Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Survival of Well-Fixed Cementless Femoral Component After Isolated Acetabular Component Revision

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

It remains controversial whether isolated acetabular component revision or both component revision surgeries should be performed in patients with stable femoral component. The present study aimed to evaluate the survival of patients with unrevised stable uncemented femoral stem who underwent isolated acetabular component revision.

Material and Methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted in patients who underwent isolated acetabular component revision and had stable uncemented femoral component during revision hip arthroplasty between February 1998 and December 2009. Demographic data of the patients included age, previous surgery, complications, duration between primary and revision surgery, and duration between revision and latest follow-up. Functional results were analyzed using Harris Hip Score (HHS).

Results

Fifteen hips of thirteen patients were included in the study with a mean age of 62.08 ± 12.9 years. Average time from THA to the isolated acetabular revision was 9.2 ± 3.48 years. Average follow-up time from revision to the latest follow-up was 12.39 ± 2.68 years, and femoral components had been followed for an average of 21.6 ± 4.06 years since the time of implantation. Average HHS of the patients were 53 before revision surgery and 81.9 at the last follow-up (p < 0.001). The 10-year survival rate of patients who underwent revision in the femoral component was 100%, whereas their 15-year survival rate was 93.3%. None of the acetabular components required revision.

Conclusion

Isolated revision of acetabular component may be considered if there is stable uncemented femoral component in revision THA. Acetabular reconstruction quality, acetabular and unrevised femoral component survival are not affected by retaining well-fixed femoral component.

Level of Evidence

4, retrospective cohort study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bozic, K. J., Kurtz, S. M., Lau, E., Ong, K., Vail, D. T. P., & Berry, D. J. (2009). The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the united states. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 91(1), 128–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Park, K. S., Yoon, T. R., Song, E. K., & Lee, K. B. (2010). Results of isolated femoral component revision with well-fixed acetabular implant retention. Journal of Arthroplasty, 25(8), 1188–1195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Moskal, J. T., Shen, F. H., & Brown, T. E. (2002). The fate of stable femoral components retained during isolated acetabular revision: a six-to-twelve-year follow-up study. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume, 84(2), 250–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Poon, E. D., & Lachiewicz, P. F. (1998). Results of isolated acetabular revisions: the fate of the unrevised femoral component. Journal of Arthroplasty, 13(1), 42–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Harris, W. H. (1996). Modularity is unnecessary in primary femoral THA but has some advantages in primary acetabular THA. Journal of Arthroplasty, 11(3), 334–336.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. He, C., Feng, J. M., Yang, Q. M., Wang, Y., & Liu, Z. H. (2010). Results of selective hip arthroplasty revision in isolated acetabular failure. Journal of Surgical Research, 164(2), 228–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Civinini, R., Carulli, C., Matassi, F., Nistri, L., & Innocenti, M. (2012). A dual-mobility cup reduces risk of dislocation in isolated acetabular revisions. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 470(12), 3542–3548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Jones, C. P., & Lachiewicz, P. F. (2004). Factors Influencing the longer-term survival of uncemented acetabular components used in total hip revisions. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 86(2), 342–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Park, D. K., Della, Valle C., & J., Quigley L., Moric M., Rosenberg A. G., & Galante J. O., (2009). Revision of the acetabular component without cement: a concise follow-up, at twenty to twenty-four years, of a previous report. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 91(2), 350–355.

  10. Paprosky, W. G., Perona, P. G., & Lawrence, J. M. (1994). Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation. Journal of Arthroplasty, 9(1), 33–44.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Gruen, T. A., McNeice, G. M., & Amstuts, H. (1979). “Modes of Failure” of Cemented Stem-type Femoral Components: A Radiographic Analysis of Loosening. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 141, 17–27.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Banaszkiewicz, P. A. (2014). Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Classic Papers in Orthopaedics, 121, 39–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Engh, C. A., Massin, P., & Suthers, K. E. (1990). Roentgenographic assessment of the biologic fixation of porous-surfaced femoral components. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 257, 107–128.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Zicat, B., Engh, C. A., & Gokcen, E. (1995). Patterns of osteolysis around total hip components inserted with and without cement. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 77(3), 432–439.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Kim, Y. S., Kim, Y. H., Hwang, K. T., & Choi, I. Y. (2009). Isolated acetabular revision hip arthroplasty with the use of uncemented cup. Journal of Arthroplasty, 24(8), 1236–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Jamali, A. A., Dungy, D. S., Mark, A., Schule, S., & Harris, W. H. (2004). Isolated acetabular revision with use of the Harris-Galante cementless component: Study with intermediate-term follow-up. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 86(8), 1690–1697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Blom, A. W., Astle, L., Loveridge, J., & Learmonth, I. D. (2005). Revision of an acetabular liner has a high risk of dislocation. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 87(12), 1636–1638.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jack, C. M., Molloy, D. O., Walter, W. L., Zicat, B. A., & Walter, W. K. (2013). The use of ceramic-on-ceramic bearings in isolated revision of the acetabular component. The Bone Joint Journal, 95(3), 333–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Boucher, H. R., Lynch, C., Young, A. M., Engh, C. A., Engh, C., & Black, J. (2003). Dislocation after polyethylene liner exchange in total hip arthroplasty. Journal of Arthroplasty, 18(5), 654–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Alberton, G. M., High, W. A., & Morrey, B. F. (2002). Dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty. An analysis of risk factors and treatment options. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 84(10), 1788–1792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Park, Y. S., Moon, Y. W., Lim, B. H., Shon, M. S., & Lim, S. J. (2011). A comparative study of the posterolateral and anterolateral approaches for isolated acetabular revision. Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, 131(7), 1021–1026.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Manning, D. W., Ponce, B. A., Chiang, P. P., Harris, W. H., & Burke, D. W. (2005). Isolated acetabular revision through the posterior approach: short-term results after revision of a recalled acetabular component. Journal of Arthroplasty, 20(6), 723–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lawless, B. M., Healy, W. L., Sharma, S., & Iorio, R. (2010). Outcomes of isolated acetabular revision. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 468(2), 472–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Neu, M. J., & Solomon, M. I. (1996). A technique of revision of failed acetabular components leaving the femoral component in situ. Journal of Arthroplasty, 11(4), 482–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. De Thomasson, E., Conso, C., & Mazel, C. (2012). A well-fixed femoral stem facing a failed acetabular component: To exchange or not? A 5- to 15-year follow-up study. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research, 98(1), 24–29.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Schreurs, B. W., Keurentjes, J. C., Gardeniers, J. W. M., Verdonschot, N., Slooff, T. J. J. H., & Veth, R. P. H. (2009). Acetabular revision with impacted morsellised cancellous bone grafting and a cemented acetabular component: a 20- to 25-year follow-up. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery—Series B., 91(9), 1148–1153.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Cho, H. J., Han, S. B., Park, J. H., & Park, S. W. (2011). An Analysis of stably fixed femoral components retained during revision total hip arthroplasty. Journal of Arthroplasty, 26(8), 1239–1244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Lim, J. W., Ridley, D., Johnston, L. R., & Clift, B. A. (2017). Acetabulum-only revision total hip arthroplasty is associated with good functional outcomes and survivorship. Journal of Arthroplasty, 32(7), 2219–2225.e1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Stathopoulos, I. P., Lampropoulou-Adamidou, K. I., Vlamis, J. A., Georgiades, G. P., & Hartofilakidis, G. C. (2014). One-component revision in total hip arthroplasty: the fate of the retained component. Journal of Arthroplasty, 29(10), 2007–2012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Mehmet Ekinci, Yucel Bilgin, Yasin Sayar, Omer Naci Ergin, Ahmet Salduz, Turgut Akgul & Irfan Ozturk

Authors
  1. Mehmet Ekinci
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yucel Bilgin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yasin Sayar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Omer Naci Ergin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ahmet Salduz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Turgut Akgul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Irfan Ozturk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet Ekinci.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Mehmet Ekinci, Yucel Bilgin, Yasin Sayar, Omer Naci Ergin, Ahmet Salduz, Turgut Akgul and Irfan Ozturk declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standard statement

The current study was approved by the local ethical committee.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from the patients in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ekinci, M., Bilgin, Y., Sayar, Y. et al. The Survival of Well-Fixed Cementless Femoral Component After Isolated Acetabular Component Revision. JOIO 54, 885–891 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-020-00147-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43465-020-00147-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation