printing (n = 7) and the other using conventional techniques (n = 7). We collected implant details, type of surgery and removal technique, patient demographics, and clinical history. Bone integration was assessed by macroscopic visual analysis, followed by sectioning to allow undecalcified histology on eight sections (~200 µm) for each implant. The outcome measures considered were area of bone attachment (%), extent of bone ingrowth (%), bone-implant contact (%), and depth of ingrowth (%), and these were quantified using a line-intercept method. Results. The two groups were matched for patient sex, age (61 and 63 years), time to revision (30 and 41 months), implant size (54 mm and 52 mm), and porosity (72% and 60%) (p > 0.152). There was no difference in visual bony attachment (p = 0.209). Histological analysis showed greater bone ingrowth in 3D-printed implants (p < 0.001), with mean bone attachment of 63% (SD 28%) and 37% (SD 20%), respectively. This was observed for all the outcome measures. Conclusion. This was the first study to investigate osseointegration in retrieved 3D-printed acetabular implants. Greater bone ingrowth was found in 3D-printed implants, suggesting that better osseointegration can be achieved. However, the influence of specific surgeon, implant, and patient factors needs to be considered. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(7):388–400

Aims. Post-traumatic periprosthetic acetabular fractures are rare but serious. Few studies carried out on small cohorts have reported them in the literature. The aim of this work is to describe the specific characteristics of post-traumatic periprosthetic acetabular fractures, and the outcome of their surgical treatment in terms of function and complications. Methods. Patients with this type of fracture were identified retrospectively over a period of six years (January 2016 to December 2021). The following data were collected: demographic characteristics, date of insertion of the prosthesis, details of the intervention, date of the trauma, characteristics of the fracture, and type of treatment. Functional results were assessed with the Harris Hip Score (HHS). Data concerning complications of treatment were collected. Results. Our series included 20 patients, with a mean age of 77 years (46 to 90). All the patients had at least one comorbid condition. Radiographs showed that 75% of the fractures were pure transverse fractures, and a transverse component was present in 90% of patients. All our patients underwent surgical treatment: open reduction and internal fixation, revision of the acetabular component, or both. Mean follow-up was 24 months, and HHS at last follow-up was 75.5 (42 to 95). The principal complications observed were dislocations of the prosthesis (30%) and infections (20%). A need for revision surgery was noted in 30% of patients. No dislocation occurred in patients undergoing osteosynthesis with acetabular reconstruction. We did not note either mechanical loosening of the acetabular component nor thromboembolic complications. In all, 30% of patients presented acute anemia requiring transfusion, and one death was reported. Conclusion. Post-traumatic periprosthetic acetabular fractures frequently have a transverse component that can destabilize the acetabular implant. The frequency of complications, principally dislocations, led to a high rate of revision surgery. Improvements in preoperative planning should make it possible to codify management to reduce this high rate of complications. The best results were obtained when the surgical strategy combined osteosynthesis with acetabular reconstruction. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(1):28–36

Aims. Pelvic discontinuity is a rare but increasingly common complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA). This single-centre study evaluated the performance of custom-made triflange acetabular components in acetabular reconstruction with pelvic discontinuity by determining: 1) revision and overall implant survival rates; 2) discontinuity healing rate; and 3) Harris Hip Score (HHS). Methods. Retrospectively collected data of 38 patients (39 hips) with pelvic discontinuity treated with revision THA using a custom-made triflange acetabular component were analyzed. Minimum follow-up was two years (mean 5.1 years (2 to 11)). Results. There were eight subsequent surgical interventions. Two failures (5%) of the triflange acetabular components were both revised because of deep infection. There were seven (18%) patients with dislocation, and five (13%) of these were treated with a constraint liner. One patient had a debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) procedure. In 34 (92%) hips the custom-made triflange component was considered stable, with a healed pelvic discontinuity with no aseptic loosening at midterm follow-up. Mean HHS was 80.5 (48 to 96). Conclusion. The performance of the custom triflange implant in this study is encouraging, with high rates of discontinuity healing and osteointegration of the acetabular implant with no aseptic loosening at midterm follow-up. However, complications are not uncommon, particularly instability which we successfully addressed with constrained liners. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(11):867–876

We investigated the revision rates of primary total hip replacement (THR) reported in the National Joint Registry (NJR) by types of bearing surfaces used. We analysed THR procedures across all orthopaedic units in England and Wales. Our analyses estimated all-cause and cause-specific revision rates. We identified primary THRs with heads and monobloc cups or modular acetabular component THRs with head and shell/liner combinations. We used flexible parametric survival models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR). A total of 1,026,481 primary THRs performed between 2003–2019 are included in the primary analysis (Monobloc: n=378,979 and Modular: n=647,502) with 20,869 (2%) of these primary THRs subsequently undergoing a revision episode (Monobloc: n=7,381 and Modular: n=13,488). Compared to implants with a cobalt chrome head and highly crosslinked polyethylene (HCLPE) cup, the all-cause risk of revision for monobloc acetabular implant was higher for patients with cobalt chrome or stainless steel head and non-HCLPE cup. The risk of revision was lower for patients with a delta ceramic head and HCLPE cup implant, at any post-operative period. Compared to patients with a cobalt chrome head and HCLPE liner primary THR, the all-cause risk of revision for modular acetabular implant varied non-constantly. THRs with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and HCLPE liner had a lower risk of revision throughout the entire post-operative period. The all-cause and indication-specific risk of prosthesis revision, at different time points following the initial implantation, is lower for implants with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and a HCLPE liner/cup than commonly used alternatives such as cobalt chrome heads and HCLPE liner/cup

Hip bearing surfaces materials are typically broadly reported in national registry (metal-on-polyethylene, ceramic-on-ceramic etc). We investigated the revision rates of primary total hip replacement (THR) reported in the National Joint Registry (NJR) by detailed types of bearing surfaces used. We analysed THR procedures across all orthopaedic units in England and Wales. Our analyses estimated all-cause and cause-specific revision rates. We identified primary THRs with heads and monobloc cups or modular acetabular component THRs with detailed head and shell/liner bearing material combinations. We used flexible parametric survival models to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HR). A total of 1,026,481 primary THRs performed between 2003–2019 were included in the primary analysis (Monobloc cups: n=378,979 and Modular cups: n=647,502) with 20,869 (2%) of these primary THRs subsequently undergoing a revision episode (Monobloc: n=7,381 and Modular: n=13,488). Compared to implants with a cobalt chrome head and highly crosslinked polyethylene (HCLPE) cup, the overall risk of revision for monobloc acetabular implant was higher for patients with cobalt chrome or stainless steel head and non-HCLPE cup. The risk of revision was lower for patients with a delta ceramic head and HCLPE cup implant, at any post-operative period. Compared to patients with a cobalt chrome head and HCLPE liner primary THR, the overall risk of revision for modular acetabular implant varied non-constantly. THRs with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and HCLPE liner had a lower risk of revision throughout the entire post-operative period. The overall and indication-specific risk of prosthesis revision, at different time points following the initial implantation, is reduced for implants with a delta ceramic or oxidised zirconium head and a HCLPE liner/cup in reference to THRs with a cobalt chrome head and HCLPE liner/cup

Aims. Large acetabular bone defects encountered in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) are challenging to restore. Metal constructs for structural support are combined with bone graft materials for restoration. Autograft is restricted due to limited volume, and allogenic grafts have downsides including cost, availability, and operative processing. Bone graft substitutes (BGS) are an attractive alternative if they can demonstrate positive remodelling. One potential product is a biphasic injectable mixture (Cerament) that combines a fast-resorbing material (calcium sulphate) with the highly osteoconductive material hydroxyapatite. This study reviews the application of this biomaterial in large acetabular defects. Methods. We performed a retrospective review at a single institution of patients undergoing revision THA by a single surgeon. We identified 49 consecutive patients with large acetabular defects where the biphasic BGS was applied, with no other products added to the BGS. After placement of metallic acetabular implants, the BGS was injected into the remaining bone defects surrounding the new implants. Patients were followed and monitored for functional outcome scores, implant fixation, radiological graft site remodelling, and revision failures. Results. Mean follow-up was 39.5 months (36 to 71), with a significant improvement in post-revision function compared to preoperative function. Graft site remodelling was rated radiologically as moderate in 31 hips (63%) and strong in 12 hips (24%). There were no cases of complete graft site dissolution. No acetabular loosening was identified. None of the patients developed clinically significant heterotopic ossification. There were twelve reoperations: six patients developed post-revision infections, three experienced dislocations, two sustained periprosthetic femur fractures, and one subject had femoral component aseptic loosening. Conclusion. Our series reports bone defect restoration with the sole use of a biphasic injectable BGS in the periacetabular region. We did not observe significant graft dissolution. We emphasize that successful graft site remodelling requires meticulous recipient site preparation. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(12):991–997

Literature data show varying rates of aseptic loosening of standard hemispherical cups after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with Crowe IV developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). In order to improve the results regarding the frequency of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component, we decided to use custom-made acetabular implants (CMAI) in this category of patients. The aim of our study was to report outcomes after primary THA using CMAI in patients with Crowe IV DDH. We retrospectively analyzed the results of primary THA using the CMAI in 58 hips. The mean follow-up period was 5.2 years (range 4.2 – 6.3). Patients demonstrated improved functional outcomes according to the Oxford Hip Score: preoperatively 16.9 and postoperatively 38.5 (P < 0.05). Revisions were performed in 2 cases due to dislocations, in 1 case due to nonunion of the greater trochanter and in 1 case due to chronic pain syndrome caused by contact of the CMAI flange with the iliopsoas muscle. In a patient with chronic pain syndrome, during the revision, the pubic flange of the CMAI, which was in contact with the iliopsoas muscle, was removed. There were no radiological signs of loosening of the CMAI. The use of CMAI shows good results in patients with DDH. Extended capability for supplementary screw fixation is an excellent feature of such implants, allowing them to obtain reliable primary fixation. Further observation is required to assess CMAI in the long-term follow-up

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. 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

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.

Aims

The primary objective of this study was to develop a validated classification system for assessing iatrogenic bone trauma and soft-tissue injury during total hip arthroplasty (THA). The secondary objective was to compare macroscopic bone trauma and soft-tissues injury in conventional THA (CO THA) versus robotic arm-assisted THA (RO THA) using this classification system.

Aims

Computer-assisted 3D preoperative planning software has the potential to improve postoperative stability in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Commonly, preoperative protocols simulate two functional positions (standing and relaxed sitting) but do not consider other common positions that may increase postoperative impingement and possible dislocation. This study investigates the feasibility of simulating commonly encountered positions, and positions with an increased risk of impingement, to lower postoperative impingement risk in a CT-based 3D model.

Aims

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MoM-HR) has seen decreased usage due to safety and longevity concerns. Joint registries have highlighted the risks in females, smaller hips, and hip dysplasia. This study aimed to identify if reported risk factors are linked to revision in a long-term follow-up of MoM-HR performed by a non-designer surgeon.

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.

Aims

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and radiological results of patients who were revised using a custom-made triflange acetabular component (CTAC) for component loosening and pelvic discontinuity (PD) after previous total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Aims

Although the Fitmore Hip Stem has been on the market for almost 15 years, it is still not well documented in randomized controlled trials. This study compares the Fitmore stem with the CementLeSs (CLS) in several different clinical and radiological aspects. The hypothesis is that there will be no difference in outcome between stems.

Aims. The aim of the study was to investigate whether the primary stability of press-fit acetabular components can be improved by altering the impaction procedure. Methods. Three impaction procedures were used to implant acetabular components into human cadaveric acetabula using a powered impaction device. An impaction frequency of 1 Hz until complete component seating served as reference. Overimpaction was simulated by adding ten strokes after complete component seating. High-frequency implantation was performed at 6 Hz. The lever-out moment of the acetabular components was used as measure for primary stability. Permanent bone deformation was assessed by comparison of double micro-CT (µCT) measurements before and after impaction. Acetabular component deformation and impaction forces were recorded, and the extent of bone-implant contact was determined from 3D laser scans. Results. Overimpaction reduced primary acetabular component stability (p = 0.038) but did not significantly increase strain release after implantation (p = 0.117) or plastic deformations (p = 0.193). Higher press-fits were associated with larger polar gaps for the 1 Hz reference impaction (p = 0.002, R. 2. = 0.77), with a similar trend for overimpaction (p = 0.082, R. 2. = 0.31). High-frequency impaction did not significantly increase primary stability (p = 0.170) at lower impaction forces (p = 0.001); it was associated with smaller plastic deformations (p = 0.035, R. 2. = 0.34) and a trend for increased acetabular component relaxation between strokes (p = 0.112). Higher press-fit was not related to larger polar gaps for the 6 Hz impaction (p = 0.346). Conclusion. Overimpaction of press-fit acetabular components should be prevented since additional strokes can be associated with increased bone damage and reduced primary stability as shown in this study. High-frequency impaction at 6 Hz was shown to be beneficial compared with 1 Hz impaction. This benefit has to be confirmed in clinical studies. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):261–268

Aims

Iliopsoas impingement occurs in 4% to 30% of patients after undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite a relatively high incidence, there are few attempts at modelling impingement between the iliopsoas and acetabular component, and no attempts at modelling this in a representative cohort of subjects. The purpose of this study was to develop a novel computational model for quantifying the impingement between the iliopsoas and acetabular component and validate its utility in a case-controlled investigation.

Aims

The aim of this study was to examine the implant accuracy of custom-made partial pelvis replacements (PPRs) in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Custom-made implants offer an option to achieve a reconstruction in cases with severe acetabular bone loss. By analyzing implant deviation in CT and radiograph imaging and correlating early clinical complications, we aimed to optimize the usage of custom-made implants.

We have undertaken a prospective, randomised study to compare conservation of acetabular bone after total hip replacement and resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. We randomly assigned 210 hips to one of the two treatment groups. Uncemented, press-fit acetabular components were used for both. No significant difference was found in the mean diameter of acetabular implant inserted in the groups (54.74 mm for total hip replacement and 54.90 mm for resurfacing arthroplasty). In seven resurfacing procedures (6.8%), the surgeon used a larger size of component in order to match the corresponding diameter of the femoral component. With resurfacing arthroplasty, conservation of bone is clearly advantageous on the femoral side. Our study has shown that, with a specific design of acetabular implant and by following a careful surgical technique, removal of bone on the acetabular side is comparable with that of total hip replacement