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. 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.Aims
Methods
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. 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.Aims
Methods
Periprosthetic hip fractures (PPFs) after total hip arthroplasty are difficult to treat. Therefore, it is important to identify modifiable risk factors such as stem selection to reduce the occurrence of PPFs. This study aimed to clarify differences in fracture torque, surface strain, and fracture type analysis between three different types of cemented stems. We conducted biomechanical testing of bone analogues using six cemented stems of three different types: collarless polished tapered (CPT) stem, Versys Advocate (Versys) stem, and Charnley-Marcel-Kerboull (CMK) stem. Experienced surgeons implanted each of these types of stems into six bone analogues, and the analogues were compressed and internally rotated until failure. Torque to fracture and fracture type were recorded. We also measured surface strain distribution using triaxial rosettes.Aims
Methods
