Computer simulation study of cementless cup placement for dysplastic hip osteoarthritis using subluxation percentage of Crowe classification.

It is often difficult to achieve adequate bone coverage of the cup in total hip arthroplasty in cases of severe developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH). This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between subluxation percentage of Crowe classification and cup center-edge (cup-CE) angle to investigate whether subluxation percentage according to the Crowe classification is a useful indicator for cementless cup placement. Cementless cup placement was simulated in 77 women with DDH in 91 hips (Crowe I, 35 hips; Crowe II, 35 hips; and Crowe III, 21 hips) using computed tomography-based computer simulation software. The cups were placed at the anatomic hip center (AHC) and 10-mm high hip center (HHC). The relationship between the subluxation percentage and cup-CE angle was evaluated using Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. In addition, the cutoff values for the subluxation percentage that satisfied a cup-CE angle ≥0° were determined using the receiving operating characteristic curve. The cup-CE angle was negatively correlated with the subluxation percentage in both AHC and 10-mm HHC (correlation coefficient ρ = -0.542 [p < 0.01] and -0.704 [p < 0.01], respectively). The cutoff values for subluxation percentage that satisfied a cup-CE angle ≥0° were 56.1% and 73.6% for AHC and 10-mm HHC, respectively. Cementless cup placement in AHC is difficult in cases with the subluxation percentage ≥56.1%, and HHC reconstruction or femoral structural autograft technique should be considered as an alternative. Moreover, placement at 10 mm above AHC is difficult in cases with subluxation percentage ≥73.6%.

New acetabulum bone formation after 10-years impaction bone graft and cemented acetabular cup lead to simple revision-THA with cementless acetabular cup: A case report.

BACKGROUND: Secondary hip osteoarthritis with acetabular bone defect is still a challenging case in hip arthroplasty surgery. The incidence of revision total hip arthroplasty is estimated to be between 10% and 15% in 10 years. Simple revision cementless acetabular cup after a prior complex cemented-THA rarely performed. CASE PRESENTATION: A case of aseptic loosening with prosthesis dislocation after THA was reported in a 54 year-old female patient. The patient had prior surgery of THA 10 years ago due to secondary post-traumatic hip osteoarthritis with acetabular bone defect. At the first surgery, cemented acetabular cup with acetabular bone grafting was performed to fill the defect. A complete new acetabulum bone formation was encountered at 10 years after the surgery which lead to simple revision THA with primary cementless acetabular cup. Excellent functional outcome was also reported at the final follow-up after revision THA. CONCLUSION: This case showed that the potential of bone healing of the acetabulum cannot be underestimated. Therefore, it is suggested to always put an adequate bone graft to manage acetabular bone defect in THA surgery and a new acetabulum bone formation can be expected.

Midterm results of revision total hip arthroplasty for migrated bipolar hemiarthroplasty in patients with hip osteoarthritis using cementless cup with the rim-fit technique.

PURPOSE: The results of reamed bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA) in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA) are reported to be unfavorable. Acetabular reaming for sufficient bony coverage caused bipolar head migration into the superomedial direction, and most patients required revision surgeries. Several methods are applicable to treat decreased bone stock. This study aimed to investigate the midterm results of revision surgeries using the cementless cup with the rim-fit technique. METHODS: Between 1996 and 2014, acetabular revision surgeries using the cementless cup with the rim-fit technique were performed in 86 hips (74 patients). We evaluated radiographic outcomes, including positional change of the rotation center of the artificial femoral head, presence of implant loosening, and filling of the initial gap. We also evaluated clinical outcomes, including the Harris hip score (HHS), and postoperative complications. RESULTS: The average positional changes from BHA to prerevision surgeries were 8.0 mm superiorly and 4.1 mm medially. The average changes from prerevision to postrevision surgeries were 3.7 mm inferiorly and 2.4 mm laterally. No implant loosening was found in all cases; the initial gap between the acetabular host bone and the acetabular cup was filled in 53 (93%) among 57 hips. The average HHS improved from 65.9 before revision surgeries to 83.8 in the latest follow-up. Dislocation and postoperative periprosthetic fracture occurred in two and five hips, respectively; no cases required rerevision surgeries. CONCLUSION: There were favorable midterm results of the revision total hip arthroplasty for migrated BHA in patients with hip OA using cementless cup with the rim-fit technique.

Have newer bearing surfaces changed expectations regarding the longevity of total hip arthroplasty?

AIMS: The purpose of this study is to examine six types of bearing surfaces implanted at a single institution over three decades to determine whether the reasons for revision vary among the groups and how long it takes to identify differences in survival. METHODS: We considered six cohorts that included a total of 1,707 primary hips done between 1982 and 2010. These included 223 conventional polyethylene sterilized with γ irradiation in air (CPE-GA), 114 conventional polyethylene sterilized with gas plasma (CPE-GP), 116 crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE), 1,083 metal-on-metal (MOM), 90 ceramic-on-ceramic (COC), and 81 surface arthroplasties (SAs). With the exception of the COC, all other groups used cobalt-chromium (CoCr) femoral heads. The mean follow-up was 10 (0.008 to 35) years. Descriptive statistics with revisions per 100 component years (re/100 yr) and survival analysis with revision for any reason as the endpoint were used to compare bearing surfaces. RESULTS: XLPE liners demonstrated a lower cumulative incidence of revision at 15 years compared to the CPE-GA and CPE-GP groups owing to the absence of wear-related revisions (4% for XLPE vs 18%, p = 0.02, and 15%, p = 0.003, respectively). Revisions for adverse local tissue reactions occurred exclusively among the MOM (0.8 re/100 year) and SA groups (0.1 re/100 year). The revision rate for instability was lower among hips with 36 mm and larger head sizes compared to smaller head sizes (0.2% vs 2%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The introduction of XLPE has eliminated wear-related revisions through 15-year follow-up compared to CPE-GP and CPE-GA. Dislocation incidence has been reduced with the introduction of larger diameter heads but remains a persistent concern. The potential for adverse local tissue reactions with MOM requires continued follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(7 Supple B):105-111.

Comparison of cementless and cemented cups in revision total hip arthroplasty using a computed tomography-based navigation system.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing cementless and cemented cups are lacking, especially for revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to investigate and compare the differences in implant accuracy between two fixation methods in revision THA. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of 85 hips in 70 patients who underwent revision THA using a computed tomography (CT)-based navigation system. Among these, 53 hips underwent cementless THA and 32 hips underwent cemented THA. We measured cup inclination and anteversion using the Kyocera two-dimensional-template with X-ray (Japan-Kyocera, Shiga, Japan) and stem anteversion with CT. We calculated the combined anteversion [cup anteversion+0.7×stem anteversion]. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to definitive cup inclination and anteversion. The mean deviations in the inclination and anteversion angle were 40.3 ±â€¯4.3 and 19.6 ±â€¯6.2° in the cementless group and 40.5 ±â€¯3.3 and 17.1 ±â€¯5.1° in the cemented group. There were 11 outliers with respect to the Lewinnek safe zone in the cementless group and two in the cemented group (P = 0.072). Although there was no statistically significant difference, the number of safe zone outliers in the cemented group was less than that in the cementless group. CONCLUSION: We conclude that when using a navigation system for revision THA, high precision can be obtained for the cup placement angle with or without cement. However, it seems that a major error in the installation angle of the cup is less likely to occur when using a cemented cup than when using a cementless cup in revision THA with a navigation system.

Delayed total hip arthroplasty after failed treatment of acetabular fractures: an 8- to 17-year follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Delayed total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a reliable procedure following failed treatment of acetabular fractures. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the influence of the type of fracture treatment and modern ceramic bearing on the clinical outcomes of delayed THA. METHODS: Between January 1997 and January 2008, 33 patients (33 hips) underwent cementless THA after failed acetabular fractures. Twenty-one were initially treated by open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) and 12 had non-ORIF. Joint articulation was either conventional metal-on-polyethylene (MOP) or ceramic-on-ceramic (COC). Intraoperative measures and preoperative and follow-up clinical, radiological, and functional outcomes were compared between the ORIF and non-ORIF groups. RESULTS: Surgery duration, blood loss, and transfusion requirement were greater in the ORIF group than in the non-ORIF group (p < 0.05). Significant improvement in Harris Hip Scores was seen post-surgery in both groups. However, a significant difference in the mean Harris Hip Score was not observed between the two groups (p = 0.57). Six patients in the ORIF group required acetabular reconstructive procedures to address bony defects compared to seven patients in the non-ORIF group (p = 0.09). The rate of anatomical restoration was 58.3% (7/12) in the non-ORIF group and 42.9% (9/21) in the ORIF group (p = 0.12). Radiolucent lines were observed in the MOP group and none in the COC group. Overall survival rate was similar in both groups (p = 0.85): 89.3% in the ORIF group and 87.5% in the non-ORIF group. CONCLUSION: Delayed THA with previous acetabular fractures is a challenging procedure. Initial fracture treatment does not influence the outcome of delayed THA, and modern ceramic bearing has promising results in the long-term follow-up.

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Cementless Cup Supporter and Iliac Autograft: A Minimum of 15-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Bone deficiency in revision total hip arthroplasty is a surgical challenge. The Murata-Chiba cup supporter (MC support ring) is an acetabular component supporter for a cementless porous-coated cup. The purpose of this study is to examine the clinical and radiographic outcomes of reconstruction of acetabular bone deficiency using iliac autografts supported by an MC support ring in a revision setting with minimum 15-year follow-up. METHODS: Fifty-nine consecutive revision total hip arthroplasties (57 patients) using the MC support ring were followed for a minimum of 15 years. Nine hips had American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons type II deficiency and 24 had type III defects of the acetabulum. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Harris hip score. Radiographic evaluation included assessment for loosening and bone graft incorporation. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed. RESULTS: At a minimum 15-year follow-up (mean, 17.6 years), 32 patients (33 hips) were alive, 17 patients (18 hips) were deceased, and 8 patients (8 hips) were lost to follow-up. The mean Harris hip score improved from 44.3 to 77.2 at final follow-up. Four hips required reoperation due to deep infection (2 hips) and liner dissociation (2 hips), but no acetabular components were revised for aseptic loosening. Incorporation of the bone graft occurred in all cases. One unrevised patient had radiographic failure. Survivorship at 15 years with re-revision or radiographic failure as the end point was 90.6% (95% confidence interval, 83.0%-98.8%). CONCLUSION: The reconstruction of acetabular bone deficiency using autografts supported by an MC support ring provided satisfactory clinical and radiological results at 17.6 years postoperatively.

Long-term clinical outcome of acetabular cup revision surgery: comparison of cemented cups, cementless cups, and cemented cups with reinforcement devices.

The aim of the present study was to analyze the clinical and radiographic outcomes and Kaplan-Meier survivorship of patients who underwent revision surgeries of the acetabular cup that had sustained aseptic loosening. We reviewed 101 consecutive patients (120 hips; 10 men 11 hips; 91 women 109 hips; age at surgery 66 years; range 45-85) who underwent acetabular component revision surgery, at a follow-up period of 15.6 years (range 10-32). To evaluate the state of the acetabulum, acetabular bony defects were classified according to the AAOS classification based on intraoperative findings: type I (segmental deficiencies n = 24 hips), type II (cavity deficiency n = 48), type III (combined deficiency n = 46), and type IV (pelvic discontinuity n = 2). The Harris hip score improved from 42.5 ± 10.8 (mean ± SD) before surgery to 74.9 ± 14.6 points at follow-up. The survival rates of the acetabular revision surgery with cemented, cementless, and cemented cups plus reinforcement devices were 74, 66, and 82 %, respectively. The difference in the survival rate between the cemented and cementless group was marginal (p = 0.048 Gehan-Breslow-Wilcoxon, p = 0.061 log-rank), probably due to the early-stage failure cases in the cementless group. The cementless and reinforcement groups included nine early-stage failure cases. To prevent early-stage failure, we recommend the cementless cups for types I and II acetabular bone defects with adequate contact between host bone and acetabular component, and the cemented cup with or without reinforcement devices, together with restoration of bone stock by impaction or structured bone grafting, for cases lacking such contact.

Acetabular Revision Using Cementless Acetabular Cup

PURPOSE: To evaluate implant survivorship and clinical outcomes after acetabular revision using cementless acetabular cups. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated 27 cementless acetabular revision cases performed between January 1998 and October 2005. All patients were followed up for more than 2 years, and the mean follow-up period was 54.1 months (range: 24~120 months). In all cases, morselized allografting was performed. Five cases needed structural allografting to achieve stability of the acetabular cup. The clinical results were analyzed using the Harris hip score, and radiological analysis was performed for evaluation of radiolucent lines, osteolysis, loosening, and changes in the hip center. RESULTS: At the time of latest follow-up, no cups showed failure requiring re-revision. The average Harris hip score improved from 67.1 points preoperatively to 91.4 points postoperatively. Radiologically, 7 cases (25.9%) showed radiolucent lines around the acetabular cup, but there was no loosening or osteolysis. CONCLUSION: Cementless acetabular revision showed satisfactory radiological and clinical results on short-term follow-up analysis. Even in cases with considerable amounts of acetabular bone loss, stable fixation could be obtained with structural bone grafting.

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty using Morselized Femoral Head Allograft and Cementless Cup in Acetabular Bone Deficiency / 대한정형외과학회잡지

PURPOSE: This study was aimed to evaluate the clinical and radiologic results of revision total hip arthroplasty using a cementless cup and a morselized femoral head allograft in acetabular bone deficiency. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 1992 to December 1999, the authors performed 37 revision total hip arthroplasties using morselized femoral head allografts and cementless cup. This study evaluated the clinical and radiologic results, at a mean follow-up of 50 months. We evaluated the Harris hip score clinically, and the displacement of acetabular cup by Yoder's criteria. Location and progression of radiolucent area within acetabular zone, which was defined by DeLee and Charnley was observed and recorded. RESULTS: Mean Harris hip score was improved from 50.6 preoperative to 89.2 at final follow-up. A radiolucent zone between host bone and graft bone was observed in 5 cases, and between graft bone and cup in 7 cases, but all of these were less than 2 mm. The change of cup angle more than 4 degrees were observed in 3 cases in Gross type 4, 4 mm superior migration of acetabular cup was observed in 1 case in Gross type 3 and 5 mm horizontal migration was observed in 1 case in Gross type 4. CONCLUSION: Although the early results in revision total hip arthroplasty have been encouraging to date except for Gross type 4, a more long term follow-up study with a larger size cases are needed.

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Cementless Acetabular Cup / 대한정형외과학회잡지

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical and radiological results of revision total hip arthroplasty using cemetless acetabular cup and several kinds of morseled bone grafts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed 20 cases of revision total hip arthroplasties between July 1993 and June 1996. Acetabular bone deficiency was classified as type I in 4 hips, type II in 13 hips, type III in 2 hips and type IV in one hip by AAOS classification. Autogenous bone graft was used in 10 cases, heterograft in 5 cases, allograft in 2 cases and a mixture with autografts and allografts in 2 cases. The average contact rate between cup and host bone was 33.5% in type I acetabular deficiency, 65.1% in type II, 50% in type III and 39% in type IV. RESULTS: The mean Harris hip score was 82.9 points at the last follow-up. Osseous union between host bone and graft bone occurred within 6 months in 14 cases. Radiological failure was noted in 8 cases at the last follow-up. Three cases were revised during the follow-up period. Five cases out of 7 cases in which the contact rate between acetabular cup and host bone was less than 50% were determined to be a radiologic failure. Only 2 cases of the 10 cases in which autogenous bone graft had failed grafts. The rate of complication was 7cases (35%). CONCLUSIONS: The usage of the hemispherical cementless acetabular cup with autogenous bone graft and increasing the contact rate between the acetabular cup and host bone could be a safe management method in revision total hip arthroplasty. We recomrnend avoiding the use of heterograft in cementless cup revision arthroplasty.