[Standardized reconstruction of acetabular bone defects using the cranial socket system]

Acetabular defect management and revision arthroplasty via the direct anterior approach

OBJECTIVE

Acetabular revision arthroplasty and osseous defect management through the direct anterior approach (DAA) with or without proximal extension.

INDICATIONS

Aseptic or septic component loosening, periacetabular osseous defects, pelvic discontinuity, intrapelvic cup protrusion, anterior pseudotumors, iliopsoas tendonitis, polyethylene wear or iliopsoas abscess.

CONTRAINDICATIONS

Clinically relevant gluteal tendon lesions, active infection, morbid obesity, large abdominal pannus, ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) score > III, inguinal skin infection.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

Electrocautery dissection is recommended to dissect the Hueter interval and to debulk pericapsular scar tissue. At all times during capsular debulking, it should be made sure not to damage the iliopsoas tendon or the neurovascular bundle. A stepwise releasing sequence can facilitate dislocation of the prosthesis. Most cases can be revised via the standard DAA but certain circumstances require an intra- or extrapelvic extension. Access to the anterior gluteal surface of the ilium can be provided using a "tensor snip". More posterior access is provided by the extensile extrapelvic approach described by Smith-Petersen. The intrapelvic Levine extension offers access to the entire visceral surface of the ilium and large parts of the anterior column.

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

Patient revised via the intra- or extrapelvic extension and patients suffering from extensive soft tissue or osseous defects should undergo postoperative weight-bearing restrictions with 20 kg for 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Based on our studies, there is no limitation on the type of acetabular implant that can be used in DAA revision arthroplasty. Moreover, virtually all types of periacetabular osseous defects can be managed through the approach and its extensions. Acetabular revision arthroplasty via the DAA and its extensions is safe and can result in good midterm results.

Custom Made Monoflange Acetabular Components for the Treatment of Paprosky Type III Defects

PURPOSE

Patient-specific, flanged acetabular components are used for the treatment of Paprosky type III defects during revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). This monocentric retrospective cohort study analyzes the outcome of patients treated with custom made monoflanged acetabular components (CMACs) with intra- and extramedullary iliac fixation.

METHODS

14 patients were included who underwent revision THA with CMACs for the treatment of Paprosky type III defects. Mechanism of THA failure was infection in 4 and aseptic loosening in 10 patients. Seven patients underwent no previous revision, the other seven patients underwent three or more previous revisions.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 35.4 months (14-94), the revision rate of the implant was 28.3%. Additionally, one perioperative dislocation and one superficial wound infection occurred. At one year postoperatively, we found a significant improvement of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score (p = 0.015). Postoperative radiographic analysis revealed good hip joint reconstruction with a mean leg length discrepancy of 3 mm (-8-20), a mean lateralization of the horizontal hip center of rotation of 8 mm (-8-35), and a mean proximalization of the vertical hip center of rotation of 6 mm (13-26). Radiolucency lines were present in 30%.

CONCLUSION

CMACs can be considered an option for the treatment of acetabular bone loss in revision THA. Iliac intra- and extramedullary fixation allows soft tissue-adjusted hip joint reconstruction and improves hip function. However, failure rates are high, with periprosthetic infection being the main threat to successful outcome.

Acetabular Revision With Intramedullary and Extramedullary Iliac Fixation for Pelvic Discontinuity

BACKGROUND

Parallel to the increase in revision hip procedures surgeons face more and more complex anatomical challenges with pelvic discontinuity (PD) being one of the worst-case scenarios. Here we report on our clinical results using an asymmetric acetabular component for the treatment of PD. The implant is armed in a monoblock fashion with an extramedullary iliac flange and provides the possibility to augment it with an intramedullary iliac press-fit stem.

METHODS

In a single-center retrospective cohort study we analyzed prospectively collected data of 49 patients (35 female, 14 male) suffering from unilateral periprosthetic PD treated with an asymmetric acetabular component between 2009 and 2017. The mean follow-up was 71 months (21-114). Complications were documented and radiographic and functional outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a 5-year implant survival of 91% (confidence interval 77%-96%). The 5-year survival with revision for any cause was 87% (CI 74%-94%). The overall revision rate was 16% (n = 8). Two patients required acetabular component revision due to aseptic loosening. Four patients (8%) suffered from periprosthetic infection: one patient was treated with a 2-stage revision, and another one with resection arthroplasty. The other 2 patients were treated with debridement, irrigation, and exchange of the mobile parts. Of 6 patients (12%) suffering from hip dislocation, 2 required implantation of a dual mobility acetabular component. The mean Harris Hip Score improved from 41 preoperatively to 79 at the latest follow-up (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate that an asymmetric acetabular component with extramedullary and optional intramedullary iliac fixation is a reliable and safe treatment method for periprosthetic PD resulting in good clinical and radiographic mid-term results.

Revision Arthroplasty Through the Direct Anterior Approach Using an Asymmetric Acetabular Component

Despite increasing numbers of primary hip arthroplasties performed through the direct anterior approach (DAA), there is a lack of literature on DAA revision arthroplasty. The present study was performed in order to evaluate outcomes and revision rates after revision through the DAA using an asymmetric acetabular component with optional intra- and extramedullary fixation. In a retrospective cohort study, we analyzed prospectively collected data of 57 patients (61 hips, 43 female, 18 male) who underwent aseptic acetabular component revision through the DAA with the abovementioned implant system between January 2015 and December 2017. The mean follow-up was 40 months (12–56). Survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. All complications were documented and functional outcomes were assessed pre- and postoperatively. Kaplan–Meier analysis revealed an estimated five-year implant survival of 97% (confidence interval CI 87–99%). The estimated five-year survival with revision for any cause was 93% (CI 83–98%). The overall revision rate was 6.6% (n = 4). Two patients had to undergo revision due to periprosthetic infection (3.3%). In one patient, the acetabular component was revised due to aseptic loosening four months postoperatively. Another patient suffered from postoperative iliopsoas impingement and was treated successfully by arthroscopic iliopsoas tenotomy. Two (3.3%) of the revised hips dislocated postoperatively. The mean Harris Hip Score improved from 35 (2–66) preoperatively to 86 (38–100) postoperatively (p < 0.001). The hip joint’s anatomical center of rotation was restored at a high degree of accuracy. Our findings demonstrate that acetabular revision arthroplasty through the DAA using an asymmetric acetabular component with optional intra- and extramedullary fixation is safe and practicable, resulting in good radiographic and clinical midterm results.

[Periprosthetic fractures of the acetabulum: revision endoprosthetics]

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic acetabular fractures are an increasing severe complication in revision arthroplasty. A differentiation is made between periprosthetic acetabular fractures (acute/traumatic fractures) and insufficiency fractures (chronic fractures).

OBJECTIVE

This article introduces a novel treatment algorithm that provides assistance in therapeutic decision making for implant selection and the anchoring philosophy based on diagnostic decision criteria and the relevant load-bearing osseous structures, taking the defect situation into account.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The article provides an overview of original and review articles.

RESULTS

The essential criteria for decisions in treatment planning are based on the stability of the primary cup, the load-bearing ability of the main anatomical structures and the resulting defect situation. For insufficiency fractures the reason for the revision and therefore the exclusion of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) must additionally be considered. In the case of proven PJI a two-stage or multistage prosthesis exchange must be carried out. Based on the extent of apparent bony defects and pelvic discontinuity, the spectrum of treatment options ranges up to implantation of individual patient custom-made acetabular components.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

This overview introduces a new treatment algorithm that provides assistance in decision making for traumatic periprosthetic acetabular fractures and insufficiency fractures. It also provides decision criteria for selection of implants and the surgical approach. Due to the complexity of revision arthroplasty often requiring specialized expertise in trauma and orthopedic surgery and experienced revision surgeons, the operative treatment of periprosthetic acetabular fractures should only be carried out in specialized orthopedic and trauma surgery centers with appropriate experience.

Acetabular defects in revision hip arthroplasty: a therapy-oriented classification

INTRODUCTION

The treatment of severe acetabular bone loss remains a difficult challenge. No classification system is available that combines intuitive use, structured design and offers a therapeutic recommendation according to the current literature and modern state of the art treatment options. The goal of this study is to introduce an intuitive, reproducible and reliable guideline for the evaluation and treatment of acetabular defects.

METHODS

The proposed Acetabular Defect Classification (ADC) is based on the integrity of the acetabular rim and supporting structures. It consists of 4 main types of defects ascending in severity and subdivisions narrowing down-defect location. Type 1 presents an intact acetabular rim, type 2 includes a noncontained defect of the acetabular rim ≤ 10 mm, in type 3 the rim defect exceeds 10 mm and type 4 includes different kinds of pelvic discontinuity. A collective of 207 preoperative radiographs were graded according to ADC and correlated with intraoperative findings. Additionally, a randomized sample of 80 patients was graded according to ADC by 5 observers to account for inter- and intra-rater reliability.

RESULTS

We evaluated the agreement of preoperative, radiographic grading and intraoperative findings presenting with a k value of 0.74. Interobserver agreement presented with a k value of 0.62 and intraobserver at a k value of 0.78.

CONCLUSION

The ADC offers an intuitive, reliable and reproducible classification system. It guides the surgeon pre- and intraoperatively through a complex field of practice.

Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty in Severe Dysplastic Hip Osteoarthritis With a Far Proximal Cup Position

BACKGROUND

Developmental hip dysplasia is the most common cause of secondary hip osteoarthritis. Due to severe acetabular bone deficiency, cup positioning in total hip arthroplasty (THA) of dysplastic hips remains a surgical challenge. The aim was to analyze the functional outcome of far proximal cup positions in primary THA.

METHODS

Fifty patients (61 hips) with THA for severe dysplastic osteoarthritis and a far proximal cup position were included. Patients were divided according to the heights of the implanted cups with increasing vertical distance from the interteardrop line (group A: 55-65 mm, group B: 65-75 mm, group C: >75 mm). Functional outcome was assessed at latest follow-up (38 ± 16 months) by Lower Extremity Functional Score, Tegner Activity Score, and Harris Hip Score (HHS). Patients answered a Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire. Leg length discrepancy was estimated radiographically.

RESULTS

The Lower Extremity Functional Score significantly decreased in C (45.3 ± 25) compared to A (66.7 ± 15.3) and B (67.9 ± 9.9). The Tegner Activity Score significantly increased in all subgroups from preoperative to postoperative (2.2 ± 1.3 to 4.1 ± 1.4; P < .05). The mean overall HHS was 89.3 ± 14.7 (A: 89.5 ± 14.3, B: 94.3 ± 6.5, C: 78.3 ± 22.1). The HHS domains of activity of daily life and gait were significantly reduced in C (P < .05). Patients described a high satisfaction level with the surgery. No significant differences were found with regard to preoperative and postoperative leg lengthening (P = .881). Neither dislocations, impingement problems nor neurologic complications were observed.

CONCLUSION

Primary THA without any concomitant surgical interventions with a far proximal cup position offers a safe and effective treatment option in severe dysplastic hip osteoarthritis.

[Treatment of acetabular bone defects in revision hip arthroplasty using the Revisio-System]

BACKGROUND

Many different systems for the management of primary and secondary acetabular defects are available, each with its inherent advantages and disadvantages. The Revisio-System is a press-fit oval mono-block implant that makes a defect-oriented reconstruction and restoration of the center of rotation possible.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this study, we retrospectively reviewed the outcome of 92 consecutive patients treated with this oval press-fit cup due to periacetabular bone loss. The average follow-up was 58.2 months. Defects were classified according to D'Antonio. There were 39 type II, 38 Type III, and 15 type IV defects. After an average of 4.9 years, the implant survival rate was 94.6% with cup revision as the end point and 89.1% with revision for any reason as the end point. The Harris Hip Score increased from 41.1 preoperatively to 62.3 postoperatively. The mean level of pain measured with the Visual Analogue Scale (VSA) was reduced from 6.9 preoperatively to 3.8 postoperatively.

RESULTS

The Revisio-System represents a promising toolbox for defect-orientated reconstruction of acetabular bone loss in revision hip arthroplasty. Our results demonstrate that the implantation of the Revisio-System can result in a good mid-term clinical outcome.

Acetabular defect classification in times of 3D imaging and patient-specific treatment protocols

Parallel to the rising number of revision hip procedures, an increasing number of complex periprosthetic osseous defects can be expected. Stable long-term fixation of the revision implant remains the ultimate goal of the surgical protocol. Within this context, an elaborate preoperative planning process including anticipation of the periacetabular defect form and size and analysis of the remaining supporting osseous elements are essential. However, detection and evaluation of periacetabular bone defects using an unsystematic analysis of plain anteroposterior radiographs of the pelvis is in many cases difficult. Therefore, periacetabular bone defect classification schemes such as the Paprosky system have been introduced that use standardized radiographic criteria to better anticipate the intraoperative reality. Recent studies were able to demonstrate that larger defects are often underestimated when using the Paprosky classification and that the intra- and interobserver reliability of the system is low. This makes it hard to compare results in terms of defects being studied. Novel software tools that are based on the analysis of CT data may provide an opportunity to overcome the limitations of native radiographic defect analysis. In the following article we discuss potential benefits of these novel instruments against the background of the obvious limitations of the currently used native radiographic defect analysis.

Outcome of a modular head-neck adapter system in revision hip arthroplasty

PURPOSE

Revision hip arthroplasty using a modular head-neck adapter gives the possibility of keeping a well-fixed femoral component while revising the acetabular prosthesis or femoral head and adapt leg length and femoral offset to the individual anatomy intraoperatively. The success of this kind of surgery is still unclear due to the lack of medium- to long-term follow-up. Therefore, we analyzed the clinical and radiological outcome of the modular Merete BioBall© adapter system in revision hip surgery.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we included 95 consecutive patients with a Merete BioBall© adapter system implanted during revision hip arthroplasty. The average follow-up was 52.5 months. For clinical evaluation, we used the Harris Hip Score. The health-related quality of life was determined with the visual analog pain scale.

RESULTS

The surgeries were performed 97 months after prior hip arthroplasty on average. The main indications for the Merete BioBall© adapter system were dislocation, acetabular loosening, and wear. In the clinical outcome, patients achieved 80.9 points in the Harris Hip Score. The mean level of persisting pain was 1.4 (VAS). The overall survival of the Merete BioBall© system in revision hip arthroplasty revealed 92.8 % survival at 8.17 years follow-up with a repeat revision rate of 5.2 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing revision hip arthroplasty using the Merete BioBall

Treatment of acetabular defects during revision total hip arthroplasty--preliminary clinical and radiological outcome using bone substitute materials

Acetabular defects are a particular challenge during THR revision. Defects may be filled with autologous bone grafts, allografts or synthetic bone substitute materials. In this preliminary, retrospective study, 22 patients were treated with an oval shaped revision cup and a combination of synthetic bone substitute materials, namely hydroxyapatite and beta-tricalcium phosphate. The postoperative outcome was evaluated regarding the functional clinical outcome and quality of life using the Harris hip score, the WOMAC and the SF-36. Signs of loosening and changes of the implant position were evaluated from plain radiographs. Follow up examinations were performed after an average duration of 20.5 months (7-33 months). Postoperatively, we found a significant increase of the Harris hip score, and an increase in both the SF-36 and the WOMAC scores (without statistical significance). No radiographic signs of loosening were evident at the time of follow up. The use of synthetic bone substitute materials offers a possible alternative to the use of autologous and allogenic bone grafts in acetabular revision surgery. Further randomised controlled long-term studies are needed to verify the promising short-term results and to determine potential side effects, such as possible third body wear.

[Partial pelvic resection (internal hemipelvectomy) and endoprosthetic replacement in periacetabular tumors]

OBJECTIVE

Treatment of tumors of the pelvic girdle by resection of part or all of the innominate bone with preservation of the extremity. Implantation and stable fixation using a custom-made megaprosthesis to restore painless joint function and loading capacity. The surgical goal is to obtain a wide surgical margin and local tumor control.

INDICATIONS

Primary bone and soft tissue sarcomas, benign or semi-malignant aggressive lesions, metastatic disease (radiation resistance and/or good prognosis).

CONTRAINDICATIONS

Limited life expectancy and poor physical status, extensive metastatic disease, persistent deep infection or recalcitrant osteomyelitis, poor therapeutic compliance, local recurrence following a previous limb-sparing resection, extensive infiltration of the neurovascular structures and the intra- and extrapelvic soft tissues.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

Levels of osteotomy are defined preoperatively by a CT-controlled manufactured three-dimensional 1:1 model of the pelvis. Using these data, the custom-made prosthesis and osteotomy templates are then constructed by the manufacturer. The anterior (internal, retroperitoneal) and posterior (extrapelvic, retrogluteal) aspects of the pelvis are exposed using the utilitarian incision surgical approach. The external iliac and femoral vessels are mobilized as they cross the superior pubic ramus. The adductor muscles, the rectus femoris and sartorius muscle are released from their insertions on the pelvis and the obturator vessels and nerve are transected. If the tumor extends to the hip joint, the femur is transected at a level distal to the intertrochanteric line to ensure hip joint integrity and to prevent tumor contamination. A large myocutaneous flap with the gluteus maximus muscle is retracted posteriorly. The pelvitrochanteric and small gluteal muscles are divided near their insertion in the upper border of the femur. To release the hamstrings and the attachment of the sacrotuberous ligament, the ischial tuberosity is exposed. After osteotomy using the prefabricated templates, the pelvis is released and the specimen is removed en bloc. The custom made prosthesis can either be fixed to the remaining iliac bone or to the massa lateralis of the sacrum. The released muscles are refixated on the remaining bone or the implant.

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

Time of mobilization and degree of weight-bearing depends on the extent of muscle resection. Usually partial loading of the operated limb with 10 kg for a period of 6-12 weeks, then increased loading with 10 kg per week. Thrombosis prophylaxis until full weight bearing. Physiotherapy and gait training. At follow-up, patients are monitored for local recurrence and metastases using history, physical examination, and radiographic studies.

RESULTS

Between 1994 and 2008, 38 consecutive patients with periacetabular tumors were treated by resection and reconstruction with a custom-made pelvic megaprosthesis. The overall survival of the patients was 58% at 5 years and 30% at 10 years. One or more operative revisions were performed in 52.6% of the patients. The rate of local recurrence was 15.8%. Deep infection (21%) was the most common reason for revision. In two of these cases (5.3%), a secondary external hemipelvectomy had to be performed. There were four cases of aseptic loosening (10.5%) in which the prosthesis had to be revised. Six patients had recurrent hip dislocation (15.8%). In four of them a modification of the inserted inlay and an implantation of a trevira tube had to be performed respectively. Peroneal palsy occurred in 6 patients (15.8%) with recovery in only two. There were 4 operative interventions because of postoperative bleeding (10.5%). The mean MSTS score for 12 of the 18 living patients was 43.7%. In particular, gait was classified as poor and almost all patients were reliant on walking aids. However, most patients showed good emotional acceptance.

Total hip replacement in developmental dysplasia using an oval-shaped cementless press-fit cup

PURPOSE

Acetabular roof deficiency due to subluxation of the femoral head (Hartofilakidis type II) increases the complexity of total hip arthroplasty. In these cases some form of support is usually required, to reach stable fixation of the acetabular component. Pursuing this aim, the oval-shaped cementless cranial socket could be an alternative to conventional treatment options.

METHODS

Between 1998 and 2008, 37 patients (40 hips) underwent primary total hip arthroplasty using the cranial socket (mean follow-up 5.6 years, range 26 to 133 months). In a retrospective study we compared these clinical and radiological results with the results of a matched control group consisting of 35 patients (40 hips) treated with a standard cementless hemispherical cup in combination with bulk femoral autografting (mean follow-up 6.9 years, range 30 to 151 months).

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the HHS (p=0.205) or the SF-36 (p=0.26) between both groups. There was no prosthesis failure due to septic or aseptic loosening. Time of surgery was significantly shorter in the cranial socket group (p<0.001). The acetabular component could be placed in the ideal rotational hip centre in 24 (60%) hips in the cranial socket group and 32 (80%) hips in the control group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study indicates, that the cranial socket can be an alternative treatment option for the reconstruction of acetabular deficiency in osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia.

[Total hip replacement in developmental dysplasia: anatomical features and technical pitfalls]

Total hip arthroplasty is the procedure of choice for most patients with advanced, symptomatic osteoarthritis due to congenital dysplasia of the hip. However, the complexity of arthroplasty is significantly increased because of anatomic abnormalities associated with dysplasia of the hip. In addition the relatively young age of patients may affect survival of the implant. From a biomechanical standpoint the primary surgical objective is reconstruction of the anatomical center of rotation. Independent of the pelvic bone stock the socket should be located as near as possible to the anatomical acetabular location. There are various operative strategies to ascertain sufficient stability of the socket. The anterolateral deficiency of the acetabulum can be reconstructed by bulk femoral autografting or bone impaction grafting. Furthermore controlled perforation of the medial wall or implantation of reinforcement rings and oval sockets have been described. Cementless, biological socket fixation shows superior long-term results compared to cemented cups, especially in these young patients. The location of the reconstructed acetabulum and the desired leg length influence the type of femoral reconstruction and in some cases femoral shortening is required. In this article endoprosthetic reconstructive options for developmental dysplasia of the hip are discussed depending on the femoral and acetabular deformity.