The fate of grafting acetabular defects during revision total hip arthroplasty

Global mapping of institutional and hospital-based (Level II-IV) arthroplasty registries: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Four joint arthroplasty registries (JARs) levels exist based on the recorded data type. Level I JARs are national registries that record primary data. Hospital or institutional JARs (Level II-IV) document further data (patient-reported outcomes, demographic, radiographic). A worldwide list of Level II-IV JARs must be created to effectively assess and categorize these data.

METHODS

Our study is a systematic scoping review that followed the PRISMA guidelines and included 648 studies. Based on their publications, the study aimed to map the existing Level II-IV JARs worldwide. The secondary aim was to record their lifetime, publications' number and frequency and recognise differences with national JARs.

RESULTS

One hundred five Level II-IV JARs were identified. Forty-eight hospital-based, 45 institutional, and 12 regional JARs. Fifty JARs were found in America, 39 in Europe, nine in Asia, six in Oceania and one in Africa. They have published 485 cohorts, 91 case-series, 49 case-control, nine cross-sectional studies, eight registry protocols and six randomized trials. Most cohort studies were retrospective. Twenty-three per cent of papers studied patient-reported outcomes, 21.45% surgical complications, 13.73% postoperative clinical and 5.25% radiographic outcomes, and 11.88% were survival analyses. Forty-four JARs have published only one paper. Level I JARs primarily publish implant revision risk annual reports, while Level IV JARs collect comprehensive data to conduct retrospective cohort studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study mapping all Level II-IV JARs worldwide. Most JARs are found in Europe and America, reporting on retrospective cohorts, but only a few report on studies systematically.

[Allogeneic bone transplantation in hip revision surgery : Indications and potential for reconstruction]

The increasing number of people having joint replacements will lead to increasing numbers of revision operations. The transplantation of allogeneic bones might reconstruct bone defects and improve long-term anchorage of the implant. A sufficient primary stability of the implanted construct is necessary to achieve osseous incorporation as well as tight contact between the implanted allogeneic and host bones. Transplantation of bone can contribute to downgrading acetabular defects and so avoid bigger reinforcement implants. An improvement of bone stock due to reconstruction of femoral bony defects might also reduce the size of the stem necessary since the indication might be limited in case of extensive bone defects. According to good longterm results of modular revision stems the Impaction-Bone-Grafting has not yet generally been established.

Polyethylene Liner and Femoral Head Exchange in Total Hip Arthroplasty: Factors Associated with Long-Term Success and Failure

BACKGROUND

Polyethylene (PE) liner and femoral head exchange is commonly used to treat periprosthetic osteolysis associated with PE wear after total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of our study was to determine long-term implant survivorship, risk factors for mechanical failure, clinical outcomes, and complications following PE liner and head exchange.

METHODS

We identified 116 hips in 110 patients treated with PE liner and head exchange from 1993 to 2004. There were 64 women (58%) in the series, the mean age at revision surgery was 58 years, and the mean follow-up was 11 years (range, 2 to 23 years). Radiographic review determined the location and size of osteolytic defects before the revision surgery. Implant survivorship was determined using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Cox regression analysis was used to determine factors that were predictive of failure.

RESULTS

Implant survivorship free of repeat revision for any cause was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 86% to 96%) at 5 years, 81% (95% CI = 74% to 90%) at 10 years, and 69% (95% CI = 55% to 84%) at 15 years. Reasons for repeat revision included aseptic acetabular loosening in 5 hips (4%) and subsequent wear of conventional PE with osteolysis in 5 hips (4%). No patient who underwent revision with highly cross-linked PE subsequently had a repeat revision due to wear. The absolute risk of acetabular component loosening was 23% for patients with osteolysis in 3 zones, 40% for those with osteolysis involving more than half the cup circumference, and 21% for those with osteolytic defects of >600 mm. The mean Harris hip score improved from 77 before the PE liner and head exchange to 87 after it (p < 0.001). The most common complication was dislocation, which occurred in 19 hips (16%).

CONCLUSIONS

PE liner and head exchange provides acceptable long-term implant survivorship with good clinical outcomes. Complications are not uncommon, and steps should be taken to mitigate hip instability. Acetabular revision may be considered when in situ components have a poor track record or are malpositioned, or when preoperative radiographs demonstrate large osteolytic defects threatening cup fixation. Use of highly cross-linked PE at revision was protective against subsequent PE wear and osteolysis, although this did not reach significance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Computer-assisted navigation as a diagnostic tool in revision total hip arthroplasty: A case report

Revision total hip arthroplasty is a costly procedure accounting for approximately 14% of all hip arthroplasties. Compounding the cost considerations is the potential for serious injury to the patient when removing existing components. Such injury can result in not only increased morbidity but also dramatically increased costs. The use of computer-assisted navigation in revision total hip arthroplasty, while relatively uncommon, offers surgeons the ability to measure component position and orientation intraoperatively, thus allowing them the opportunity to modify their surgical plan, with the potential for decreasing both costs and iatrogenic injury. Here, we report a case of revision total hip arthroplasty where the use of computer-assisted navigation as a diagnostic tool allowed for intraoperative alterations in surgical plan and resulted in improved post-operative outcomes.

The augment-and-modular-cage revision system for reconstruction of severe acetabular defects-two-year clinical and radiographic results

PURPOSE

Acetabular revision of failed total hip arthroplasty (THA) is often associated with severe bone loss. Therefore, a variety of revision implant systems has been developed during recent years, with the augment-and-modular-cage system being one of the newest additions to this portfolio. Together with biologic downsizing by means of impaction bone grafting, this uncemented system promises a high modularity and versatility to treat all acetabular defects up to Paprosky types IIIa and IIIb without pelvic discontinuity. The aim of the present study was to evaluate first short-term results of its clinical application, both clinical functional and patient-reported as well as radiographic.

METHODS

Forty-four patients (28 female, 16 male, mean age 70.9 ± 11.5 years) could be followed for a mean of 26 ± 10 months after acetabular revision with a novel augment-and-modular-cage system. Indications for revision included aseptic loosening (68%), septic loosening (16%), or others (16%) with bone loss Paprosky IIa up to IIIb without discontinuity. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) served as a primary outcome parameter. In addition, a number of patient-reported outcome measurements (PROMs) were collected including the Short Form 36 (SF-36), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), and Visual Analogue Scale for Hip Pain (VAS Hip) as well as overall satisfaction. Radiographic changes between the pre- and postoperative center of rotation (COR) and various criteria of implant failure served as secondary outcome parameters.

RESULTS

No patients were lost to follow-up. Two implant-associated complications (partial flange breakage) without a need for revision surgery were detected, which represent a failure rate of 4.5%. Functional outcome as measured by mHHS increased from 49.4 ± 2.9 pre-operatively to 74.4 ± 3.1 at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). PROMs showed significant improvements in all pain-related categories, while other quality-of-life measurements only exhibited positive tendencies towards improvement. VAS Hip significantly improved from 6.5 ± 0.7 pre-operatively to 2.2 ± 0.6 at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Radiographic evaluation showed that reconstruction of the COR was possible, referenced to the contralateral side. The COR could be lateralized by 5.0 mm (n.s.) and caudalized by 10.3 mm (p < 0.001) comparing pre-operative and post-operative states, with complete osseointegration in 95% of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with the augment-and-modular-cage system significantly improved clinical functional and patient-reported outcomes in cases of acetabular revision after failed THA. In addition, a good reconstruction of the COR could also be achieved. Therefore, this highly modular system can be considered as an effective treatment option in almost all cases of acetabular bone loss except for those of pelvic discontinuity. It offers the unique possibility of intra-operative implant customization according to the existing bone defect and host bone quality.

Outcome of 4 Surgical Treatments for Wear and Osteolysis of Cementless Acetabular Components

BACKGROUND

Loosening and periprosthetic osteolysis are some of the most common long-term complications after hip arthroplasty. The decision-making process and surgical treatment options are controversial.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 96 acetabular revisions (91 patients) performed between 2002 and 2012, with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up and a mean of 5.7 years of follow-up. Clinical outcome was assessed using the Harris Hip Score. The size and location of osteolytic lesions were evaluated using the preoperative radiographs; healing of the defects was categorized using a standardized protocol.

RESULTS

Thirty-three (34.4%) hips had isolated liner exchanges (ILEs), 10 (10.4%) hips had cemented liners into well-fixed shells (CLS), 45 (46.9%) hips had full acetabular revisions (FARs), and 8 (8.3%) hips had revision with a roof ring/antiprotrusio cage (RWC). All procedures showed significant improvement in Harris Hip Score after revision (P ≤ .001). Fifteen patients had moderate residual pain (pain score ≤20): 8 (24%) ILE, 3 (30%) CLS, and 4 (9%) FAR. Complete bone defect healing after grafting was lower with acetabular component retention procedures (ILE and CLS; 27%) compared with full acetabular component revision procedures (FAR and RWC; 57%). Fifteen patients underwent reoperation: 3 ILE, 1 CLS, 8 FAR, and 3 RWC.

CONCLUSION

Acetabular component retention demonstrates a low risk of reoperation; however, residual pain and limited potential for bone graft incorporation are a concern. FAR is technically challenging and may have an elevated risk of reoperation; however, higher degrees of bone graft incorporation and satisfactory clinical outcome can be expected.

Is the size of the acetabular bone lesion a predictive factor for failure in revisions of total hip arthroplasty using an impacted allograft?

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the acetabular bone lesion size (in millimeters) from which impacted bone graft failure starts to occur more frequently, through simple anteroposterior hip radiographs, and whether measurement of the defect on simple radiographs maintains the same pattern in inter and intraobserver assessments.

METHODS

Thirty-eight anteroposterior pelvic-view radiographs from patients undergoing revision of an acetabular prosthesis were retrospectively analyzed and assessed. In the vertical plane, the bilacrimal line was measured in millimeters from the farthest point found on the bone edge of the acetabular osteolysis to the top edge of the cementation or of the acetabular implant in uncemented cases. The base was taken to be a line perpendicular to bilacrimal line, with the aim of eliminating any pelvic tilt effects. This measurement was named the vertical size of failure. Radiographs produced four years after the operation were analyzed to investigate any failure of the technique.

RESULTS

The graft failure rate in the study group was 26.3%. The failures occurred in cases with an initial bone defect larger than 11 mm. No cases with measurements smaller than this evolved with failure of the revision. The highest incidence of graft failure occurred in cases described as advanced according to the "Paprosky" classification.

CONCLUSION

Failure of acetabular revision arthroplasty using an impacted graft did not present any statistically significant correlation with the vertical extent of the lesion on simple anteroposterior radiographs, as a predictor of treatment failure.

Clinical evaluation following the use of mineralized collagen graft for bone defects in revision total hip arthroplasty

Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) with massive bone loss has been a real challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Here we describe an approach using mineralized collagen (MC) graft to reconstruct acetabulum and femur with massive bone defects. We identified 89 patients suffering acetabular or femoral bone defects after primary THA, who required revision THA for this study. During the surgery, MC was applied to reconstruct both the acetabular and femoral defects. Harris hip score was used to evaluate hip function while radiographs were taken to estimate bone formation in the defect regions. The average follow-up period was 33.6 ± 2.4 months. None of the components needed re-revised. Mean Harris hip scores were 42.5 ± 3.5 before operation, 75.2 ± 4.0 at 10th month and 95.0 ± 3.6 at the final follow-up. There were no instances of deep infection, severe venous thrombosis or nerve palsy. The present study demonstrated that MC graft can serve as a promising option for revision THA with massive bone deficiency. Meanwhile, extended follow-up is needed to further prove its long-term performance.

The use of morselized allografts without impaction and cemented cage support in acetabular revision surgery: a 4- to 9-year follow-up

Background

Acetabular revision arthroplasty with major bone loss is one of the most difficult operations in orthopedic surgery. The goal of the study was to evaluate midterm clinical results of the use of morselized allografts with cemented cage support in revision total hip replacement.

Methods

We identified 28 patients (29 hips) at an average follow-up of 73 months. Harris Hip Scores (HHS) were assessed before and after surgery. Pre- and postoperative radiographs were evaluated for restoration of the center of rotation, component migration, and graft incorporation.

Results and discussion

At follow-up, the mean HHS improved from 34 (range, 20–45) to 80 (range, 71–98) points. None of the components had been re-revised. On average, the revised hip center of rotation was improved significantly. Incorporation of the graft was complete in 23 hips. The midterm result of cage reconstruction with morselized bone allograft is relatively better than other studies using a similar cage construction. We believe we have three special modifications of this reconstruction technique that are beneficial for bone incorporation.

Conclusions

These data confirm that acetabular reconstruction using morselized allografts and cemented acetabular cages is effective in the midterm as a treatment for acetabular loosening with massive bone deficiency.

Fate of bone grafting for acetabular defects in total hip replacement

BACKGROUND

The use of allografts and autografts in the management of acetabular defects have been reported with varying results. Trabecular metal is an expensive option in the management of these defects. This study aims to assess the fate and efficacy of bone grafting for acetabular bone defects in total hip arthroplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 30 hips in 28 patients with acetabular deficiencies were treated with bone grafting and total hip replacement (THR). Seventeen hips had American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS) type 2 (Paprosky type 2c) deficiency and 13 had AAOS type 3 (Paprosky type 3a) defects of the acetabulum. Allografts were used in 15 patients and autografts were used in the remaining 13. Cemented total hip arthroplasty was done in 18 hips and uncemented THR in 12. Seven patients underwent the procedure for, acetabular erosion and symptoms following hemiarthroplasty (4 out of 7), or, acetabular revision for failure (3 out of 7) following total hip arthroplasty. Acetabular deficiencies in other patients were due to posttraumatic causes, advanced primary hip arthritis and second stage treatment of postinfective arthritis. A mesh was used in 6 hips and screws were used in 13 hips for graft fixation.

RESULTS

Patients were followed up clinicoradiologically for a period of 10 months to 4 years (mean 23.4 months). One patient required staged revision due to infection. Two patients had early asymptomatic cup migration. One patient had graft lysis and change in cup inclination with persistent pain. He was not keen on further intervention at last followup. Other patients were pain free at the time of followup with radiographs showing maintenance of graft and implant position.

CONCLUSION

Bone grafting is a suitable option in the management of acetabular defects in total hip arthroplasty, especially in resource challenged countries.

The revision acetabulum – allograft and bone substitutes

A common situation presenting to the orthopaedic surgeon today is a worn acetabular liner with substantial acetabular and pelvic osteolysis. The surgeon has many options for dealing with osteolytic defects. These include allograft, calcium based substitutes, demineralised bone matrix, or combinations of these options with or without addition of platelet rich plasma. To date there are no clinical studies to determine the efficacy of using bone-stimulating materials in osteolytic defects at the time of revision surgery and there are surprisingly few studies demonstrating the clinical efficacy of these treatment options. Even when radiographs appear to demonstrate incorporation of graft material CT studies have shown that incorporation is incomplete. The surgeon, in choosing a graft material for a surgical procedure must take into account the efficacy, safety, cost and convenience of that material.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B (11 Suppl A):70–2.

Treatment of failures related to articulation material in THA. A comprehensive algorithm of surgical options and open questions

Total hip arthroplasty is considered one of the greatest advances in health care of the last century. More than one million THAs are estimated to be performed annually and an increasing number of revisions are expected in the future. Osteolysis and loosening are still the main reasons for failure, justifying the use of low-wear bearings.The aim of this paper is to describe the mode of failure of the different couplings (polyethylene, cross-linked PE, metal, ceramic) and the options of treatment considering the various scenarios that the surgeon has to face nowadays in the case of failure related to articulation material. A comprehensive algorithm of treatment strategies is proposed based on the best current evidence and on the authors' experience.Periodical follow-up, indications for early revision, selection of proper surgical techniques and tribology are suggested. Nowadays, few rules are strongly recommended: trying to avoid any metal in case of failure of metal-on-metal; to avoid metal in fracture of ceramic; never to mix metals or ceramics from different manufactures. We aim to address a great number of open questions. There is still need for further research and evidences in this essential field of orthopaedic surgery.

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty with Retained Acetabular Component

BACKGROUND

Aseptic loosening and osteolysis commonly limit the survivorship of total hip prostheses. Retention of a well-fixed acetabular component, rather than full acetabular revision, has multiple advantages, but questions have lingered regarding the clinical success and prosthetic survivorship following this procedure. We examined the impact of acetabular component position, polyethylene type, liner insertion technique, femoral head size, and simultaneous revision of the entire femoral component (as opposed to head and liner exchange) or bone-grafting on mid-term to long-term prosthetic survival following such limited revisions.

METHODS

One hundred hips in 100 patients with osteolysis, polyethylene wear, or femoral component loosening underwent revision total hip arthroplasty with retention of the acetabular component. Acetabular component inclination and anteversion were measured on prerevision radiographs and were categorized according to predetermined positional safe zones (inclination of 35° to 55° and anteversion of 5° to 25°). Operative reports were reviewed for femoral head size, polyethylene liner type (conventional or highly cross-linked), liner insertion technique (use of the existing locking mechanism or cementation), whether the patient had revision of the entire femoral component, and use of bone graft. Outcomes of interest included the Harris hip score, University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score, episodes of instability, and need for repeat revision.

RESULTS

At an average of 6.6 years (range, two to fourteen years) postoperatively, the Harris hip and UCLA activity scores were both significantly improved compared with the preoperative scores (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.01, respectively). Overall, the failure rate was 13%. In addition, 6% of the patients had postoperative instability. Hips in which the acetabular component was outside of the safe zone for inclination had a higher rate of failure (p = 0.048). Use of conventional, rather than highly cross-linked, polyethylene at the time of revision was also associated with an increased rate of repeat revision (p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Revision total hip arthroplasty with retention of the acetabular component is associated with good outcomes in hips with an appropriately positioned, well-fixed acetabular component. Acetabular components outside the safe zone for inclination were at a higher risk for failure, as was use of conventional polyethylene.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Cemented liner exchange with bone grafting halts the progression of periacetabular osteolysis

The aims of this were to examine the effect of acetabular liner exchange and intra-operative bone grafting surgery on peri-prosthetic osteolysis. Seven patients with well-fixed Harris-Galante-1 acetabular components received cemented exchange liners for worn liners associated with pre-operatively CT-quantified osteolysis. During surgery, accessible osteolytic lesions were debrided and bone-grafted. Except for one patient with recurrent dislocation and acetabular component revision, the other patients had CT scans at a median of 4 months and at approximately 4 years after surgery. None of the pre-operative lesions increased in volume during the post-operative reporting period and no new lesions were detected. These results show that cemented liner exchange surgery can halt the progression of osteolysis and that bone grafting has the potential to restore bone.

Reconstruction of massive uncontained acetabular defects using allograft with cage or ring reinforcement

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.

The challenge of pelvic discontinuity

The use of ilioischial cage reconstruction for pelvic discontinuity has been replaced by the Trabecular Metal (Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana) cup-cage technique in our institution, due to the unsatisfactory outcome of using a cage alone in this situation. We report the outcome of 26 pelvic discontinuities in 24 patients (20 women and four men, mean age 65 years (44 to 84)) treated by the cup-cage technique at a mean follow-up of 82 months (12 to 113) and compared them with a series of 19 pelvic discontinuities in 19 patients (18 women and one man, mean age 70 years (42 to 86)) treated with a cage at a mean follow-up of 69 months (1 to 170). The clinical and radiological outcomes as well as the survivorship of the groups were compared. In all, four of the cup-cage group (15%) and 13 (68%) of the cage group failed due to septic or aseptic loosening. The seven-year survivorship was 87.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 71 to 103) for the cup-cage group and 49.9% (95% CI 15 to 84) for the cage-alone group (p = 0.009). There were four major complications in the cup-cage group and nine in the cage group. Radiological union of the discontinuity was found in all successful cases in the cup-cage group and three of the successful cage cases. Three hips in the cup-cage group developed early radiological migration of the components, which stabilised with a successful outcome.

Cup-cage reconstruction is a reliable technique for treating pelvic discontinuity in mid-term follow-up and is preferred to ilioischial cage reconstruction. If the continuity of the bone graft at the discontinuity site is not disrupted, early migration of the components does not necessarily result in failure.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:195–200.

Osteolysis in the well-fixed socket

Osteolysis remains a common reason for revision after total hip arthroplasty (THA). For osteolysis associated with loose cups, revision is indicated. For osteolysis around a well-fixed cup, the decision is more controversial. The data available data support retention of the cupwith lesional treatment, working through screw holes and access channels for debridement and grafting. The choice of graft material to fill defects, if any, remains controversial. Several studies demonstrate good survivorship with cup retention strategies. Complete revision allows more complete debridement of the lesion and better graft fill, and allows implantation of a modern cup, typically with a full line of liners and bearing surfaces available. Additionally, revision allows fine tuning of the orientation of the cup, which may be advantageous for optimising hip stability. The author prefers to retain a well-fixed cup if it meets the following criteria: it is well-fixed to intra-operative testing, it is well-positioned, it is of sufficient size to allow insertion of a new liner with a reasonable head size, new liners are available, and the hip is stable to intra-operative trialing after liner insertion.

Large acetabular defects can be managed with cementless revision components

BACKGROUND

Optimal techniques for acetabular revision in the setting of major pelvic osteolysis have not been established. Bilobed components, structural grafts, and reinforcement cages have demonstrated 10-24% midterm failure rates. While cementless hemispherical components have been utilized to treat large acetabular defects, most reports have not focused specifically on patients with extensive deficiencies.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We report midterm clinical scores, component revisions, and complications following focal bone grafting and cementless acetabular revision in cases with major periacetabular osteolysis.

METHODS

We identified 30 patients (32 hips) who underwent cementless acetabular revision to treat massive acetabular bone loss at an average followup of 53 months. We excluded three patients lost to followup and two patients who died prior to minimum 24 month followup. Harris Hip Scores were assessed before and after surgery. Postoperative radiographs were evaluated for graft incorporation and component migration. Component revision and component migration are reported as failures.

RESULTS

Mean Harris Hip Score improved from 52.5 (range, 17.7-90.7) to 87.3 (range, 25.3-100) points. Three hips (9%) were revised for aseptic loosening. Three components (10.7%) demonstrated radiographic migration, but were not revised. Complete graft incorporation was seen in 17 cases (68%). There were five major complications (14%).

CONCLUSIONS

Cementless acetabular fixation and bone grafting result in clinical scores and survivorship comparable to other options at midterm followup, with potential for biological fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, clinical research study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.