International Orthopaedics

, Volume 40, Issue 9, pp 1835–1842 | Cite as

Long-term results with the Atlas IIIp elastic cementless acetabular component in total hip replacement

  • Paul Yuh Feng LeeEmail author
  • Madhu Rachala
  • Kar Ho Teoh
  • David John Woodnutt
Original Paper



Modular cementless elastic acetabular systems have advantages over cemented and hard shell cementless acetabular systems. There are few reports on the medium-term and long-term follow up of this particular type of implant. This study describes our experience with the Atlas IIIp modular acetabular system, which is a thin shell cementless elastic acetabular implant for total hip replacement commercialized under this name in many countries.


We prospectively followed 244 patients treated with Atlas IIIp acetabular system between 2001 and 2004. Minimum ten year follow up was available for 148 hips (139 patients) from the original cohort of 263 hips (244 patients). One hundred five patients had died from unrelated causes and were excluded from the results. Post-operative and follow up radiographs of patients were assessed; and Harris hip scores were used as clinical outcome. Revision for any reason was defined as the end point for survivorship analysis.


The mean pre-operative Harris hip score was 48 (S.D. 16) and the average post-operative score was 82 (S.D. 12). The mean follow up in our series was 11.5 years, ranging from ten to 13.5 years. Thirteen hips required further surgery in our cohort; of which ten cases required cup revision. The 13-years cumulative implant survival was 91.2 % and the risk of implant revision was 8.8 % at 13 years in 148 hips (139 patients). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed the implant survival rate of 95.2 % at ten years for revision for any reason and 99.4 % for aseptic loosening.


Our clinical experience with this acetabular cup suggests good long-term survival rates that are similar to other cups on the market. The clinical experience in this study shows long-term survival rates that are consistent, acceptable and good results achieved with a low revision rate.

Level of evidence: Therapeutic III; therapeutic study.


Hip arthroplasty Acetabular cup Cementless Elastic press-fit Altas IIIp Long-term results 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest



  1. 1.
    Dambreville A (2004) Minimum ten years follow-up of the hydroxyapatite-coated ATLAS cup. In: Epinette J-A, Manley MT (eds) Fifteen years of clinical experience with hydroxyapatite coatings in joint arthroplasty. Springer, ParisGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Philippe M, Ameil M (2007) Survival analysis at 10 years of a cohort of 297 atlas total hip prostheses. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 17(6):573–578. doi: 10.1007/s00590-007-0236-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dambreville A (2001) Assessing the stability of metal back acetabular inserts. A microscopic study of explants. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 11(4):213–218. doi: 10.1007/BF01686891 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pakvis D, Janssen D, Verdonschot N (2010) Acetabular stress shielding—a finite element analysis of a cemented, a cementless rigid and a cementless elastic socket. In: Deutscher Kongress für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie (DKOU), 21/10/2010 2010. doi:  10.3205/10dkou105
  5. 5.
    DeLee JG, Charnley J (1976) Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 121:20–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zenz P, Stiehl JB, Knechtel H, Titzer-Hochmaier G, Schwagerl W (2009) Ten-year follow-up of the non-porous Allofit cementless acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 91(11):1443–1447. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.91B11.22368 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim YH, Kim JS, Park JW, Joo JH (2012) Periacetabular osteolysis is the problem in contemporary total hip arthroplasty in young patients. J Arthroplasty 27(1):74–81. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2011.03.022 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brooker AF, Bowerman JW, Robinson RA, Riley LH Jr (1973) Ectopic ossification following total hip replacement. Incidence and a method of classification. J Bone Joint Surg Am 55(8):1629–1632PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Epinette JA (1999) Radiographic assessment of cementless hip prostheses: the “ARA” scoring system. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 9(2):91–94. doi: 10.1007/bf01695736 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goslings JC, Gouma DJ (2008) What is a surgical complication? World J Surg 32(6):952. doi: 10.1007/s00268-008-9563-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Streit MR, Schroder K, Korber M, Merle C, Gotterbarm T, Ewerbeck V, Aldinger PR (2012) High survival in young patients using a second generation uncemented total hip replacement. Int Orthop 36(6):1129–1136. doi: 10.1007/s00264-011-1399-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Streit MR, Weiss S, Andreas F, Bruckner T, Walker T, Kretzer JP, Ewerbeck V, Merle C (2014) 10-year results of the uncemented Allofit press-fit cup in young patients. Acta Orthop 85(4):368–374. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2014.925351 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ries MD, Harbaugh M, Shea J, Lambert R (1997) Effect of cementless acetabular cup geometry on strain distribution and press-fit stability. J Arthroplasty 12(2):207–212. doi: 10.1016/S0883-5403(97)90068-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Charnley J (1972) The long-term results of low-friction arthroplasty of the hip performed as a primary intervention. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 54(1):61–76Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hallan G, Dybvik E, Furnes O, Havelin LI (2010) Metal-backed acetabular components with conventional polyethylene: a review of 9113 primary components with a follow-up of 20 years. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 92(2):196–201. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.92B2.22179 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee PC, Shih CH, Chen WJ, Tu YK, Tai CL (1999) Early polyethylene wear and osteolysis in cementless total hip arthroplasty: the influence of femoral head size and polyethylene thickness. J Arthroplasty 14(8):976–981CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Oonishi H, Iwaki H, Kin N, Kushitani S, Murata N, Wakitani S, Imoto K (1998) The effects of polyethylene cup thickness on wear of total hip prostheses. J Mater Sci Mater Med 9(8):475–478CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Duffy GP, Prpa B, Rowland CM, Berry DJ (2004) Primary uncemented Harris-Galante acetabular components in patients 50 years old or younger: results at 10 to 12 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res 427:157–161CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eskelinen A, Remes V, Helenius I, Pulkkinen P, Nevalainen J, Paavolainen P (2006) Uncemented total hip arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis in young patients: a mid-to long-term follow-up study from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 77(1):57–70. doi: 10.1080/17453670610045704 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Utting MR, Raghuvanshi M, Amirfeyz R, Blom AW, Learmonth ID, Bannister GC (2008) The Harris-Galante porous-coated, hemispherical, polyethylene-lined acetabular component in patients under 50 years of age: a 12- to 16-year review. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 90(11):1422–1427. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.90B11.20892 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Craiovan B, Renkawitz T, Weber M, Grifka J, Nolte L, Zheng G (2014) Is the acetabular cup orientation after total hip arthroplasty on a two dimension or three dimension model accurate? Int Orthop 38(10):2009–2015. doi: 10.1007/s00264-014-2336-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Yuh Feng Lee
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  • Madhu Rachala
    • 2
  • Kar Ho Teoh
    • 1
  • David John Woodnutt
    • 2
  1. 1.South Wales Orthopaedics Research NetworkWelshBoneCardiffUK
  2. 2.Morriston HospitalSwanseaUK
  3. 3.CardiffUK

Personalised recommendations