HSS Journal

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 128–137 | Cite as

A Review of the Treatment of Pelvic Discontinuity

  • M. Villanueva
  • A. Rios-Luna
  • J. Pereiro De Lamo
  • H. Fahandez-Saddi
  • M. P. G. Böstrom
Original Article


Pelvic discontinuity is a complex entity with a high surgical complication rate and no standardized treatment to date. Revision hip arthroplasty in cases of massive bone loss remains a difficult and unsolved problem. The goal of the surgeon is to preserve limb function by restoring bone stock and the biomechanics of the hip. In cases of severe acetabular bone loss, biologic fixation is often inadequate, requiring extensive bone grafting and reconstructive cages. Reconstructive cages are the most commonly used devices and are designed to bridge bone defects, protect the bone graft, and reestablish the rotation center of the hip. A major limitation of current cages is that they do not allow for biologic fixation. We review the options for treating patients with massive bone loss and pelvic discontinuity and discuss therapeutic options and the clinical and radiological criteria for success.


reconstructive cages massive bone loss revision hip arthroplasty pelvic discontinuity 



Burch–Schneider cage


contour cup cage


not specified for pelvic discontinuity


  1. 1.
    O’Rourke MR, Paprosky WG, Rosemberg AG (2004) Use of structural allografts in acetabular revision surgery. Clin Orthop 420:113–121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berry DJ, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD et al (1999) Pelvic discontinuity in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:1692–1702PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harris WH (1998) Reconstruction at a high hip center in acetabular revision surgery using a cementless acetabular component. Orthopedics 21:991–992PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tanzer M (1998) Role and results of the high hip center. Orthop Clin North Am 29:241–247PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jasty M (1998) Jumbo cups and morselized graft. Orthop Clin North Am 29:249–254PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Boer DK, Christie MJ (1998) Reconstruction of the deficient acetabulum with an oblong prosthesis: three to seven year results. J Arthroplasty 13:674–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koster G, Willert HG, Kohler HP et al (1998) An oblong revision cup for large acetabular defects: design rationale and two to seven year follow up. J Arthroplasty 13:559–569PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gill TJ, Sledge JB, Mueller ME (1998) The Burch–Schneider anti-protrusio cage in revision hip arthroplasty. Indications, principles and long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:946–953PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Garbuz D, Mosri E, Mohammed N et al (1996) Classification and reconstruction in revision acetabular arthroplasty with bone stock deficiency. Clin Orthop 324:98–107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goodman S, Sastamoinen H, Shasha N et al (2004) Complications of ilio-ischial reconstructions rings in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 19:436–446PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Holt GE, Dennis DA (2004) Use of custom triflanged acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 429:209–214PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nehme A, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD (2004) Modular porous metal augments for treatment of severe acetabular bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 429:201–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peters CL, Miller M, Erickson J et al (2004) Acetabular revision with a modular anti-protrusio acetabular component. J Arthroplasty 19:67–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chiang PP, Burke DW, Freiberg AA et al (2003) Osteolysis of the pelvis. Evaluation and treatment. Clin Orthop 417:164–174PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    D’Antonio JA, Capello WN, Borden LS et al (1989) Classification and management of acetabular abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 243:126–137PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Saleh KJ, Holtzman J, Gafni A et al (2001) Development, test reliability and validation of a classification for revision hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 19:50–56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Saleh KJ, Jaroszynski G, Woodgate I et al (2000) Revision total hip arthroplasty with the use of structural acetabular allograft and reconstruction ring. A case series with a 10 year average follow-up. J Arthroplasty 15:951–958PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM (1994) Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty: a 6-year follow up evaluation. J Arthroplasty 9:33–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gross AE (1999) Revision arthroplasty of the acetabulum with restoration of bone stock. Clin Orthop S369:198–207Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stiehl JB, Saluja R, Diener T (2000) Reconstruction of major column defects and pelvic discontinuity in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 15:849–857PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Udomkiat P, Dorr LD, Won YY et al (2001) Technical factors for success with metal ring acetabular reconstruction. J Arthroplasty 16:961–969PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wachtl S, Jung M, Jakob R et al (2000) The Burch–Schneider antiprotrusio cage in acetabular revision surgery. A mean follow-up of 12 years. J Arthroplasty 15:959–963PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gross AE, Goodman S (2004) The current role of structural grafts and cages in revision arthroplasty of the hip. Clin Orthop 429:193–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Eggli S, Muller C, Ganz R (2002) Revision surgery in pelvic discontinuity. An analysis of seven patients. Clin Orthop 398:136–145PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Murphy SB (2005) Management of acetabular bone stock deficiency. J Arthroplasty 20(S2):85–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mahoney CR, Garvin KL (2002) Periprosthetic acetabular stress fracture causing pelvis discontinuity. Orthopedics 25:83–85PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Springer BD, Berry DJ, Cabanela ME et al (2005) Early postoperative transverse pelvis fracture: a new complication related to revision arthroplasty with an uncemented cup. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:2626–2632PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Scott MS, O’Rourke M, Chong P et al (2005) The use of structural distal femoral allografts for acetabular reconstruction. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:760–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shinar AA, Harris WH (1997) Bulk structural autogenous grafts and allografts for reconstruction of the acetabulum in total hip arthroplasty. Sixteen year average follow up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79:159–168PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sporer S, O’Rourke M, Paprosky W (2005) The treatment of pelvic discontinuity during acetabular revision. J Arthroplasty 20:79–84PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kerboull M, Hamadouche M, Kerboull L (2000) The Kerboull acetabular reinforcement device in major acetabular reconstructions. Clin Orthop 378:155–168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lietman SA, Bhawnani K (2001) The partial pelvic replacement cup in severe acetabular defects. Orthopedics 24:1131–1135PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ko PS, Chan WF, Wong MK et al (2004) Fixation using acetabular reconstruction cage and cancellous allografts for intraoperative acetabular fractures associated with cementless acetabular component insertion. J Arthroplasty 19:643–646PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Berry DJ (2004) Antiprotrusio cages for acetabular revision. Clin Orthop 420:106–112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shatzker J, Wong M (1999) Acetabular revision. The role of rings and cages. Clin Orthop 369:187–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Böstrom MP, Lehman AP, Buly RL, Lyman S et al (2006) Acetabular revision with the contour antiprotrusio cage, 2- to 5-year followup. Clin Orthop 453:188–194PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Paprosky W, Sporer S, O’Rourke M (2006) The treatment of pelvic discontinuity with acetabular cages. Clin Orthop 453:183–187PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Christie MJ, Barrington SA, Brinson MF et al (2001) Bridging massive acetabular defects with the triflanged cup: 2 to 9 years result. Clin Orthop 393:216–227PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Joshi AB, Lee J, Christensen C (2002) Results for a custom acetabular component for acetabular deficiency. J Arthroplasty 17:643–648PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Levine B, Della Valle C, Jacobs J (2006) Applications of porous tantalum in total hip arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 14:646–665PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sporer SM, Paprosky WG (2006) Acetabular revision using a trabecular metal acetabular component for severe acetabular bone loss associated with a pelvic discontinuity. J Arthroplasty 21:87–90PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hanssen AD, Lewallen DG (2004) Acetabular cages. A ladder across a melting pond. Orthopedics 27:830–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gross AE, Goodman SB (2005) Rebuilding the skeleton. The intraoperative use of trabecular metal in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 20:91–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Nercessian OA (1999) Intraoperative complications. In: Steinberg ME, Garino JP (eds) Revision hip arthroplasty. Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 443–456Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dennis DA (2003) Management of massive acetabular defects in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 18:121–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Winter E, Piert M, Volkmann R et al (2001) Allogeneic cancellous bone graft and a Bursch–Schneider ring for acetabular reconstruction in revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 83A:862–867Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Cook SD, Barrack RL, Shimmin A et al (2001) The use of osteogenic protein-1 in reconstructive surgery of the hip. J Arthroplasty 16:88–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gamradt SC, Lieberman JR (2003) Bone graft for revision hip arthroplasty. Biology and future applications. Clin Orthop 417:183–194PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Speirs AD, Oxland TR, Masri BA et al (2005) Calcium phosphate cement composite in revision hip arthroplasty. Biomaterials 26:7310–7318PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Kärrholm J, Hourigan P, Timperley J et al (2006) Mixing bone graft with OP-1 does not improve cup or stem fixation in revision surgery of the hip. 5-year follow-up of 10 acetabular and 11 femoral study cases and 40 control cases. Acta Orthop Scan 77:39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    McDonald SJ, Mehin R. (2005) Acetabular revision: structural grafts. Advanced reconstruction. Hip. In Lieberman JR and Berry DJ (Ed) AAOS, pp 335–342Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Slooff TJ, Gardeniers JW, Schreurs BW et al (1999) Acetabular bone grafting: impacted cancellous allografts. In: Steinberg ME, Garino JP (eds) Revision hip arthroplasty. Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 249–261Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Schreurs BW, Slooff TJ, Gardeniers JW et al (2001) Acetabular reconstruction with bone impaction grafting and a cemented cup. Clin Orthop 393:202–215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Van Haaren EH, Heyligers IC, Alexander FG, Wuisman PI (2007) High rate of failure of impaction grafting in large acetabular defects. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(3):296–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Hospital for Special Surgery 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Villanueva
    • 1
  • A. Rios-Luna
    • 2
    • 3
  • J. Pereiro De Lamo
    • 4
  • H. Fahandez-Saddi
    • 5
  • M. P. G. Böstrom
    • 6
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and TraumatologyHospital General Universitario Gregorio MarañónMadridSpain
  2. 2.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and TraumatologyHospital Virgen del MarAlmeríaSpain
  3. 3.Neuroscience and Health Science DepartmentUniversity of AlmeriaAlmeriaSpain
  4. 4.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and TraumatologyHospital Clínico UniversitarioMadridSpain
  5. 5.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and TraumatologyHospital Fundación AlcorcónMadridSpain
  6. 6.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryHospital for Special SurgeryNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations