Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

BEHAVIOUR OF NON-CEMENTED ACETABULAR IMPLANTS LEFT IN PLACE AFTER REVISION OF THE FEMORAL COMPONENT OF TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY



Abstract

Purpose: Removing a non-cemented cup can increase operative morbidity destroying bone stock. Data are thus needed concerning the long-term behaviour of non-cemented acetabular implants left in place after revision of the femoral component of a total hip arthroplasty.

Methods: We studied clinical and radiological outcome at five and fifteen years in a consecutive series of 83 patients (88 hips) with a non-cemented acetabular implant that was left in place after revision of the femoral component of a total hip arthroplasty. Mean age of the patients at revision surgery was 54 years. Two types of acetabular implants had been used: 69 titanium screen and 19 with a porocoat surface. All revisions were performed for isolated loosening of the femoral component. At revision, 33% of the patients had an osteolytic acetabulum and 52% had a bone graft.

Results: At mean follow-up of 7.5 years after revision (acetabular implants in situ for 11.6 years on the average), the mean UCLA function scores, preoperatively and at last follow-up were, respectively, pain 3.8 versus 8.9, gait 6.3 versus 8.4; function 5.8 versus 7.9; activity 4.8 versus 6.1. Six acetabular implants required a revision procedure at 7.5 years (mean, range 2 – 14 years) after the femoral revision (acetabular implants in situ for 13.3 years on the average) or acetabular loosening (n=1), conversion to a metal-on-metal bearing (n=1), and for repeated dislocation and infection (n=1). There were no hips with recurrent or worsening osteolysis.

Discussion: The duration of implantation or prior revision would not appear to be sufficient to justify removing a non-cemented acetabular implant. Presence of osteolysis does not appear to affect long-term fixation of the non-cemented acetabular implant after femoral revision. We recommend removing the acetabular screw at revision in order to correctly assess the component’s fixation.

The abstracts were prepared by Docteur Jean Barthas. Correspondence should be addressed to him at Secrétariat de la Société S.O.F.C.O.T., 56 rue Boissonade, 75014 Paris.