Comparison of Head Center Position and Screw Fixation Options Between a Jumbo Cup and an Offset Center of Rotation Cup in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Computer Simulation Study.

Jumbo acetabular cups are commonly used in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). A straightforward reaming technique is used which is similar to primary THA. However, jumbo cups may also be associated with hip center elevation, limited screw fixation options, and anterior soft tissue impingement. A partially truncated hemispherical shell was designed with an offset center of rotation, thick superior rim, and beveled anterior and superior rims as an alternative to a conventional jumbo cup. A three dimensional computer simulation was used to assess head center position and safe screw trajectories. Results of this in vitro study indicate that a modified hemispherical implant geometry can reduce head center elevation while permitting favorable screw fixation trajectories into the pelvis in comparison to a conventional jumbo cup.

Do jumbo cups cause hip center elevation in revision THA? A computer simulation.

BACKGROUND: Acetabular revision THA with use of a large (jumbo) cup is an effective treatment for many cavitary and segmental peripheral bone defects. However, the jumbo cup may result in elevation of the hip center and protrusion through the anterior acetabular wall as a result of the oversized geometry of the jumbo cup compared with the physiologic acetabulum. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purpose of this computer simulation was to determine how much elevation of the hip center and anterior wall protrusion occurs in revision THA with use of a jumbo cup technique in which the inferior edge of the jumbo cup is placed at the inferior acetabular rim and the superior edge of the jumbo cup is placed against host bone at the superior margin of a posterosuperior bone defect. METHODS: Two hundred sixty-five pelvic CT scans were analyzed by custom CT analytical software. The computer simulated oversized reaming. The vertical and anterior reamer center shifts were measured, and anterior column bone removal was determined. RESULTS: The computer simulation demonstrated that the hip center shifted 0.27 mm superiorly and 0.02 mm anteriorly, and anterior column bone removal increased 0.86 mm for every 1-mm increase in reamer diameter. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the jumbo cup technique results in hip center elevation despite placement of the cup adjacent to the inferior acetabulum. For a hypothetical increase from a 54-mm socket to a 72-mm socket, as one might see in the context of the revision of a failed THA, our model would predict an elevation of the hip center of approximately 5 mm and loss of approximately 15 mm of anterior column bone. This suggests that an increase in femoral head length may be needed to compensate for the hip center elevation caused by the use of a large jumbo cup in revision THA. A jumbo cup may also result in protrusion through the anterior wall.

The addition of a hydroxyapatite coating changes the immediate postoperative stability of a plasma-sprayed femoral stem.

Nonbiologic and mechanical effects of hydroxyapatite coatings have received little evaluation. Hydroxyapatite coatings give porous metal the appearance of decreased roughness. We hypothesized that this apparent decrease in surface roughness would result in diminished initial implant stability. We measured the initial stability of titanium plasma sprayed press-fit femoral stems with and without HA. Stems were implanted into cadaver and synthetic femora and subjected to aggressive stair-climbing loads. Migrations (retroversion and subsidence) and cyclic motions were recorded. Hydroxyapatite coating significantly reduced retroversion (P = .0007) and cyclic subsidence (P = .0086). Scanning electron microscopy imaging revealed that HA coating appeared to have reduced roughness on a millimeter scale but increased roughness on a micrometer scale. We concluded that HA coating improves initial stability through mechanical means, before biological action.