We retrospectively reviewed 44 consecutive patients (50 hips) who underwent acetabular re-revision after a failed previous revision that had been performed using structural or morcellised allograft bone, with a cage or ring for uncontained defects. Of the 50 previous revisions, 41 cages and nine rings were used with allografts for 14 minor-column and 36 major-column defects. We routinely assessed the size of the acetabular bone defect at the time of revision and re-revision surgery. This allowed us to assess whether host bone stock was restored. We also assessed the outcome of re-revision surgery in these circumstances by means of radiological characteristics, rates of failure and modes of failure. We subsequently investigated the factors that may affect the potential for the restoration of bone stock and the durability of the re-revision reconstruction using multivariate analysis.

At the time of re-revision, there were ten host acetabula with no significant defects, 14 with contained defects, nine with minor-column, seven with major-column defects and ten with pelvic discontinuity. When bone defects at re-revision were compared with those at the previous revision, there was restoration of bone stock in 31 hips, deterioration of bone stock in nine and remained unchanged in ten. This was a significant improvement (p <  0.001). Morselised allografting at the index revision was not associated with the restoration of bone stock.

In 17 hips (34%), re-revision was possible using a simple acetabular component without allograft, augments, rings or cages. There were 47 patients with a mean follow-up of 70 months (6 to 146) available for survival analysis. Within this group, the successful cases had a minimum follow-up of two years after re-revision. There were 22 clinical or radiological failures (46.7%), 18 of which were due to aseptic loosening. The five and ten year Kaplan–Meier survival rate was 75% (95% CI, 60 to 86) and 56% (95% CI, 40 to 70) respectively with aseptic loosening as the endpoint. The rate of aseptic loosening was higher for hips with pelvic discontinuity (p = 0.049) and less when the allograft had been in place for longer periods (p = 0.040).

The use of a cage or ring over structural allograft bone for massive uncontained defects in acetabular revision can restore host bone stock and facilitate subsequent re-revision surgery to a certain extent.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:319–24.

Deficiencies of acetabular bone stock at revision hip replacement were reconstructed with two different types of allograft using impaction bone grafting and a Burch-Schneider reinforcement ring. We compared a standard frozen non-irradiated bone bank allograft (group A) with a freeze-dried irradiated bone allograft, vitalised with autologous marrow (group B). We studied 78 patients (79 hips), of whom 87% (69 hips) had type III acetabular defects according to the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons classification at a mean of 31.4 months (14 to 51) after surgery. At the latest follow-up, the mean Harris hip score was 69.9 points (13.5 to 97.1) in group A and 71.0 points (11.5 to 96.5) in group B. Each hip showed evidence of trabeculation and incorporation of the allograft with no acetabular loosening. These results suggest that the use of an acetabular reinforcement ring and a living composite of sterile allograft and autologous marrow appears to be a method of reconstructing acetabular deficiencies which gives comparable results to current forms of treatment

We have reviewed 29 patients (30 hips) who had undergone revision total hip arthroplasty using a Freeman metal-backed acetabular component and acetabular impaction allografting. The mean follow-up was for 15.3 years (12 to 17). Five patients (5 hips) died with the prosthesis in situ and four (4 hips) were lost to follow-up. Twelve hips had failed and in the remaining nine there were minor symptoms. The mean time to failure requiring further surgery was nine years. Excluding patients who were lost to follow-up or had died, 72% of the hips were radiologically loose at the last review. The commonest pattern in those requiring revision was failure of the reinforcement ring in adduction with remodelling of the medial wall. Of the nine patients who had not undergone revision, one with bilateral replacements had no current radiographs and only three of the remaining seven replacements had no radiological signs of loosening. The short-term results for this technique have been reported to be satisfactory, but in the long term they are not. The factors associated with failure include the design of the prosthesis, which has been implicated in disappointing long-term results when used in primary arthroplasty, but not with the frequency of failure found in this series. It seems that the reliance on peripheral screw fixation over a bed of allograft without bridging the graft does not provide sufficient stability to allow incorporation of the graft

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

One-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is gaining popularity. The outcome for a repeat one-stage revision THA after a failed one-stage exchange for infection remains unknown. The aim of this study was to report the infection-free and all-cause revision-free survival of repeat one-stage exchange, and to investigate the association between the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) staging system and further infection-related failure.

Aims

There is a paucity of long-term studies analyzing risk factors for failure after single-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip arthroplasty (THA). We report the mid- to long-term septic and non-septic failure rate of single-stage revision for PJI after THA.

Aims

The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of a lateral rim mesh on the survival of primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) in young patients, aged 50 years or younger.

In this retrospective study we evaluated the proficiency of shelf autograft in the restoration of bone stock as part of primary total hip replacement (THR) for hip dysplasia, and in the results of revision arthroplasty after failure of the primary arthroplasty. Of 146 dysplastic hips treated by THR and a shelf graft, 43 were revised at an average of 156 months, 34 of which were suitable for this study (seven hips were excluded because of insufficient bone-stock data and two hips were excluded because allograft was used in the primary THR). The acetabular bone stock of the hips was assessed during revision surgery. The mean implant–bone contact was 58% (50% to 70%) at primary THR and 78% (40% to 100%) at the time of the revision, which was a significant improvement (p < 0.001). At primary THR all hips had had a segmental acetabular defect > 30%, whereas only five (15%) had significant segmental bone defects requiring structural support at the time of revision. In 15 hips (44%) no bone graft or metal augments were used during revision.

A total of 30 hips were eligible for the survival study. At a mean follow-up of 103 months (27 to 228), two aseptic and two septic failures had occurred. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of the revision procedures demonstrated a ten-year survival rate of 93.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 78 to 107) with clinical or radiological failure as the endpoint. The mean Oxford hip score was 38.7 (26 to 46) for non-revised cases at final follow-up.

Our results indicate that the use of shelf autografts during THR for dysplastic hips restores bone stock, contributing to the favourable survival of the revision arthroplasty should the primary procedure fail.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:777–81.

We retrospectively evaluated 42 hips which had undergone acetabular reconstruction using the Kerboull acetabular reinforcement device between September 1994 and December 1998. We used autogenous bone chips from the ilium and ceramic particle morsellised grafts, even in large acetabular bone defects, in the early stages of the study. Thereafter, femoral head allograft was used as bulk graft in patients with large acetabular defects. Ceramic blocks and the patients’ contralateral femoral head were also used as bulk graft. The mean follow-up period was 8.7 years (4.3 to 12).

Survivorship analysis was performed using radiological failure of the acetabular component, irrespective of whether it was revised, or not, as the end-point.

The survival rate of the morsellised graft group (25 hips) and the bulk graft group (17 hips) at ten years was 53% (95% confidence interval (CI) 42.5% to 63.5%) and 82% (95% CI 72.4% to 91.6%), respectively. The mid-term results of revision total hip replacement with the Kerboull device were better when bulk graft was used in any size of bone defect.

Between 1980 and 2000, 63 support rings were used in the management of acetabular deficiency in a series of 60 patients, with a mean follow-up of 8.75 years (2 months to 23.8 years). There was a minimum five-year follow-up for successful reconstructions. The indication for revision surgery was aseptic loosening in 30 cases and infection in 33. All cases were Paprosky III defects; IIIA in 33 patients (52.4%) and IIIB in 30 (47.6%), including four with pelvic dissociation. A total of 26 patients (43.3%) have died since surgery, and 34 (56.7%) remain under clinical review. With acetabular revision for infection or aseptic loosening as the definition of failure, we report success in 53 (84%) of the reconstructions. A total of 12 failures (19%) required further surgery, four (6.3%) for aseptic loosening of the acetabular construct, six (9.5%) for recurrent infection and two (3.2%) for recurrent dislocation requiring captive components. Complications, seen in 11 patients (18.3%), included six femoral or sciatic neuropraxias which all resolved, one grade III heterotopic ossification, one on-table acetabular revision for instability, and three early post-operative dislocations managed by manipulation under anaesthesia, with no further instability.

We recommend support rings and morcellised bone graft for significant acetabular bone deficiency that cannot be reconstructed using mesh.

Failure of total hip arthroplasty with acetabular deficiency occurred in 55 patients (60 hips) and was treated with acetabular revision using morsellised allograft and a cemented metal-backed component. A total of 50 patients (55 hips) were available for clinical and radiological evaluation at a mean follow-up of 5.8 years (3 to 9.5). No hip required further revision of the acetabular component because of aseptic loosening.

All the hips except one had complete incorporation of the allograft demonstrated on the radiographs. A complete radiolucent line of > 1 mm was noted in two hips post-operatively. A good to excellent result occurred in 50 hips (91%). With radiological evidence of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component as the end-point, the survivorship at a mean of 5.8 years after surgery was 96.4%.

The use of impacted allograft chips in combination with a cemented metal-backed acetabular component and screw fixation can achieve good medium-term results in patients with acetabular bone deficiency.

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.

We have reviewed a group of patients with iliopsoas impingement after total hip replacement with radiological evidence of a well-fixed malpositioned or oversized acetabular component. A consecutive series of 29 patients (30 hips) was assessed. All had undergone a trial of conservative management with no improvement in their symptoms. Eight patients (eight hips) preferred continued conservative management (group 1), and 22 hips had either an iliopsoas tenotomy (group 2) or revision of the acetabular component and debridement of the tendon (group 3), based on clinical and radiological findings. Patients were followed clinically for at least two years, and 19 of the 22 patients (86.4%) who had surgery were contacted by phone at a mean of 7.8 years (5 to 9) post-operatively. Conservative management failed in all eight hips. At the final follow-up, operative treatment resulted in relief of pain in 18 of 22 hips (81.8%), with one hip in group 2 and three in group 3 with continuing symptoms. The Harris Hip Score was significantly better in the combined groups 2 and 3 than in group 1. There was a significant rate of complications in group 3. This group initially had better functional scores, but at final follow-up these were no different from those in group 2.

Tenotomy of the iliopsoas and revision of the acetabular component are both successful surgical options. Iliopsoas tenotomy provided the same functional results as revision of the acetabular component and avoided the risks of the latter procedure.

The purpose of this study was to define immediate post-operative ‘quality’ in total hip replacements and to study prospectively the occurrence of failure based on these definitions of quality. The evaluation and assessment of failure were based on ten radiological and clinical criteria. The cumulative summation (CUSUM) test was used to study 200 procedures over a one-year period. Technical criteria defined failure in 17 cases (8.5%), those related to the femoral component in nine (4.5%), the acetabular component in 32 (16%) and those relating to discharge from hospital in five (2.5%). Overall, the procedure was considered to have failed in 57 of the 200 total hip replacements (28.5%). The use of a new design of acetabular component was associated with more failures. For the CUSUM test, the level of adequate performance was set at a rate of failure of 20% and the level of inadequate performance set at a failure rate of 40%; no alarm was raised by the test, indicating that there was no evidence of inadequate performance.

The use of a continuous monitoring statistical method is useful to ensure that the quality of total hip replacement is maintained, especially as newer implants are introduced.

Aim

Until now, there has been no consensus as to whether stemmed acetabular components are appropriate for use in patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) who have major acetabular defects or pelvic discontinuity. We wished to address this deficiency in the literature.

We evaluated the use of a stemmed acetabular component in the treatment of severe acetabular deficiency during revision and complex primary total hip arthroplasty.

There were 31 hips of which 24 were revisions (20 for aseptic loosening, four for infection) and the remainder were complex primary arthroplasties. At a mean follow-up of 10.7 years (6 to 12.8), no component had been revised for aseptic loosening; one patient had undergone a revision of the polyethylene liner for wear. There was one failure because of infection. At the latest follow-up, the cumulative survival rate for aseptic loosening, with revision being the end-point, was 100%; for radiographic loosening it was 92% and for infection and radiographic loosening it was 88%. These results justify the continued use of this stemmed component for the reconstruction of severe acetabular deficiency.

Intact abductors of the hip play a crucial role in preventing limping and are known to be damaged through the direct lateral approach. The extent of trauma to the abductors after revision total hip replacement (THR) is unknown. The aim of this prospective study was to compare the pre- and post-operative status of the gluteus medius muscle after revision THR. We prospectively compared changes in the muscle and limping in 30 patients who were awaiting aseptic revision THR and 15 patients undergoing primary THR. The direct lateral approach as described by Hardinge was used for all patients. MRI scans of the gluteus medius and functional analyses were recorded pre-operatively and six months post-operatively. The overall mean fatty degeneration of the gluteus medius increased from 35.8% (1.1 to 98.8) pre-operatively to 41% (1.5 to 99.8) after multiple revision THRs (p = 0.03). There was a similar pattern after primary THR, but with considerably less muscle damage (p = 0.001), indicating progressive muscle damage. Despite an increased incidence of a positive Trendelenburg sign following revision surgery (p = 0.03) there was no relationship between the cumulative fatty degeneration in the gluteus medius and a positive Trendelenburg sign (p = 0.26). The changes associated with other surgical approaches to the hip warrant investigation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1618–22.

Conventional cemented acetabular components are reported to have a high rate of failure when implanted into previously irradiated bone. We recommend the use of a cemented reconstruction with the addition of an acetabular reinforcement cross to improve fixation.

We reviewed a cohort of 45 patients (49 hips) who had undergone irradiation of the pelvis and a cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) with an acetabular reinforcement cross. All hips had received a minimum dose of 30 Gray (Gy) to treat a primary nearby tumour or metastasis. The median dose of radiation was 50 Gy (Q1 to Q3: 45 to 60; mean: 49.57, 32 to 72).

The mean follow-up after THA was 51 months (17 to 137). The cumulative probability of revision of the acetabular component for a mechanical reason was 0% (0 to 0%) at 24 months, 2.9% (0.2 to 13.3%) at 60 months and 2.9% (0.2% to 13.3%) at 120 months, respectively. One hip was revised for mechanical failure and three for infection.

Cemented acetabular components with a reinforcement cross provide good medium-term fixation after pelvic irradiation. These patients are at a higher risk of developing infection of their THA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:177–84.

There are few reports describing the technique of managing acetabular protrusio in primary total hip replacement. Most are small series with different methods of addressing the challenges of significant medial and proximal migration of the joint centre, deficient medial bone and reduced peripheral bony support to the acetabular component. We describe our technique and the clinical and radiological outcome of using impacted morsellised autograft with a porous-coated cementless cup in 30 primary THRs with mild (n = 8), moderate (n = 10) and severe (n = 12) grades of acetabular protrusio. The mean Harris hip score had improved from 52 pre-operatively to 85 at a mean follow-up of 4.2 years (2 to 10). At final follow-up, 27 hips (90%) had a good or excellent result, two (7%) had a fair result and one (3%) had a poor result. All bone grafts had united by the sixth post-operative month and none of the hips showed any radiological evidence of recurrence of protrusio, osteolysis or loosening. By using impacted morsellised autograft and cementless acetabular components it was possible to achieve restoration of hip mechanics, provide a biological solution to bone deficiency and ensure long-term fixation without recurrence in arthritic hips with protrusio undergoing THR.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:37–40.

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.