Bone defect map of the true acetabulum in hip dysplasia (Crowe type II and III) based on three-dimensional image reconstruction analysis

The high hip center technique (HHC) is considered to be feasible for acetabular reconstruction in patients with DDH, but there is little in-depth study of its specific impact on Crowe type II and III DDH. The purpose of this study was to simultaneously analyze the effect of HHC on bone coverage of the cup (CC) in the acetabular reconstruction of type II and III DDH patients and to propose a map of acetabular bone defects from the perspective of the cup. Forty-nine hip CT data of 39 patients with DDH (Crowe type II and III) were collected to simulate acetabular reconstruction by cup models of different sizes (diameter 38mm–50 mm, 2 mm increment) with the HHC technique. The frequency distribution was plotted by overlapping the portions of the 44 mm cups that were not covered by the host bone. The mean CC of cups with sizes of 38 mm, 40 mm, 42 mm, 44 mm, 46 mm, 48 mm, and 50 mm at the true acetabula were 77.85%, 76.71%, 75.73%, 74.56%, 73.68%, 72.51%, and 71.75%, respectively, and the maximum CC increments were 21.24%, 21.58%, 20.86%, 20.04%, 18.62%, 17.18%, and 15.42% (P < 0.001), respectively, after the cups were elevated from the true acetabula. The bone defect map shows that 95% of type II and III DDH acetabula had posterosuperior bone defects, and approximately 60% were located outside the force line of the hip joint. Acetabular cups can meet a CC of more than 70% at the true acetabulum, and approximately 60% of Crowe type II and III DDH patients can obtain satisfactory CC at the true acetabulum by using a 44-mm cup without additional operations.

Minimum 10 years clinical and radiological outcomes of acetabular revisions of total hip arthroplasties with tricalcium phosphate/hydroxyapatite bone graft substitute

Background Aseptic loosening is the most frequent indication for revision of total hip arthroplasty. Revision arthroplasty of acetabular component is a challenge for every surgeon because they have to simultaneously deal with the reconstruction of bone defects, adequate implant geometry and stable fixation. Allografts are the most frequently used materials in reconstruction of bone loss during revision surgeries. Because of an increasing number of revision hip arthroplasties and poor availability of allografts, we decided to use bone graft substitutes in acetabular revisions. Methods Between September 2005 and January 2010, 44 revision arthroplasties in 43 patients were performed with the use of bone graft substitutes for acetabular defect reconstruction in revision of total hip arthroplasty. Acetabular bone defects were classified according to Paprosky. Seventeen hips were classified as IIA, 3 hips IIB, 3 hips IIC, 10 hips IIIA and 11 hips IIIB. Acetabular bone defects were reconstructed with tricalcium phosphate/hydroxyapatite bone graft substitute - BoneSave. Clinical and radiological examination was performed after 3 months, 1 year and then annually. Harris hip score was used for clinical evaluation. Survival analysis was performed with Kaplan-Meier method with aseptic loosening as the definition of endpoint. Results The average follow-up period is 12 (range from 10 to 15) years. During the follow-up, three patients died after 24 months because of causes not related to surgery. None of the patients was lost to follow-up. The evaluation of clinical results revealed an increase in pre-operative HHS from average 38.3 (range 25 to 55) points to average 86.3 (range 45 to 95) points at the most recent follow-up. Radiographic evaluation showed the migration of one revision cage 12 months after surgery. Revision arthroplasty performed after 14 months revealed the partial incorporation of bone graft substitute. There were not any cases of loosening of revision acetabular cup at the most recent follow up examination in the remaining 39 patients. Bone graft substitute was not absorbed in all of these patients. The survival after 10 years amounted to 97.56%. Conclusion Bone graft substitute Bone Save may be suitable for acetabular revision surgery, however preoperative bone defect is critical for success and determining of a surgical technique, so this is multifactorial in this challenge surgery.

The Diagnosis and Treatment of Acetabular Bone Loss in Revision Hip Arthroplasty: An International Consensus Symposium

Despite growing evidence supporting the evaluation, classification, and treatment of acetabular bone loss in revision hip replacement, advancements have not been systematically incorporated into a single document, and therefore, a comprehensive review of the treatment of severe acetabular bone loss is needed. The Stavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center at Hospital for Special Surgery held an Acetabular Bone Loss Symposium on June 21, 2019, to answer the following questions: What are the trends, emerging technologies, and areas of future research related to the evaluation and management of acetabular bone loss in revision hip replacement? What constitutes the optimal workup and management strategies for acetabular bone loss? The 36 international experts convened were divided into groups, each assigned to discuss 1 of 4 topics: (1) preoperative planning and postoperative assessment; (2) implant selection, management of osteolysis, and management of massive bone loss; (3) the treatment challenges of pelvic discontinuity, periprosthetic joint infection, instability, and poor bone biology; and (4) the principles of reconstruction and classification of acetabular bone loss. Each group came to consensus, when possible, based on an extensive literature review. This document provides an overview of these 4 areas, the consensus each group arrived at, and directions for future research.

Risk factors for implant failure of custom-made acetabular implants in patients with Paprosky III acetabular bone loss and combined pelvic discontinuity

BACKGROUND: Severe acetabular bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty (RTHA), both with or without pelvic discontinuity, remains a great challenge in orthopaedic surgery. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate risk factors for failure of custom-made acetabular implants in RTHA. METHODS: Seventy patients with severe acetabular bone loss (Paprosky Type III) and pelvic discontinuity, who required RTHA, were included in our study. All prostheses were constructed based on a thin-layer computed-tomography (CT) scan of the pelvis. The treatment was considered unsuccessful in the event of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) or aseptic loosening (AL) with need for explantation of the custom-made acetabular implant. RESULTS: The average follow-up was 41.9 ± 34.8 months (range 1.5–120). Implant survival at last follow-up was 75.7% (53 of 70). Explantation was necessary in 17 cases (15 PJI; 2 AL). Previous PJI as reason for RTHA (p= 0.025; OR 3.56 (95% CI: 1.14; 11.21)), additional revision of femoral components (p= 0.003; OR 8.4 (95% CI: 1.75; 40.42)), rheumatoid disease (p= 0.039; OR 3.43 (95% CI: 1.01; 11.40)), elevated preoperative CRP > 15.2 mg/l (p= 0.015; AUC: 0.7) and preoperative haemoglobin < 10.05 (p= 0.022; AUC: 0.69) were statistically significant risk factors associated with treatment failure. Age and BMI were not statistically significant contributing to implant failure. CONCLUSION: Risk factors for treatment failure were a previous PJI, additional revision of femoral component, rheumatoid disease, elevated preoperative CRP and low preoperative haemoglobin. Awareness of these risk factors will help to improve future treatment standards.

Acetabular revision using ReadiGraft® BLX Putty and cortical/cancellous bone chips

Acetabular bone loss presents a challenge to the revision total hip arthroplasty surgeon. It is described a technique of stressing the acetabular bone intra-operatively to access for pelvic discontinuity and the use of allograft to fill the bone gap. Three radiographic criteria are assessed on the AP radiograph for pre-operative classification according to the Paprosky system. This paper describes the pre-operative assessment, the acetabular defect classification and the surgery to achieve a successful outcome.