Biomechanical analysis of acetabular revision constructs: is pelvic discontinuity best treated with bicolumnar or traditional unicolumnar fixation?

Independent volumetric internal fixation reduces posterior column acetabular fracture site motion as compared to plate/screw construct: A biomechanical analysis

Aims & objectives

To establish whether a suprapectineal pelvic reconstruction plate and posterior column screw (P&S) construct or a single 6.5-mm cannulated posterior column screw (PCS) construct demonstrates greater mechanical stability for fixation of acetabulum fractures involving the posterior column (PC). We hypothesized that the PCS construct would result in less fracture site motion.

Materials & methods

Twelve fourth-generation composite hemipelvi were utilized, 6 for each construct. The P&S construct consisted of a suprapectineal pelvic reconstruction plate with two 3.5-mm posterior column screws crossing the fracture site in lag-by-technique fashion and two screws anchoring the plate to the sciatic buttress. The PCS construct consisted of a single 6.5-mm partially threaded cannulated screw placed in an antegrade fashion. Both fixation models were cyclically loaded at 0.5 cycles/second at 400N and 800N, first in a sit-to-stand position that is expected during recovery, and subsequently in a squat-to-stand position to test overload conditions.

Results

Under sit-to-stand loading, the PCS construct resulted in less motion at the fracture site than the P&S construct (0.06 ± 0.02 mm vs 0.1 ± 0.02 mm at 400N, p = 0.02; 0.13 ± 0.03 mm vs 0.19 ± 0.04 mm at 800N, p = 0.03). The PCS construct also demonstrated less fracture site motion under squat-to-stand loading (0.22 ± 0.13 mm vs 1.9 ± 0.5 mm at 400N, p = < 0.001; 1.48 ± 0.44 mm vs 4.77 ± 0.3 mm at 800N, p = < 0.001). At 800 N, half of the repairs failed during squat-to-stand loading (2 PCS, 4 P&S).

Conclusion

Fixation of the posterior column of the acetabulum with a 6.5-mm cannulated screw demonstrated comparable fracture motion upon loading compared to the plate and screw construct.

What Are the Functional, Radiographic, and Survivorship Outcomes of a Modified Cup-Cage Technique for Pelvic Discontinuity?

BACKGROUND

Pelvic discontinuity (PD) presents a complex challenge in revision hip arthroplasty. The traditional cup-cage construct, which involves a screw-secured porous metal cup and an overlying antiprotrusio cage, has shown promising mid- to long-term results. However, there is limited information on the outcomes of modifications to the original technique. Our study aims to evaluate a modified technique in which the cup position is determined by the placement of the overlying cage, allowing for adjustments to achieve optimal orientation.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Among patients treated for PD with a cup-cage construct in which the cup position was dictated by the position of the cage: (1) What are Harris hip scores achieved at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up? (2) What is the Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from aseptic loosening or component migration? (3) What is the Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from revision for any reason? (4) What surgical complications are associated with the procedure?

METHODS

Between October 2013 and January 2022, we performed 805 acetabular revisions. Among these, 33 patients with PD confirmed intraoperatively were considered potentially eligible for a cup-cage construct; no other method of surgical management was used. We performed 64% (21 of 33) of these procedures from October 2013 to January 2018, with 6% (2 of 33) of patients lost to follow-up before the minimum study follow-up of 2 years; these 19 patients were monitored over a period ranging from 70 to 115 months. A further 12 patients underwent this procedure from January 2018 to January 2022, with one lost to follow-up before the minimum study follow-up of 2 years; the other patients met the minimum 2-year follow-up requirement. The remaining 30 patients with data analyzed here (10 men, 20 women) had a mean ± SD age of 61 ± 12 years and a median BMI of 29 kg/m2 (range 20 to 33 kg/m2) at the time of revision surgery. Twenty-one patients underwent revision due to aseptic loosening, and nine due to periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The causes of PD in our patients were as follows: cup aseptic loosening without significant osteolysis in 20% (6 of 30), where the loose cup caused erosion of the host bone, leading to PD; PJI in 30% (9 of 30); intraoperative iatrogenic PD in 3% (1 of 30); and osteolysis in 47% (14 of 30), which also resulted in aseptic loosening. The median follow-up time was 79 months (range 25 to 115 months). The Harris hip score was used to evaluate clinical outcomes, with preoperative values compared with the most recent follow-up. Radiographs were reviewed by two experienced surgeons at each follow-up visit to assess component loosening (defined as migration > 5 mm or the presence of circumferential radiolucent lines) or clear migration. PD was considered healed if bridging callus or trabecular bone was visible across the site of the discontinuity. Complications were assessed through a comprehensive review of electronic medical records. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate implant survivorship and radiographic loosening, with aseptic loosening or component migration as the endpoint, as well as survivorship free from any reoperation.

RESULTS

The Harris hip score improved from a median of 39 (range 30 to 66) preoperatively to a median of 76 (range 30 to 90) postoperatively (median difference 33 [range 2 to 48]; p < 0.01). Within the limitations of two-dimensional (2D) radiographic imaging, successful bone graft integration and the healing of PD were noted in 83% (25 of 30) of patients. Kaplan-Meier survivorship free from radiographic signs of aseptic loosening or component migration was 100% (95% CI 100% to 100%) at 115 months. When any revision related to the acetabular component was considered the endpoint, survivorship free from acetabular component revision at 115 months after revision surgery was 100% (95% CI 100% to 100%). When the need for any reoperation was considered the endpoint, survivorship free from needing reoperation at 115 months after revision surgery was 85% for all patients (95% CI 73% to 100%). When including only patients with a follow-up time of > 4 years (20 of 30), survivorship free from needing reoperation at 115 months after revision surgery was 90% (95% CI 78% to 100%). Postoperative complications during the follow-up period included one early dislocation on the fifth day after surgery, treated with closed reduction and 6 weeks of abduction bracing. One femoral stem loosening occurred at 56 months postoperatively, although the acetabular component remained securely fixed; this patient declined revision surgery. One patient experienced a dislocation 5 months after surgery but refused treatment and opted for prolonged bed rest. Additionally, one patient underwent a debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention procedure 1 week after the revision surgery and subsequently showed no signs of infection at the latest follow-up, 38 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the effectiveness of a modified cup-cage technique in complex hip revisions, showing promising results in terms of construct survivorship and low complication rates. Surgeons could consider delaying screw fixation until after positioning the cage within the porous cup to allow for optimal adjustment and using metal augments for severe bone defects to achieve better alignment. Surgeon experience with the cup-cage technique is crucial for achieving optimal outcomes. Future studies should focus on long-term follow-up visits to assess the durability and effectiveness of these modifications and explore the comparative effectiveness versus other methods, such as custom triflange components and jumbo cups with distraction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Porous Tantalum Acetabular Cups in Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: What Has Been the Experience So Far?-A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

The global population, especially in the Western world, is constantly aging and the need for total hip arthroplasties has rocketed, hence there has been a notable increase in revision total hip arthroplasty cases. As time has passed, a considerable developments in science and medicine have been attained which have also resulted in the evolution of both surgical techniques and implants. Continuous improvements have allowed large bore bearings to be utilized which provide an increased range of motion, with ameliorated stability and a very low rate of wear. The trend for almost the last two decades has been the employment of porous tantalum acetabular cups. Several studies exist comparing them with other conventional methods for total hip arthroplasties, exhibiting promising short and midterm results.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and a Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) were used to identify published studies in a comprehensive search up to February 2023, and these studies were reviewed by the authors of the article. Specific rigorous pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria were implemented.

RESULTS

Fifty-one studies met our inclusion criteria and were involved in the systematic review. Sixteen studies examined postoperative clinical and radiological outcomes of using a tantalum cup in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty, whilst four biomechanical studies proved the superiority of tantalum acetabular components. Five articles provided a thorough comparison between tantalum and titanium acetabular cups, while the other studies analyzed long-terms results and complication rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Porous tantalum acetabular cups appear to be a valuable option in revision total hip arthroplasty, providing clinical improvement, radiological stability, and promising long-term outcomes. However, ongoing research, longer follow-up periods, and careful consideration of patient factors are essential to further validate and refine the use of tantalum in various clinical scenarios.

Effects of Acetabular Screws on the Initial Stability of Porous Coated Acetabular Implants in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Revision total hip arthroplasty in the setting of acetabular bone loss remains a challenging clinical entity. Deficiencies of the acetabular rim, walls, and/or columns may limit the bony surface area and initial acetabular construct stability necessary for osseointegration of cementless components. Press-fit acetabular components with supplemental acetabular screw fixation represent a common technique aimed to minimize implant micromotion and allow for definitive osseointegration. Although acetabular screw fixation is commonly practiced in revision hip arthroplasty, few studies to date have examined the screw properties associated with maximal acetabular construct stability. The purpose of the present report is to examine acetabular screw fixation in a pelvis model mimicking Paprosky IIB acetabular bone loss.

METHODS

Measuring bone-implant interface micromotion as a surrogate for initial implant stability, experimental models assessed the effect of screw number, screw length, and screw position on construct stability subject to a cyclic loading protocol designed to replicate joint reaction forces of two common daily activities.

RESULTS

Trends towards increasing stability were demonstrated with increasing screw number, increasing screw length, and concentrating screws in the supra-acetabular dome. All experimental constructs yielded micromotion levels sufficient for bone ingrowth, except when screws in the dome were moved to the pubis and ischium.

CONCLUSIONS

When using a porous coated revision acetabular implant to treat Paprosky IIB defects, screws should be used, and furthermore, increasing number, length, and position within the acetabular dome may help further stabilize the construct.

Pelvic discontinuity: a challenge to overcome

Pelvic discontinuity (PD) has been a considerable challenge for the hip revision arthroplasty surgeon. However, not all PDs are the same. Some occur during primary cup insertion, resembling a fresh periprosthetic fracture that separates the superior and inferior portions of the pelvis, while others are chronic as a result of gradual acetabular bone loss due to osteolysis and/or acetabular implant loosening.In the past, ORIF, various types of cages, bone grafts and bone cement were utilized with little success. Today, the biomechanics and biology of PD as well as new diagnostic tools and especially a variety of new implants and techniques are available to hip revision surgeons. Ultraporous cups and augments, cup-cage constructs and custom triflange components have revolutionized the treatment of PD when used in various combinations with ORIF and bone grafts. For chronic PD the cup-cage construct is the most popular method of reconstruction with good medium-term results.Dislocation continues to be the leading cause of failure in all situations, followed by infection. Ultimately, surgeons today have a big enough armamentarium to select the best treatment approach. Case individualization, personal experience and improvisation are the best assets to drive treatment decisions and strategies. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:459-471. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210022.

Quadrilateral Surface Restoration by Medial Buttressing Before Revision in Periprosthetic Acetabular Fracture: A Case Report

CASE

We report a case of periprosthetic acetabular fracture with pelvic discontinuity (PAFPD) classified Paprosky IIIb around an infected hip resurfacing prosthesis. A 3-stage revision was performed with (1) implants removal and surgical debridement to treat the infection; (2) open reduction and internal fixation using a medial buttress plate to treat pelvic discontinuity; and (3) custom-made total hip replacement with acetabular-ring reinforcement. The patient recovered with excellent clinical and radiographic results at 4-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In complex cases of PAFPD, a collaboration between pelvic trauma surgeons and orthopaedic hip surgeons allows to provide stability for revision surgeries with good outcomes.

Biomechanical analysis of fixation methods for acetabular fractures: A review

Acetabular fractures are known as one of the most frequent types of pelvic fractures with growing frequency among elderly people. Because of this, it is important to establish the methods of repair that will produce optimal outcomes for fracture healing and joint remobilization. Open reduction and internal fixation are considered as the "gold standard" of acetabular fracture repair; however, to the best of authors' knowledge, there is no systematic review comparing different repair methods from biomechanical point of view. As such, in this review paper, we summarize the results of English language literature biomechanically focused on acetabular fracture fixation methods in the last thirty years with the aim to create a reference for clinical decision making. The selected literature within the review is broken down into categories based on type of fracture, i.e., simple or complex, and then further grouped based on fracture line orientation. Clinical recommendations and future research possibilities are also provided.

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.

Biomechanical analysis of transverse acetabular fracture fixation in the elderly via the posterior versus the anterior approach with and without a total hip arthroplasty

This study provides the first biomechanical comparison of the fixation constructs that can be created to treat transverse acetabular fractures when using the “gold-standard” posterior versus the anterior approach with and without a total hip arthroplasty in the elderly. Synthetic hemipelvises partially simulating osteoporosis (n = 24) were osteotomized to create a transverse acetabular fracture and then repaired using plates/screws, lag screws, and total hip arthroplasty acetabular components in one of four ways: posterior approach (n = 6), posterior approach plus a total hip arthroplasty acetabular component (n = 6), anterior approach (n = 6), and anterior approach plus a total hip arthroplasty acetabular component (n = 6). All specimens were biomechanically tested. No differences existed between groups for stiffness (range, 324.6–387.3 N/mm, p = 0.629), clinical failure load at 5 mm of femoral head displacement (range, 1630.1–2203.9 N, p = 0.072), or interfragmentary gapping (range, 0.67–1.33 mm, p = 0.359). Adding a total hip arthroplasty acetabular component increased ultimate mechanical failure load for posterior (2904.4 vs. 3652.3 N, p = 0.005) and anterior (3204.9 vs. 4396.0 N, p = 0.000) approaches. Adding a total hip arthroplasty acetabular component also substantially reduced interfragmentary sliding for posterior (3.08 vs. 0.50 mm, p = 0.002) and anterior (2.17 vs. 0.29 mm, p = 0.024) approaches. Consequently, the anterior approach with a total hip arthroplasty may provide the best biomechanical stability for elderly patients, since this fixation group had the highest mechanical failure load and least interfragmentary sliding, while providing equivalent stiffness, clinical failure load, and gapping compared to other surgical options.

Posterior wall acetabular fracture fixation: A mechanical analysis of fixation methods

Stable, anatomical fixation of acetabular fractures gives the best chance of successful outcome, while penetration of the acetabular articular surface with screws is associated with poor outcomes. Spring plates are an alternative to interfragmentary lag screws when penetration is a concern. A mechanical study comparing fracture stability and construct stiffness of three fixation methods for posterior wall acetabular fractures with transverse comminutions was performed. The three fixation methods tested were a posterior wall rim plate, a posterior wall buttress plate with separate lag screws and a posterior wall plate with two spring plates. Nine samples were tested, three for each fixation method. Two-dimensional motion analysis was used to measure fracture fragment displacement and construct stiffness. After two 6000 cycle-loading protocols, to a maximum 1.5 kN, the mean fracture displacement was 0.154 mm for the rim plate model, 0.326 mm for the buttress plate and 0.254 mm for the spring plate model. Mean maximum displacement was significantly less for the rim plate fixation than the buttress plate (p = 0.015) and spring plate fixation (p = 0.02). The rim plate was the stiffest construct 10,962 N/mm, followed by the spring plate model 5637 N/mm and the buttress plate model 4882 N/mm. Based on data obtained in this study, where possible a rim plate with interfragmentary lag screws should be used for isolated posterior wall fractures as this is the stiffest and most stable construct. When this method is not possible, spring plate fixation is a safe and a superior alternative to a posterior buttress plate method.

Cup-Cage Solution for Massive Acetabular Defects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Our systematic review compiled multiple studies and evaluated survivorship and clinical outcomes of cup‐cage construct usage in the management of massive acetabular bone defects. This systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Various combinations of “acetabular”, “pelvis”, “cup cage” and their corresponding synonyms were used to search relevant articles in the Cochrane, EMBASE, and PubMed databases. Basic information of the functional scores, implant revision rate, and complication rate were selected as outcomes for analysis. Finally, a total of 11 articles published between 1999 and 2019 were selected, which include 232 patients with an average age of 68.5 years (range, 30–90). The mean follow‐up period was 48.85 months (range, 1–140). Our study shows that the cup‐cage construct has a good clinical outcome with a low revision rate and a low complication rate. Improved clinical outcomes of cup‐cage constructs were seen with a revision rate of 8% and an all‐cause complication rate of 20%. The most commonly reported complication was dislocation, followed by aseptic loosening, infection, and nerve injuries. In summary, it is a promising method for managing large acetabular bone defects in total hip revision.

Custom triflange revision acetabular components for significant bone defects and pelvic discontinuity: Early UK experience

Aims

We report our early experience in acetabular reconstruction for significant bone loss and pelvic discontinuity using custom triflange acetabular components.

Patients and methods

Retrospective consecutive review of all patients treated at our specialist tertiary unit with significant acetabular defects (Paprosky 3A/3B) and pelvic discontinuity who were reconstructed with custom triflange implants. The primary outcomes were radiographic failure and complications.

Results

17 patients (17 hips) were included; 3 males/14 females with a mean age of 72 years (range 61-83). The average follow-up was 3.6 years (2-7 years). Bony defects were Paprosky 3B in 13/17 hips (76%) with pelvic discontinuity encountered in the majority of cases 15/17 hips (88%) and intra-pelvic failed components in 11/17 (64%). At final follow up, no radiographic failures were observed although three patients developed complications (17.6%); haematoma requiring washout out; intra-operative ilium fracture; and recurrent dislocation in one patient.

Conclusions

Our experience suggest that acceptable outcomes can be achieved with custom implants for this group of challenging patients, although longer follow up is needed to monitor future implants' failure.

Cup-cage construct for massive acetabular defect in revision hip arthroplasty- A case series with medium to long-term follow-up

OBJECTIVE

Cup-cage reconstruction has emerged as a possible solution for managing massive acetabular defects with a few existing studies reporting encouraging results at mid-term follow-up. We present our experience with this unitised construct.

METHOD

Six patients (7 hips) with a mean age of 76 years (73-81) were revised due to catastrophic aseptic failure of a primary cup implanted 10-19 years previously, having a Paprosky type 3B acetabular defect.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 72 months (63-140) no cases have required re-revision. Oxford Hip Scores improved from an average of 8 (1-17) preoperatively to an average of 36 (18-45) at the last follow-up. WOMAC scores preoperatively averaged 76 (49-96) and postoperatively averaged 26.5 points (0-69) at the last follow-up. SF-12 scores improved in both components. One patient showed non-progressive osteolysis around the ischial flange and one had less than 5 mm migration of the construct. One patient died of unrelated causes.

CONCLUSION

Our study presents one of the longest follow-up of cup-cage construct and supports the previously reported good results; it encourages the use of this construct in reconstruction of massive acetabular defect, with or without pelvic discontinuity.

Reconstruction for pelvic discontinuity and massive acetabular defects

OBJECTIVE

The acetabular reconstruction with massive acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity is a complex surgery with important difficulties for the orthopaedic surgeon. The objective of this study is to show the short and midterm results of the acetabular revision with the Cup-Cage construct in a consecutive serie of cases.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospectively we reviewed 22 consecutive patients with massive acetabular defects (8 Paprosky IIIa and 9 IIIB); 5 pelvic discontinuities; 2 pelvic fractures during the implantation of primary artroplasty, and one pelvic pseudoarthrosis. All were reoperated with a trabecular metal acetabular component and a Cup-Cage. We did clinical and radiological follow-up to detect machanical failures and loosening of the implant.

RESULTS

With a middle follow-up of 45.06 months (12-73 months) we did not see any radiographic failure of the implant (component migration, osteolysis neither rupture of the implant or screws). The complications (13,63%) included one recurrent luxation, one infection and one recurrent subluxation. The Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score improved from 6.91 to 14.36 and the punctuation in the range of motion from 2.91 to 4.36 on average of the values preoperatively and postoperatively respectively and improvement in Harris Hip Score 30 (16-55) to 72 (40-90) in the latest follow up.

CONCLUSION

The acetabular reconstruction with the Cup-Cage system is a valid alternative for the reconstruction of massive acetabular defects (Paprosky type IIIA and IIIB) and pelvic discontinuities offering good results at short and midterm follow-up.

Biomechanical study of pelvic discontinuity in failed total hip arthroplasty. Lessons learnt from the treatment of pelvic fractures

Pelvic discontinuity is a rare but serious problem in orthopedic surgery. Acetabular reconstruction in case of severe bone loss after failed total hip arthroplasty is technically difficult, especially in segmental loss type III (anterior or posterior) or pelvic discontinuity (type IV). Acetabular reinforcement devices are frequently used as load-sharing devices to allow allograft incorporation and in order to serve as support of acetabular implants. This study tries to show, by means of biomechanic work, the efficiency of reinforced plate in anterior column in a segmental pelvic loss, illustrated with a clinical case, which shows the socket stability of hip prosthesis.

Biomechanical analysis of the fixation systems for anterior column and posterior hemi-transverse acetabular fractures

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties of common fixation systems for complex acetabular fractures.

Methods

A finite element (FE) pelvic model with anterior column and posterior hemi-transverse acetabular fractures was created. Three common fixation systems were used to fix the posterior wall acetabular fractures: 1. Anterior column plate combined with posterior column screws (group I), 2. Anterior column plate combined with quadrilateral area screws (group II) and 3. Double-column plates (group III). And 600 N, representing the body weight, was loaded on the upper surface of the sacrum to simulate the double-limb stance. The amounts of total and relative displacements were compared between the groups.

Results

The total amount of displacement was 2.76 mm in group II, 2.81 mm in group III, and 2.83 mm in group I. The amount of relative displacement was 0.0078 mm in group II, 0.0093 mm in group III and 0.014 mm in group I.

Conclusion

Our results suggested that all fixation systems enhance biomechanical stability significantly. Anterior column plate combined with quadrilateral area screws has quite comparable results to double column plates, they were superior to anterior column plate combined with posterior screws.

Reconstruction of acetabulum in revision total hip arthroplasty for pelvic discontinuity: report of a difficult case requiring four revision arthroplasty

Background

Massive bone defects of the acetabulum with pelvic discontinuity are one of the major problems in revision total hip arthroplasty. Several techniques have been described for repair of acetabular defect; however, reconstruction of acetabulum with massive bone defect is still a major problem. We describe a patient who required four revision total hip arthroplasty during a 24-year period.

Findings

The acetabulum with pelvic discontinuity was successfully reconstructed by stabilization of the posterior column with a plate commonly used for fracture treatment, and stabilization of the anterior column by reinforcement device commonly used for acetabular reconstruction. Fixation of both acetabular columns provided significant improvement of component stability.

Conclusions

In the case of pelvic discontinuity with massive acetabular bone defect, reconstruction by stabilizing both acetabular columns using reconstruction plate and KT plate is one of the better surgical options.

Biomechanical Analysis of the Fixation System for T-Shaped Acetabular Fracture

This study aims to evaluate the biomechanical mechanism of fixation systems in the most frequent T-shaped acetabular fracture using finite element method. The treatment of acetabular fractures was based on extensive clinical experience. Three commonly accepted rigid fixation methods (double column reconstruction plates (P × 2), anterior column plate combined with posterior column screws (P + PS), and anterior column plate combined with quadrilateral area screws (P + QS)) were chosen for evaluation. On the basis of the finite element model, the biomechanics of these fixation systems were assessed through effective stiffness levels, stress distributions, force transfers, and displacements along the fracture lines. All three fixation systems can be used to obtain effective functional outcomes. The third fixation system (P + QS) was the optimal method for T-shaped acetabular fracture. This fixation system may reduce many of the risks and limitations associated with other fixation systems.

Preliminary biomechanical study of different acetabular reinforcement devices for acetabular reconstruction

Background

Acetabular reinforcement devices (ARDs) are frequently used as load-sharing devices to allow allograft incorporation in revision hip arthroplasty with massive acetabular bone loss. The key to a successful reconstruction is robust fixation of the device to the host acetabulum. Interlocking fixation is expected to improve the initial stability of the postoperative construct. However, all commercially available ARDs are designed with non-locking fixation. This study investigates the efficacy of standard ARDs modified with locking screw mechanisms for improving stability in acetabular reconstruction.

Methods

Three types of ARDs were examined to evaluate the postoperative compression and angular stability: i) standard commercial ARDs, ii) standard ARDs modified with monoaxial and iii) standard ARDs modified with polyaxial locking screw mechanisms. All ARDs were implanted into osteomized synthetic pelvis with pelvic discontinuity. Axial compression and torsion tests were then performed using a servohydraulic material testing machine that measured load (angle) versus displacement (torque). Initial stability was compared among the groups.

Results

Equipping ARDs with interlocking mechanisms effectively improved the initial stability at the device/bone interface compared to standard non-locked ARDs. In both compression and torsion experiments, the monoaxial interlocking construct demonstrated the highest construct stiffness (672.6 ± 84.1 N/mm in compression and 13.3 ± 1.0 N·m/degree in torsion), whereas the non-locked construct had the lowest construct stiffness (381.4 ± 117.2 N/mm in compression and 6.9 ± 2.1 N·m/degree in torsion) (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Our study demonstrates the potential benefit of adding a locking mechanism to an ARD. Polyaxial ARDs provide the surgeon with more flexibility in placing the screws at the cost of reduced mechanical performance. This in vitro study provides a preliminary evaluation of biomechanical performance for ARDs with or without interlocking mechanisms, actual clinical trial deserves to be further investigated in future studies.

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.

Complications of total hip arthroplasty: periprosthetic fractures of the acetabulum

Periprosthetic fractures of the acetabulum are a rare but potentially disastrous complication of total hip arthroplasty. Such fractures occur either as early perioperative complications or late complications when they are associated with either significant trauma or as a result of the loss of the structural integrity of the bone supporting the prosthesis, such as aseptic osteolysis. The incidence of such fractures appears to be increasing with the increased use of uncemented acetabular components. This article explores the current literature on the epidemiology, etiology, and classification of periprosthetic acetabular fractures as well as offering potential treatment strategies.

Pelvic discontinuity

Pelvic discontinuity represents a rare but challenging problem for orthopaedic surgeons. It is most commonly encountered during revision total hip replacement, but can also result from an iatrogentic acetabular fracture during hip replacement. The general principles in management of pelvic discontinuity include restoration of the continuity between the ilium and the ischium, typically with some form of plating. Bone grafting is frequently required to restore pelvic bone stock. The acetabular component is then impacted, typically using an uncemented, trabecular metal component. Fixation with multiple supplemental screws is performed. For larger defects, a so-called ‘cup–cage’ reconstruction, or a custom triflange implant may be required. Pre-operative CT scanning can greatly assist in planning and evaluating the remaining bone stock available for bony ingrowth. Generally, good results have been reported for constructs that restore stability to the pelvis and allow some form of biologic ingrowth.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:109–13.

Biomechanical analysis of the acetabular buttress-plate: are complex acetabular fractures in the quadrilateral area stable after treatment with anterior construct plate-1/3 tube buttress plate fixation?

OBJECTIVE

The acetabular buttress-plate has been widely used in treating difficult cases with satisfying clinical results. However, the biomechanical properties of a postoperative acetabular fracture fixed by the buttress-plate are not clear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical properties of stability after the anterior tube buttress-plate fixation of complex acetabular fractures in the quadrilateral area.

METHODS

A construct was proposed based on anterior construct plate - 1/3 tube buttress plate fixation for acetabular both-column fractures. Two groups of six formalin-preserved cadaveric pelvises were analyzed: (1) group A, the normal pelvis and (2) group B, anterior construct plate-1/3 tube buttress plate with quadrilateral area fixation. The displacements were measured, and cyclical loads were applied in both standing and sitting simulations.

RESULTS

As the load was added, the displacements were A<B, increasing in line. In the 600 N physiological loading, the differences were significant (standing position: p=0.013; sitting position: p=0.009) between groups A and B.

CONCLUSION

The anterior construct plate - 1/3 tube buttress plate fixation provided a better stable construct for early sitting. The standing mode yielded more significant differences between the groups. Placing a 1/3 tube buttress-plate via an anterior approach is a novel method of providing quadrilateral area support in this setting.