Mid- to Long-term Follow-up of Severe Acetabular Bone Defect after Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Impaction Bone Grafting and Metal Mesh

Use of morselized bone allograft in revision hip arthroplasty for massive acetabular defect: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Many treatment options are available for the revision of large acetabular defects. Debate continues as to which technique is most effective. This meta-analysis aimed to determine the rates of failure of acetabular bone defects Paprosky type III or American Academy of Orthopaedic types III-IV treated with morselized allograft in association with cemented cup or cementless cup or reinforcement devices.

Methods

The US National Library of Medicine (PubMed/MEDLINE), EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were queried for publications from January 1980 to 1 April 2024 utilizing keywords pertinent to total hip arthroplasty (THA), acetabular impaction bone grafting and revision THA. The main outcome measure was the 9-year implant failure rate.

Results

Thirty-nine articles were eligible for inclusion in the current study. We found 41 treatment approaches that we grouped into three different treatment options: 1 = morselized allograft and cemented cup (10 studies); 2 =morselized allograft and cementless cup (nine studies); 3 = morselized allograft and device (22 studies). The overall implant failure rate was 2.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6%-2.8%) at a mean of 9.2 years. There was no significant difference in failure rates between different treatment options (1.6% [95% CI, 0.9%-2.6%]) for morselized allograft and cemented cup; 2.1% (95% CI, 1.4%-3.2%) for morselized allograft and cementless cup; 2.5% (95% CI, 1.7%-3.7%) for morselized allograft and device) between the three different types of treatment (heterogeneity between groups p = 0.351).It was determined that the number one cause of failure was aseptic loosening (80.5%), followed by infection (13.1%) and dislocation (6.4%). THA with reinforcement devices has a higher incidence of infection (3.6 vs. 0.7%, p = 0.001) and dislocation (1.4 vs. 0.6%, p = 0.010) than THA with a cemented cup.

Conclusions

The use of morselized allograft in hip revision of large acetabular defects has low implant failure rates, independently of the associated type of implant. Reinforcement devices increase the risk of re-revision for infection and dislocation.

Level of Evidence

Level III.

Trabecular titanium cups in hip revision surgery: a systematic review of the literature

Background

Hip revision surgery in extensive acetabular bone defects represents a complex challenge for hip surgeons. The primary goal is to obtain a stable acetabular component and restore the hip biomechanics. Through the years, different prosthetic implants have been developed to perform acetabular revision depending on bone loss location and extension. This systematic review aims to summarize the clinical outcomes and complications reported with trabecular titanium (TT) cups in hip revision surgery.

Methods

A literature search of four databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus and the Cochrane Database of systematic reviews) was performed according to the PRISMA guideline from January 2008 to December 2022. All studies written in English and reporting the clinical outcome of patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty using Delta TT cups were included. The initial screening identified 378 studies. Each eligible clinical article was analyzed according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence (LoE), and the papers' methodological quality was evaluated using The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies Criteria (MINORS) score.

Results

Eight clinical studies were included in the analysis. A total of 523 hip revisions were analyzed. Delta TT cups were used in 3.9%, Delta TT one cups in 46.8%, and Delta TT revisions in 49.3%. Paprosky IIIa was the most frequent acetabular bone defect reported in 26.4% of cases. The overall survival rate of TT cups was 93.4%. The dislocation was the most frequent complication in 4.1% of patients, while the prevalence of aseptic loosening was 1.5.

Conclusions

Managing severe acetabular bone defects remains a complex challenge for hip surgeons. Since their introduction, TT cups have exhibited good clinical results, with complication rates in line with or lower than those reported by similar implants.