Revision total hip arthroplasty using the Kerboull acetabular reinforcement device for Paprosky type III defects involving the inferior margin of the acetabulum: a minimum five-year follow-up study

Outcome of different reconstruction options using allografts in revision total hip arthroplasty for severe acetabular bone loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have reported good to excellent outcomes of revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) using allografts for treating severe acetabular bone defects. However, precise information on the impact of allograft type and reconstruction method is not available.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Systematic literature search was performed in Medline and Web of Science including patients with acetabular bone loss classified according to the Paprosky classification who underwent rTHA involving the use of allografts. Studies with a minimum follow-up of 2 years published between 1990 and 2021 were included. Kendall correlation was applied to determine the relationship between Paprosky grade and allograft type use. Proportion meta-analyses with 95% confidence interval (CI) were performed to summarize the success of various reconstruction options, including allograft type, fixation method, and reconstruction system.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies met the inclusion criteria encompassing 1561 cases from 1491 patients with an average age of 64 years (range 22-95). The average follow-up period was 7.9 years (range 2-22). Structural bulk and morselized grafts were used in equal proportions for all Paprosky acetabular defect types. Their use increased significantly with the type of acetabular defect (r = 0.69, p = 0.049). The overall success rate ranged from 61.3 to 98.3% with a random effect pooled estimate of 90% [95% CI 87-93]. Trabecular metal augments (93% [76-98]) and shells (97% [84-99]) provided the highest success rates. However, no significant differences between reconstruction systems, allograft types and fixation methods were observed (p > 0.05 for all comparisons).

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the use of bulk or morselized allograft for massive bone loss independent of Paprosky classification type and indicate similar good mid- to long-term outcomes of the different acetabular reconstruction options using allografts.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42020223093.

Major acetabular defects: outcomes of first revision total hip arthroplasty using Kerboull cross-plate with allograft and cemented dual mobility cup at a maximum follow-up of fourteen years

BACKGROUND

The use of dual mobility cups (DMC) has been shown to reduce hip instability after revision surgery. For severe acetabular bone loss, reconstruction with a Kerboull cross-plate and bone allograft would contribute to restoring native hip position and bone stock. Only two papers reported on the combination of Kerboull cross-plate with bone allograft and cemented DMC in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

This is a monocentric retrospective study (28 cases) of first-time revision THA using such a construct in American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) grade III and IV acetabular bone defect. Detailed demographic, clinical and radiographic results were recorded and evaluated.

RESULTS

With a mean follow-up of six ± 3.63 years, no case of instability was reported. The modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) was 88.4 ± 10.1. No hook fracture or mechanical failure was observed. Non-progressive radiolucent lines were recorded. Osteointegration of the allografts was observed in all cases with a mean Grodet score of 7.9 ± 0.97.

CONCLUSIONS

In first revision THA, the use of a Kerboull cross-plate with allograft and a cemented DMC in AAOS grade III and IV acetabular bone defects demonstrated excellent clinical and radiological outcomes with no recorded cases of dislocation or mechanical failure.

Influence of dual-mobility acetabular implants on revision and survivorship of cup and Kerboull-type reinforcement ring constructs in aseptic acetabular loosening

INTRODUCTION

Dual-mobility (DM) acetabular implants have been used in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) to prevent postoperative instability, with excellent mid-term survivorship. However, few comparative studies assessed the long-term outcomes of DM implants used in Kerboull-type reinforcement ring constructs for acetabular revision. The present study aimed to compare long-term survivorship, dislocation rates and clinical outcome between DM acetabular implants and conventional single-bearing (SB) implants when cemented in a reinforcement ring.

HYPOTHESIS

Dual-mobility implants are associated with equivalent survivorship and lower dislocation rates than SB implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study included 60 revision THAs for aseptic loosening using a Kerboull-type reinforcement ring, and finally included 2 groups of 23 patients with either DM or SB cemented acetabular implants after matching for age, gender, BMI and preoperative Harris hip score. Mean follow-up was 10 years (range, 6-14 years). Acetabular implant survivorship, dislocation rate and radiographic failure incidence (>5mm migration, progressive radiolucency, graft non-integration, reinforcement ring breakage) were compared between the two groups. Clinical outcomes used the Harris hip score, the Postel-Merle d'Aubigné score and the Parker score.

RESULTS

Survivorship free of aseptic acetabular re-revision was 89% at 10 years, with no significant difference between DM and SB (91% and 86%, respectively; p=0.54). Single-bearing implants showed a hazard ratio for dislocation of 6.7 (95% CI, 1.5-29.6; p=0.01) compared to DM implants. There were no significant differences in radiologic failure (10-year survivorship 72% and 64%, respectively; p=0.88) or functional scores.

DISCUSSION

The present study confirmed the impact of dual-mobility implants in reducing long-term dislocation risk when used in Kerboull-type reinforcement ring constructs for acetabular aseptic revision, with no increased risk of re-revision compared to conventional single-bearing implants.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, comparative retrospective study.

Impaction bone grafting in hip re-revision surgery

AIMS

Bone stock restoration of acetabular bone defects using impaction bone grafting (IBG) in total hip arthroplasty may facilitate future re-revision in the event of failure of the reconstruction. We hypothesized that the acetabular bone defect during re-revision surgery after IBG was smaller than during the previous revision surgery. The clinical and radiological results of re-revisions with repeated use of IBG were also analyzed.

METHODS

In a series of 382 acetabular revisions using IBG and a cemented component, 45 hips (45 patients) that had failed due to aseptic loosening were re-revised between 1992 and 2016. Acetabular bone defects graded according to Paprosky during the first and the re-revision surgery were compared. Clinical and radiological findings were analyzed over time. Survival analysis was performed using a competing risk analysis.

RESULTS

Intraoperative bone defect during the initial revision included 19 Paprosky type IIIA and 29 Paprosky type IIIB hips; at re-revision, seven hips were Paprosky type II, 27 type IIIA and 11 were type IIIB (p = 0.020). The mean preoperative Harris Hip Score was 45.4 (SD 6.4), becoming 80.7 (SD 12.7) at the final follow-up. In all, 12 hips showed radiological migration of the acetabular component, and three required further revision surgery. The nine-year cumulative failure incidence (nine patients at risk) of the acetabular component for further revision surgery was 9.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9 to 21.0) for any cause, and 7.5% (95% CI 1.9 to 18.5) for aseptic loosening. Hips with a greater hip height had a higher risk for radiological migration (odds ratio 1.09, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.17; p = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

Bone stock restoration can be obtained using IBG in revision hip surgery. This technique is also useful in re-revision surgery; however, a better surgical technique including a closer distance to hip rotation centre could decrease the risk of radiological migration of the acetabular component. A longer follow-up is required to assess potential fixation deterioration. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):492-499.

The Recombinant Protein EphB4-Fc Changes the Ti Particle-Mediated Imbalance of OPG/RANKL via EphrinB2/EphB4 Signaling Pathway and Inhibits the Release of Proinflammatory Factors In Vivo

Aseptic loosening caused by wear particles is one of the common complications after total hip arthroplasty. We investigated the effect of the recombinant protein ephB4-Fc (erythropoietin-producing human hepatocellular receptor 4) on wear particle-mediated inflammatory response. In vitro, ephrinB2 expression was analyzed using siRNA-NFATc1 (nuclear factor of activated T-cells 1) and siRNA-c-Fos. Additionally, we used Tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase (TRAP) staining, bone pit resorption, Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), as well as ephrinB2 overexpression and knockdown experiments to verify the effect of ephB4-Fc on osteoclast differentiation and function. In vivo, a mouse skull model was constructed to test whether the ephB4-Fc inhibits osteolysis and inhibits inflammation by micro-CT, H&E staining, immunohistochemistry, and immunofluorescence. The gene expression of ephrinB2 was regulated by c-Fos/NFATc1. Titanium wear particles activated this signaling pathway to the promoted expression of the ephrinB2 gene. However, ephrinB2 protein can be activated by osteoblast membrane receptor ephB4 to inhibit osteoclast differentiation. In in vivo experiments, we found that ephB4 could regulate Ti particle-mediated imbalance of OPG/RANKL, and the most important finding was that ephB4 relieved the release of proinflammatory factors. The ephB4-Fc inhibits wear particle-mediated osteolysis and inflammatory response through the ephrinB2/EphB4 bidirectional signaling pathway, and ephrinB2 ligand is expected to become a new clinical drug therapeutic target.

Stemmed acetabular cup as a salvage implant for revision total hip arthroplasty with Paprosky type IIIA and IIIB acetabular bone loss

INTRODUCTION

Certain cases of repeated acetabular loosening with severe bone loss are hardly amenable to reconstruction using a Kerboull-type plate with allograft. This limitation is more likely when the severe bone loss occurs in older adults with significant comorbidities that may require a faster procedure. In these indications, a stemmed acetabular cup may be an alternative, although the outcomes have not been well defined, especially for a version where the peg is coated with porous material and additional screws can be added. This led us to conduct a retrospective study to determine: (1) whether a stemmed cup anchored in the iliac isthmus is a viable alternative in these situations, (2) the complication rate and (3) the revision rate for any reason.

HYPOTHESIS

A stemmed cup anchored in the iliac isthmus is a viable alternative in cases of repeated revision with severe acetabular bone loss.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective single-center study. Sixteen Integra™ cups were implanted in 14 patients (mean age 72.8±10.4 years, minimum-maximum: 58-95) who had aseptic acetabular loosening combined with severe acetabular bone loss graded as Paprosky IIIA in 7 hips and IIIB in 9 hips. The patients had undergone a mean of 2.7±1.8 (minimum-maximum: 1-6) procedures (i.e. primary and/or revision arthroplasty) before this cup was implanted. The cup's survivorship at the time of review and the complication rate were determined.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 48.8±23.4 months (minimum-maximum: 7-85), two patients had died and two were lost to follow-up. Six hips experienced one or more complications (37.5%): three infections (18.8%), two mechanical failures (12.5%) and one dislocation (6.7%). The cup had to be removed in three patients (18.8%). These complications required reoperation, thus the cumulative incidence of revision for any reason at 5 years was 31% (95% CI: 11-55%).

CONCLUSION

Despite the high complication and revision rates, we believe the stemmed acetabular cup is a viable alternative in salvage reconstruction procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, Retrospective case study.

Acetabular reinforcement rings associated with allograft for severe acetabular defects

Acetabular revisions with severe bone defects can be challenging procedures. Several grading systems have been set into place to help the surgeon adequately gauge the degree of bone loss within the acetabulum. Internationally innovative research in orthopedics and bio-engineering has helped with progression of successful techniques and rings to re-establish the normal anatomy of the hip. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the outcomes of the different acetabular reinforcement rings in the setting of severe acetabular defects. A successive report of relevant data from the literature of multiple techniques will be provided. The procedures include the cup-cage, the Müller ring, the Ganz Ring, the Kerboull acetabular reinforcement device (KARD), the graft augmentation prosthesis (GAP) ring, and the Burch-Schneider ring. The main focus of this overview is rings only; other devices such as trabecular augments, custom-made cages, or oblong cups are not discussed. Furthermore, a special emphasis on the surgical technique of the KARD is also given. Procedures using these rings are usually associated with bone grafts either bulk or morselized. When considering the available data on these various rings used for reconstruction of the severely damaged acetabulum, the cup-cage, the KARD, and the Burch-Schneider ring appear to be reliable options for more successful long-term outcomes.