The conventional method for reconstructing acetabular bone loss at revision surgery includes using structural bone allograft. The disadvantages of this technique promoted the advent of metallic but biocompatible porous implants to fill bone defects enhancing initial and long-term stability of the acetabular component. This paper presents the indications, surgical technique and the outcome of using porous metal acetabular augments for reconstructing acetabular defects.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:103–8.

The advent of modular porous metal augments has ushered in a new form of treatment for acetabular bone loss. The function of an augment can be seen as reducing the size of a defect or reconstituting the anterosuperior/posteroinferior columns and/or allowing supplementary fixation. Depending on the function of the augment, the surgeon can decide on the sequence of introduction of the hemispherical shell, before or after the augment. Augments should always, however, be used with cement to form a unit with the acetabular component. Given their versatility, augments also allow the use of a hemispherical shell in a position that restores the centre of rotation and biomechanics of the hip. Progressive shedding or the appearance of metal debris is a particular finding with augments and, with other radiological signs of failure, should be recognized on serial radiographs. Mid- to long-term outcomes in studies reporting the use of augments with hemispherical shells in revision total hip arthroplasty have shown rates of survival of > 90%. However, a higher risk of failure has been reported when augments have been used for patients with chronic pelvic discontinuity. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(4):312–318

Aims. It may not be possible to undertake revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the presence of massive loss of acetabular bone stock using standard cementless hemispherical acetabular components and metal augments, as satisfactory stability cannot always be achieved. We aimed to study the outcome using a reconstruction cage and a porous metal augment in these patients. Patients and Methods. A total of 22 acetabular revisions in 19 patients were performed using a combination of a reconstruction cage and porous metal augments. The augments were used in place of structural allografts. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 70 years (27 to 85) and the mean follow-up was 39 months (27 to 58). The mean number of previous THAs was 1.9 (1 to 3). All patients had segmental defects involving more than 50% of the acetabulum and seven hips had an associated pelvic discontinuity. . Results. Three failures were observed in two hips, both of which had undergone a previous resection of a tumour affecting the acetabulum. Other complications included a late arterial injury, a sciatic nerve palsy, a dislocation treated with a femoral revision, a deep infection treated with irrigation and debridement and a fracture of the greater trochanter treated conservatively. The mean Oxford Hip Score significantly increased from 13.9 (2 to 23) to 28.7 (13 to 38) (p < 0.00001). The mean vertical distance between the centre of rotation of the hip and its normal location decreased from 30 mm to 10 mm. Conclusions. Acceptable early survivorship can be achieved using this novel technique, but it may be unsuitable for use in patients who have previously undergone the resection of a tumour involving the acetabulum. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:607–13

Aims. The aims of this study were to determine the success of a reconstruction algorithm used in major acetabular bone loss, and to further define the indications for custom-made implants in major acetabular bone loss. Methods. We reviewed a consecutive series of Paprosky type III acetabular defects treated according to a reconstruction algorithm. IIIA defects were planned to use a superior augment and hemispherical acetabular component. IIIB defects were planned to receive either a hemispherical acetabular component plus augments, a cup-cage reconstruction, or a custom-made implant. We used national digital health records and registry reports to identify any reoperation or re-revision procedure and Oxford Hip Score (OHS) for patient-reported outcomes. Implant survival was determined via Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results. A total of 105 procedures were carried out in 100 patients (five bilateral) with a mean age of 73 years (42 to 94). In the IIIA defects treated, 72.0% (36 of 50) required a porous metal augment; the remaining 14 patients were treated with a hemispherical acetabular component alone. In the IIIB defects, 63.6% (35 of 55) underwent reconstruction as planned with 20 patients who actually required a hemispherical acetabular component alone. At mean follow-up of 7.6 years, survival was 94.3% (95% confidence interval 97.4 to 88.1) for all-cause revision and the overall dislocation rate was 3.8% (4 of 105). There was no difference observed in survival between type IIIA and type IIIB defects and whether a hemispherical implant alone was used for the reconstruction or not. The mean gain in OHS was 16 points. Custom-made implants were only used in six cases, in patients with either a mega-defect in which the anteroposterior diameter > 80 mm, complex pelvic discontinuity, and massive bone loss in a small pelvis. Conclusion. Our findings suggest that a reconstruction algorithm can provide a successful approach to reconstruction in major acetabular bone loss. The use of custom implants has been defined in this series and accounts for < 5% of cases. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):47–53

An uncemented hemispherical acetabular component is the mainstay of acetabular revision and gives excellent long-term results. Occasionally, the degree of acetabular bone loss means that a hemispherical component will be unstable when sited in the correct anatomical location or there is minimal bleeding host bone left for biological fixation. On these occasions an alternative method of reconstruction has to be used. A major column structural allograft has been shown to restore the deficient bone stock to some degree, but it needs to be off-loaded with a reconstruction cage to prevent collapse of the graft. The use of porous metal augments is a promising method of overcoming some of the problems associated with structural allograft. If the defect is large, the augment needs to be protected by a cage to allow ingrowth to occur. Cup-cage reconstruction is an effective method of treating chronic pelvic discontinuity and large contained or uncontained bone defects. . This paper presents the indications, surgical techniques and outcomes of various methods which use acetabular reconstruction cages for revision total hip arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):73–7

Aims. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of transferring patients to a specialized arthroplasty centre between the first and second stages (interstage) of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee. Patients and Methods. A search of our institutional database was performed to identify patients having undergone two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for PJI. Two cohorts were created: continuous care (CC) and transferred care (TC). Baseline characteristics and outcomes were collected and compared between cohorts. Results. A total of 137 patients were identified: 105 in the CC cohort (56 men, 49 women; mean age 67.9) and 32 in the TC cohort (17 men, 15 women; mean age 67.8 years). PJI organism virulence was greater in the CC cohort (36.2% vs 15.6%; p = 0.030). TC patients had a higher rate of persisting or recurrent infection (53.6% vs 13.4%; p < 0.001), soft-tissue complications (31.3 vs 14.3%; p = 0.030), and reduced requirement for porous metal augments (78.1% vs 94.3%; p = 0.006). Repeat first stage debridement after transfer led to greater need for plastic surgical procedures (58.3% vs 0.0%; p < 0.001). Conclusion. Patient transfer during the interstage of treatment for infected TKA leads to poorer outcomes compared with patients receiving all their treatment at a specialized arthroplasty centre. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1087–1092

Aims

The use of a porous metal shell supported by two augments with the ‘footing’ technique is one solution to manage Paprosky IIIB acetabular defects in revision total hip arthroplasty. The aim of this study was to assess the medium-term implant survival and radiological and clinical outcomes of this technique.

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.

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

Pelvic discontinuity is a challenging acetabular defect without a consensus on surgical management. Cup-cage reconstruction is an increasingly used treatment strategy. The present study evaluated implant survival, clinical and radiological outcomes, and complications associated with the cup-cage construct.

Aims

The advent of trabecular metal (TM) augments has revolutionized the management of severe bone defects during acetabular reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to evaluate patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) with the use of TM augments for reconstruction of Paprosky IIIA and IIIB defects.

Aims

The aim of this study was to examine the results of the acetabular distraction technique in achieving implantation of a stable construct, obtaining biological fixation, and producing healing of chronic pelvic discontinuity at revision total hip arthroplasty.

Aims

Few reconstructive techniques are available for patients requiring complex acetabular revisions such as those involving Paprosky type 2C, 3A and 3B deficiencies and pelvic discontinuity. Our aim was to describe the development of the patient specific Triflange acetabular component for use in these patients, the surgical technique and mid-term results. We include a description of the pre-operative CT scanning, the construction of a model, operative planning, and surgical technique. All implants were coated with porous plasma spray and hydroxyapatite if desired.

Increasing innovation in rapid prototyping (RP) and additive manufacturing (AM), also known as 3D printing, is bringing about major changes in translational surgical research.

This review describes the current position in the use of additive manufacturing in orthopaedic surgery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:455-60.

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.

Acetabular bone loss is a challenging problem facing the revision total hip replacement surgeon. Reconstruction of the acetabulum depends on the presence of anterosuperior and posteroinferior pelvic column support for component fixation and stability. The Paprosky classification is most commonly used when determining the location and degree of acetabular bone loss. Augments serve the function of either providing primary construct stability or supplementary fixation.

When a pelvic discontinuity is encountered we advocate the use of an acetabular distraction technique with a jumbo cup and modular porous metal acetabular augments for the treatment of severe acetabular bone loss and associated chronic pelvic discontinuity.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):36–42.

The custom triflange is a patient-specific implant for the treatment of severe bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Through a process of three-dimensional modelling and prototyping, a hydroxyapatite-coated component is created for acetabular reconstruction. There are seven level IV studies describing the clinical results of triflange components. The most common complications include dislocation and infection, although the rates of implant removal are low. Clinical results are promising given the challenging problem. We describe the design, manufacture and implantation process and review the clinical results, contrasting them to other methods of acetabular reconstruction in revision THA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):68–72.

The April 2015 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Goal-directed fluid therapy in hip fracture; Liberal blood transfusion no benefit in the longer term; Repeated measures: increased accuracy or compounded errors?; Peri-acetabular osteotomy safer than perhaps thought?; Obesity and peri-acetabular osteotomy: poor bedfellows; Stress fracture in peri-acetabular osteotomy; Infection and tantalum implants; Highly crosslinked polyethylene really does work

We report the use of porous metal acetabular revision shells in the treatment of contained bone loss. The outcomes of 53 patients with ≤ 50% acetabular bleeding host bone contact were compared with a control group of 49 patients with > 50% to 85% bleeding host bone contact. All patients were treated with the same type of trabecular metal acetabular revision shell. The mean age at revision was 62.4 years (42 to 80) and the mean follow-up of both groups was 72.4 months (60 to 102). Clinical, radiological and functional outcomes were assessed. There were four (7.5%) mechanical failures in the ≤ 50% host bone contact group and no failures in the > 50% host bone contact group (p = 0.068). Out of both groups combined there were four infections (3.9%) and five recurrent dislocations (4.9%) with a stable acetabular component construct that were revised to a constrained liner. Given the complexity of the reconstructive challenge, porous metal revision acetabular shells show acceptable failure rates at five to ten years’ follow-up in the setting of significant contained bone defects. This favourable outcome might be due to the improved initial stability achieved by a high coefficient of friction between the acetabular implant and the host bone, and the high porosity, which affords good bone ingrowth.