Advertisement

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research

, Volume 467, Issue 1, pp 188–193 | Cite as

Acetabular Loosening Using an Extended Offset Polyethylene Liner

  • Michael J. Archibeck
  • Tamara Cummins
  • Daniel W. Junick
  • Richard E. WhiteJr.
Symposium: Papers Presented at the Hip Society Meetings 2008

Abstract

The use of extended offset femoral components and acetabular liners helps restore preoperative offset during hip arthroplasty. We report a relatively high acetabular component aseptic loosening rate with the use of offset polyethylene liners. We reviewed 1919 primary and 346 revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs). A 7-mm offset acetabular liner was used in 120 of the primary and 100 of the revision THAs. The aseptic loosening rate in the primary THA group was 0.12% in the standard offset and 4.2% in the extended offset groups at a minimum of 2 years (mean, 3.6 years; range, 2–9 years) followup. The aseptic loosening rate in the revision group was 1.7% in the standard and 7% in the extended offset groups at a mean of 4 years (range, 2–9 years) followup. Although extended offset acetabular liners help restore hip offset, torsional force applied to the implant-bone interface may have a detrimental effect on fixation. We found a relatively high failure rate in our primary and revision acetabular components used with an offset liner.

Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Keywords

Aseptic Loosening Acetabular Component Standard Liner Polyethylene Liner Abduction Angle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Curtis MJ, Jinnah RH, Wilson VD, Hungerford DS. The initial stability of uncemented acetabular components. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74:372–376.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Giori NJ. Offset acetabular components introduce torsion on the implant and may increase the risk of fixation failure. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:89–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hurwitz DE, Andriacchi TP. Biomechanics of the hip. In: Callaghan JJ, Rosenberg AG, Rubash HE, eds. The Adult Hip. Vol 1. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott-Raven; 1998:80.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaneko K, Inoue Y, Yanagihara Y, Uta S, Mogami A, Iwase H. The initial fixation of the press-fit acetabular shell—clinical observation and experimental study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2000;120:323–325.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lawless JF. Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data. New York, NY: John Wiley; 1982.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    McGrory BJ. Acetabular revision with a 7-mm lateral offset component inserted without cement in patients who have acetabular deficiency. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:443–453.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael J. Archibeck
    • 1
  • Tamara Cummins
    • 1
  • Daniel W. Junick
    • 1
  • Richard E. WhiteJr.
    • 1
  1. 1.New Mexico Center for Joint Replacement SurgeryNew Mexico OrthopaedicsAlbuquerqueUSA

Personalised recommendations