Dual Mobility Reduces Dislocations-Why I Use It in All Revisions

Instantaneous Generation of Subject-Specific Finite Element Models of the Hip Capsule

Subject-specific hip capsule models could offer insights into impingement and dislocation risk when coupled with computer-aided surgery, but model calibration is time-consuming using traditional techniques. This study developed a framework for instantaneously generating subject-specific finite element (FE) capsule representations from regression models trained with a probabilistic approach. A validated FE model of the implanted hip capsule was evaluated probabilistically to generate a training dataset relating capsule geometry and material properties to hip laxity. Multivariate regression models were trained using 90% of trials to predict capsule properties based on hip laxity and attachment site information. The regression models were validated using the remaining 10% of the training set by comparing differences in hip laxity between the original trials and the regression-derived capsules. Root mean square errors (RMSEs) in laxity predictions ranged from 1.8° to 2.3°, depending on the type of laxity used in the training set. The RMSE, when predicting the laxity measured from five cadaveric specimens with total hip arthroplasty, was 4.5°. Model generation time was reduced from days to milliseconds. The results demonstrated the potential of regression-based training to instantaneously generate subject-specific FE models and have implications for integrating subject-specific capsule models into surgical planning software.

The Dome Technique for Managing Massive Anterosuperior Medial Acetabular Bone Loss in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Short-Term Outcomes

Purpose

The dome technique is a technique used in performance of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) involving intraoperative joining of two porous metal acetabular augments to fill a massive anterosuperior medial acetabular bone defect. While excellent outcomes were achieved using this surgical technique in a series of three cases, short-term results have not been reported. We hypothesized that excellent short-term clinical and patient reported outcomes could be achieved with use of the dome technique.

Materials and Methods

A multicenter case series was conducted for evaluation of patients who underwent revision THA using the dome technique for management of Paprosky 3B anterosuperior medial acetabular bone loss from 2013-2019 with a minimum clinical follow-up period of two years. Twelve cases in 12 patients were identified. Baseline demographics, intraoperative variables, surgical outcomes, and patient reported outcomes were acquired.

Results

The implant survivorship was 91% with component failure requiring re-revision in only one patient at a mean follow-up period of 36.2 months (range, 24-72 months). Three patients (25.0%) experienced complications, including re-revision for component failure, inter-prosthetic dual-mobility dissociation, and periprosthetic joint infection. Of seven patients who completed the HOOS, JR (hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome score, joint replacement) survey, five patients showed improvement.

Conclusion

Excellent outcomes can be achieved using the dome technique for management of massive anterosuperior medial acetabular defects in revision THA with survivorship of 91% at a mean follow-up period of three years. Conduct of future studies will be required in order to evaluate mid- to long-term outcomes for this technique.

Short term outcomes (average follow up of 2.4 years) of a constrained acetabular liner in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

As instability continues to be a burden post total hip arthroplasty (THA), there has been a controversial discussion on the ideal implant choice. We report here the outcomes of a modern constrained acetabular liner (CAL) system in primary and revision THA at an average follow up of 2.4 years.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of all patients undergoing primary and revision hip arthroplasty and being implanted with the modern CAL system from 2013 to 2021. We identified 31 hips, of which 13 underwent primary THA and the remaining 18 underwent revision THA for instability.

RESULTS

Of those implanted with CAL primarily, 3 had concomitant abductor tear repair and gluteus maximus transfer, 5 had Parkinson's disease, 2 had inclusion body myositis, 1 had amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, and the remaining 2 were above 94 years of age. All patients implanted with the CAL were as a result of active instability post-primary THA and underwent only liner and head exchange without revision of the acetabular or femoral components. At an average follow up of 2.4 years (range, 9 months to 5 years and 4 months), we had 1 case (3.2 %) of dislocation post-CAL implantation. None of the patients undergoing surgery with CAL for active instability had a re-dislocation.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, a constrained acetabular liner provides excellent stability in both primary THA in high risk individuals and revision THA in cases of active instability. There were no dislocations when using a constrained acetabular liner to treat active instability post THA.