Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

, Volume 472, Issue 2, pp 572–576 | Cite as

Do Jumbo Cups Cause Hip Center Elevation in Revision THA? A Computer Simulation

  • Chima Nwankwo
  • Nick N. Dong
  • Christopher D. Heffernan
  • Michael D. RiesEmail author
Symposium: 2013 Hip Society Proceedings



Acetabular revision THA with use of a large (jumbo) cup is an effective treatment for many cavitary and segmental peripheral bone defects. However, the jumbo cup may result in elevation of the hip center and protrusion through the anterior acetabular wall as a result of the oversized geometry of the jumbo cup compared with the physiologic acetabulum.


The purpose of this computer simulation was to determine how much elevation of the hip center and anterior wall protrusion occurs in revision THA with use of a jumbo cup technique in which the inferior edge of the jumbo cup is placed at the inferior acetabular rim and the superior edge of the jumbo cup is placed against host bone at the superior margin of a posterosuperior bone defect.


Two hundred sixty-five pelvic CT scans were analyzed by custom CT analytical software. The computer simulated oversized reaming. The vertical and anterior reamer center shifts were measured, and anterior column bone removal was determined.


The computer simulation demonstrated that the hip center shifted 0.27 mm superiorly and 0.02 mm anteriorly, and anterior column bone removal increased 0.86 mm for every 1-mm increase in reamer diameter.


Our results indicate that the jumbo cup technique results in hip center elevation despite placement of the cup adjacent to the inferior acetabulum. For a hypothetical increase from a 54-mm socket to a 72-mm socket, as one might see in the context of the revision of a failed THA, our model would predict an elevation of the hip center of approximately 5 mm and loss of approximately 15 mm of anterior column bone. This suggests that an increase in femoral head length may be needed to compensate for the hip center elevation caused by the use of a large jumbo cup in revision THA. A jumbo cup may also result in protrusion through the anterior wall.


Acetabular Revision Posterior Acetabular Wall Acetabular Margin Bulk Allograft Acetabular Anatomy 
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.


  1. 1.
    Bricteux S, Beguin L, Fessy MH. [Iliopsoas impingement in 12 patients with a total hip arthroplasty] [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 2001;87:820–825.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brooks PJ. The jumbo cup: the 95% solution. Orthopedics. 2008;31:913, 915.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dearborn JT, Harris WH. Acetabular revision arthroplasty using so-called jumbo cementless components: an average 7-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:8–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Delp SL, Wixson RL, Komattu AV, Kocmond JH. How superior placement of the joint center in hip arthroplasty affects the abductor muscles. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996;328:137–146.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dora C, Houweling M, Koch P, Sierra RJ. Iliopsoas impingement after total hip replacement: the results of non-operative management, tenotomy or acetabular revision. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89:1031–1035.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dorr LD, Tawakkol S, Moorthy M, Long W, Wan Z. Medial protrusio technique for placement of a porous-coated hemispherical acetabular component without cement in total hip arthroplasty patients who have acetabular dysplasia. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81:83–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dorr LD, Wan Z. Ten years of experience with porous acetabular components for revision surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;319:191–200.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dou Y, Zhou Y, Tang Q, Yang D, Liu J. Leg-length discrepancy after revision hip arthroplasty: are modular stems superior? J Arthroplasty. 2013;28:676–679.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fabi D, Gonzalez M, Goldstein W, Ahmed M. Acetabular cup revision with the use of the medial protrusio technique at an average follow-up of 6.6 years. J Arthroplasty. 2010;25:197–202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fan CY, Chen WM, Lee OK, Huang CK, Chiang CC, Chen TH. Acetabular revision arthroplasty using jumbo cups: an experience in Asia. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2008;128:809–813.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gustke KA. Jumbo cup or high hip center: is bigger better? J Arthroplasty. 2004;19(Suppl 1):120–123.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jasty M. Jumbo cups and morsalized graft. Orthop Clin North Am. 1998;29:249–254.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lachiewicz PF, Soileau ES. Fixation, survival, and dislocation of jumbo acetabular components in revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:543–548.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    O’Sullivan M, Tai CC, Richards S, Skyrme AD, Walter WL, Walter WK. Iliopsoas tendonitis a complication after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22:166–170.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Patel JV, Masonis JL, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH. The fate of cementless jumbo cups in revision hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:129–133.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tanzer M. Role and results of the high hip center. Orthop Clin North Am. 1998;29:241–247.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vasavada AN, Delp SL, Maloney WJ, Schurman DJ, Zajac FE. Compensating for changes in muscle length in total hip arthroplasty. Effects on the moment generating capacity of the muscles. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;302:121–133.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Whaley AL, Berry DJ, Harmsen WS. Extra-large uncemented hemispherical acetabular components for revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:1352–1357.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chima Nwankwo
    • 1
  • Nick N. Dong
    • 2
  • Christopher D. Heffernan
    • 2
  • Michael D. Ries
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryUniversity of California, San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA
  2. 2.Stryker Orthopaedics, IncMahwahUSA
  3. 3.Tahoe Fracture and Orthopaedic ClinicCarson CityUSA

Personalised recommendations