Aims. Severe acetabular bone loss and pelvic discontinuity (PD) present particular challenges in revision total hip arthroplasty. To deal with such complex situations, cup-cage reconstruction has emerged as an option for treating this situation. We aimed to examine our success in using this technique for these anatomical problems. Patients and Methods. We undertook a retrospective, single-centre series of 35 hips in 34 patients (seven male, 27 female) treated with a cup-cage construct using a trabecular metal shell in conjunction with a titanium cage, for severe acetabular bone loss between 2011 and 2015. The mean age at the time of surgery was 70 years (42 to 85) and all patients had an acetabular defect graded as Paprosky Type 2C through to 3B, with 24 hips (69%) having PD. The mean follow-up was 47 months (25 to 84). Results. The cumulative five-year survivorship of the implant with revision for any cause was 89% (95% confidence interval (CI) 72 to 96) with eight hips at risk. No revision was required for aseptic loosening; however, one patient with one hip (3%) required removal of the ischial flange of the cage due to sciatic nerve irritation. Two patients (6%; two hips) suffered from hip dislocation, whereas one patient (one hip) required revision surgery with cement fixation of a dual-mobility acetababular component into a well-fixed cup-cage construct. Two patients (6%; two hips) developed periprosthetic infection. One patient was successfully controlled with a two-stage revision surgery, while the other patient underwent excision arthroplasty due to severe medical comorbidities. For the whole series, the Harris Hip Score significantly improved from a mean of 30 (15 to 51) preoperatively to 71 (40 to 89) at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Our findings suggest that cup-cage reconstruction is a viable option for major
Bone stock restoration of acetabular bone defects using impaction bone grafting (IBG) in total hip arthroplasty may facilitate future re-revision in the event of failure of the reconstruction. We hypothesized that the acetabular bone defect during re-revision surgery after IBG was smaller than during the previous revision surgery. The clinical and radiological results of re-revisions with repeated use of IBG were also analyzed. In a series of 382 acetabular revisions using IBG and a cemented component, 45 hips (45 patients) that had failed due to aseptic loosening were re-revised between 1992 and 2016. Acetabular bone defects graded according to Paprosky during the first and the re-revision surgery were compared. Clinical and radiological findings were analyzed over time. Survival analysis was performed using a competing risk analysis.Aims
Methods
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. We compared a study group of 235 patients (257 hips) who received a primary THA with the use of impaction bone grafting (IBG) with an additional lateral rim mesh with a group of 306 patients (343 hips) who received IBG in the absence of a lateral rim mesh during the same period from 1988 to 2015. In the mesh group, there were 74 male and 183 female patients, with a mean age of 35 years (13 to 50). In the no-mesh group, there were 173 male and 170 female patients, with a mean age of 38 years (12.6 to 50). Cox regression analyses were performed to study the effect of a lateral rim mesh on acetabular component survival. Kaplan–Meier analyses with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were performed to estimate the survival of the acetabular implant.Aims
Patients and Methods
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. 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. Aims
Patients and Methods
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:
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:
We investigated the early results of modular porous metal components used in 23 acetabular reconstructions associated with major bone loss. The series included seven men and 15 women with a mean age of 67 years (38 to 81), who had undergone a mean of two previous revisions (1 to 7). Based on Paprosky’s classification, there were 17 type 3A and six type 3B defects. Pelvic discontinuity was noted in one case. Augments were used in 21 hips to support the shell and an acetabular component-cage construct was implanted in one case. At a mean follow-up of 41 months (24 to 62), 22 components remained well fixed. Two patients required rerevision of the liners for prosthetic joint instability. Clinically, the mean Harris Hip Score improved from 43.0 pre-operatively (14 to 86) to 75.7 post-operatively (53 to 100). The mean pre-operative Merle d’Aubigné score was 8.2 (3 to 15) and improved to a mean of 13.7 (11 to 18) post-operatively. These short-term results suggest that modular porous metal components are a viable option in the reconstruction of Paprosky type 3 acetabular defects. More data are needed to determine whether the system yields greater long-term success than more traditional methods, such as reconstruction cages and structural allografts.
We describe 129 consecutive revision total hip replacements using a Charnley-Kerboull femoral component of standard length with impaction allografting. The mean follow-up was 8.2 years (2 to 16). Additionally, extramedullary reinforcement was performed using struts of cortical allograft in 49 hips and cerclage wires in 30. There was one intra-operative fracture of the femur but none later. Two femoral components subsided by 5 mm and 8 mm respectively, and were considered to be radiological failures. No further revision of a femoral component was required. The rate of survival of the femoral component at nine years, using radiological failure as the endpoint, was 98%. Our study showed that impaction grafting in association with a Charnley-Kerboull femoral component has a low rate of subsidence. Reconstruction of deficiencies of distal bone with struts of cortical allograft appeared to be an efficient way of preventing postoperative femoral fracture for up to 16 years.
