Aim

Until now, there has been no consensus as to whether stemmed acetabular components are appropriate for use in patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) who have major acetabular defects or pelvic discontinuity. We wished to address this deficiency in the literature.

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: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):73–7.

Revision knee arthroplasty presents a number of challenges, not least of which is obtaining solid primary fixation of implants into host bone. Three anatomical zones exist within both femur and tibia which can be used to support revision implants. These consist of the joint surface or epiphysis, the metaphysis and the diaphysis. The methods by which fixation in each zone can be obtained are discussed. The authors suggest that solid fixation should be obtained in at least two of the three zones and emphasise the importance of pre-operative planning and implant selection.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:147–9.

Aims

The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the minimum five-year outcome of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) using the Kerboull acetabular reinforcement device (KARD) in patients with Paprosky type III acetabular defects and destruction of the inferior margin of the acetabulum.

Increasing innovation in rapid prototyping (RP) and additive manufacturing (AM), also known as 3D printing, is bringing about major changes in translational surgical research.

This review describes the current position in the use of additive manufacturing in orthopaedic surgery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:455-60.

Objectives

In order to address acetabular defects, porous metal revision acetabular components and augments have been developed, which require fixation to each other. The fixation technique that results in the smallest relative movement between the components, as well as its influence on the primary stability with the host bone, have not previously been determined.

Aims

Few reconstructive techniques are available for patients requiring complex acetabular revisions such as those involving Paprosky type 2C, 3A and 3B deficiencies and pelvic discontinuity. Our aim was to describe the development of the patient specific Triflange acetabular component for use in these patients, the surgical technique and mid-term results. We include a description of the pre-operative CT scanning, the construction of a model, operative planning, and surgical technique. All implants were coated with porous plasma spray and hydroxyapatite if desired.

Aims

This paper describes the methodology, validation and reliability of a new computer-assisted method which uses models of the patient’s bones and the components to measure their migration and polyethylene wear from radiographs after total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Aims

We evaluated clinical and radiographic outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) using the second-generation Trabecular Metal (TM) Glenoid component. The first generation component was withdrawn in 2005 after a series of failures were reported. Between 2009 and 2012, 40 consecutive patients with unilateral TSA using the second-generation component were enrolled in this clinical study. The mean age of the patients was 63.8 years (40 to 75) and the mean follow-up was 38 months (24 to 42).

Aims

The optimal method of tibial component fixation remains uncertain in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Hydroxyapatite coatings have been applied to improve bone ingrowth in uncemented designs, but may only coat the directly accessible surface. As peri-apatite (PA) is solution deposited, this may increase the coverage of the implant surface and thereby fixation. We assessed the tibial component fixation of uncemented PA-coated TKAs versus cemented TKAs.

Aims

We present a case series of ten metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasties (MoP THAs) with delayed dislocation associated with unrecognised adverse local tissue reaction due to corrosion at the trunnion and pseudotumour formation.

A pelvic discontinuity occurs when the superior and inferior parts of the hemi-pelvis are no longer connected, which is difficult to manage when associated with a failed total hip replacement. Chronic pelvic discontinuity is found in 0.9% to 2.1% of hip revision cases with risk factors including severe pelvic bone loss, female gender, prior pelvic radiation and rheumatoid arthritis. Common treatment options include: pelvic plating with allograft, cage reconstruction, custom triflange implants, and porous tantalum implants with modular augments. The optimal technique is dependent upon the degree of the discontinuity, the amount of available bone stock and the likelihood of achieving stable healing between the two segments. A method of treating pelvic discontinuity using porous tantalum components with a distraction technique that achieves both initial stability and subsequent long-term biological fixation is described.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):73–7.

Aims

A failed total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) is often associated with much bone loss. As an alternative to arthrodesis, the surgeon may consider a custom-made talar component to compensate for the bone loss. Our aim in this study was to assess the functional and radiological outcome after the use of such a component at mid- to long-term follow-up.

This review summarises the technique of impaction grafting with mesh augmentation for the treatment of uncontained acetabular defects in revision hip arthroplasty.

The ideal acetabular revision should restore bone stock, use a small socket in the near-anatomic position, and provide durable fixation. Impaction bone grafting, which has been in use for over 40 years, offers the ability to achieve these goals in uncontained defects. The precepts of modern, revision impaction grafting are that the segmental or cavitary defects must be supported with a mesh; the contained cavity is filled with vigorously impacted morselised fresh-frozen allograft; and finally, acrylic cement is used to stabilise the graft and provide rigid, long-lasting fixation of the revised acetabular component.

Favourable results have been published with this technique. While having its limitations, it is a viable option to address large acetabular defects in revision arthroplasty.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(1 Supple A):25–30.

The last decade has seen a considerable increase in the use of in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) to treat patients with end-stage arthritis of the ankle. However, the longevity of the implants is still far from that of total knee and hip arthroplasties.

The aim of this review is to outline a diagnostic and treatment algorithm for the painful TAA to be used when considering revision surgery.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:5–11.

Conventional cemented acetabular components are reported to have a high rate of failure when implanted into previously irradiated bone. We recommend the use of a cemented reconstruction with the addition of an acetabular reinforcement cross to improve fixation.

We reviewed a cohort of 45 patients (49 hips) who had undergone irradiation of the pelvis and a cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) with an acetabular reinforcement cross. All hips had received a minimum dose of 30 Gray (Gy) to treat a primary nearby tumour or metastasis. The median dose of radiation was 50 Gy (Q1 to Q3: 45 to 60; mean: 49.57, 32 to 72).

The mean follow-up after THA was 51 months (17 to 137). The cumulative probability of revision of the acetabular component for a mechanical reason was 0% (0 to 0%) at 24 months, 2.9% (0.2 to 13.3%) at 60 months and 2.9% (0.2% to 13.3%) at 120 months, respectively. One hip was revised for mechanical failure and three for infection.

Cemented acetabular components with a reinforcement cross provide good medium-term fixation after pelvic irradiation. These patients are at a higher risk of developing infection of their THA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:177–84.

We retrospectively reviewed 44 consecutive patients (50 hips) who underwent acetabular re-revision after a failed previous revision that had been performed using structural or morcellised allograft bone, with a cage or ring for uncontained defects. Of the 50 previous revisions, 41 cages and nine rings were used with allografts for 14 minor-column and 36 major-column defects. We routinely assessed the size of the acetabular bone defect at the time of revision and re-revision surgery. This allowed us to assess whether host bone stock was restored. We also assessed the outcome of re-revision surgery in these circumstances by means of radiological characteristics, rates of failure and modes of failure. We subsequently investigated the factors that may affect the potential for the restoration of bone stock and the durability of the re-revision reconstruction using multivariate analysis.

At the time of re-revision, there were ten host acetabula with no significant defects, 14 with contained defects, nine with minor-column, seven with major-column defects and ten with pelvic discontinuity. When bone defects at re-revision were compared with those at the previous revision, there was restoration of bone stock in 31 hips, deterioration of bone stock in nine and remained unchanged in ten. This was a significant improvement (p <  0.001). Morselised allografting at the index revision was not associated with the restoration of bone stock.

In 17 hips (34%), re-revision was possible using a simple acetabular component without allograft, augments, rings or cages. There were 47 patients with a mean follow-up of 70 months (6 to 146) available for survival analysis. Within this group, the successful cases had a minimum follow-up of two years after re-revision. There were 22 clinical or radiological failures (46.7%), 18 of which were due to aseptic loosening. The five and ten year Kaplan–Meier survival rate was 75% (95% CI, 60 to 86) and 56% (95% CI, 40 to 70) respectively with aseptic loosening as the endpoint. The rate of aseptic loosening was higher for hips with pelvic discontinuity (p = 0.049) and less when the allograft had been in place for longer periods (p = 0.040).

The use of a cage or ring over structural allograft bone for massive uncontained defects in acetabular revision can restore host bone stock and facilitate subsequent re-revision surgery to a certain extent.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:319–24.