Early aseptic loosening of cementless monoblock acetabular components
Early aseptic loosening of cementless monoblock acetabular components is a rare complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA) and hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and risk factors for early aseptic loosening of the cementless monoblock acetabular components.
This retrospective analysis consisted of 4,043 cementless hip devices (3,209 THAs and 834 HRAs). We identified 41 patients with early aseptic loosening of the acetabular component. A control group of 123 patients without acetabular component loosening was randomly selected. The demographic data and risk factors for loosening of the acetabular component were evaluated. The mean follow-up time was 4.6 years (range, 1.7–7.8). The end-point was acetabular revision.
The incidence of early acetabular component loosening was 1.0 %. Mean time to revision was 1.2 years (SD 1.6, range 0.0–5.4). There was significantly more Dorr type A and C acetabular morphology in patients with early loosening (P = 0.014). The loosened components were implanted to more vertical (P < 0.001) and less anteverted (P = 0.001) position than those of the control group. Presence of acetabular dysplasia or acetabular component type did not associate to early loosening.
Acetabular morphology (Dorr type A and C) and component positioning vertically and less anteverted were more common in patients with early aseptic loosening of cementless acetabular components. Suboptimal cup position most likely reflects challenges to obtain sufficient stability during surgery. We hypothesize that errors in surgical technique are the main reason for early loosening of monoblock acetabular components.
KeywordsAcetabular morphology Aseptic loosening Case–control study Cup positioning Hip arthroplasty
- 8.Schofer MD, Pressel T, Heyse T, Schmitt J, Boudriot U (2010) Radiological determination of the anatomic hip centre from pelvic landmarks. Acta Orthop Belgica 76:479–485Google Scholar
- 10.Wiberg G (1939) Studies on dysplastic acetabula and congenital subluxation of the hip joint with special reference to the complication of osteoarthritis. Acta Chir Scand 83:7–135Google Scholar
- 11.Sharp IK (1961) Acetabular dysplasia. The acetabular angle. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 43-B:268–272Google Scholar
- 12.Cooperman DR, Wallensten R, Stulberg SD (1983) Acetabular dysplasia in the adult. Clin Orthop Relat Res 175:79–85Google Scholar
- 16.Murray DW (1993) The definition and measurement of acetabular orientation. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 75B:228–232Google Scholar
- 18.Sarmiento A, Ebramzadeh E, Gogan WJ, McKellop HA (1990) Cup containment and orientation in cemented total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 72-B:996–1002Google Scholar
- 19.DeLee JG, Charnley J (1976) Radiological demarcation of cemented sockets in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 121:20–32Google Scholar
- 20.Mäkelä KT, Matilainen M, Pulkkinen P, Fenstad AM, Havelin L, Engesaeter L, Furnes O, Pedersen AB, Overgaarg S, Kärrholm J, Malchau H, Garellick G, Ranstam J, Eskelinen A (2014) Failure rate of cemented and uncemented total hip replacements: register study of combined Nordic database of four nations. BMJ 348:f7592CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Lee PY, Rachala M, Teoh KH, Woodnutt DJ (2016) Long-term results with Atlas IIIp elastic cementless acetabular component in total hip replacement. Int Orthop. 2016 Jan 12 [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
- 24.Smith TO, Nichols R, Donell ST, Hing CB (2010) The clinical and radiological outcomes of hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Arch Orthop 81:684–695Google Scholar
- 25.Stocks GW, Freeman MA, Evans SJ (1995) Acetabular cup migration. Prediction of aseptic loosening. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 77-B:853–861Google Scholar