Cup-Cage Technique

  • Eustathios Kenanidis
  • Eleftherios Tsiridis
  • Alan J. Highcock
  • Allan E. Gross
  • Xavier Flecher
  • Cameron K. Ledford
  • Joseph M. Statz
  • Robert T. Trousdale


This is a relatively new technique that provides a viable option for the treatment of complex severe acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity [1]. A porous trabecular metal acetabular shell (titanium and tantalum) and a bridging ilioischial cage are used to achieve mechanical construct stability and biologic fixation of the acetabular shell [2]. It was first presented at the 2007 annual meeting of American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons [3, 4].


  1. 1.
    Amenabar Τ, Rahman WA, Hetaimish BM, Kuzyk PR, Safir OA, Gross AE. Promising mid-term results with a cup-cage construct for large Acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(2):408–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sheth NP, Nelson CL, Springer BD, Fehring TK, Paprosky WG. Acetabular bone loss in revision Total hip Arthroplasty: evaluation and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2013;21:128–39.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Noiseux M, Lewallen DB, Kellet C, Gross AE. Results of a porous coated cup-cage construct in complex revision surgery with severe bone loss. Paper presented at the 2007 Annual Meeting of American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pulido L, Rachala SR, Cabanela ME. Cementless acetabular revision: past, present, and future revision total hip arthroplasty: the acetabular side using cementless implants. Int Orthop. 2011;35:289–98.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Abolghasemian M, et al. The challenge of pelvic discontinuity cup-cage reconstruction does better than conventional cages in mid-term. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B:195–200.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deirmengian GK, Zmistowski B, O’Neil JT, Hozack WJ. Current concepts review Management of Acetabular Bone Loss in revision Total hip Arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:1842–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kosashvili Y, et al. Acetabular revision using an anti-protrusion (ilio-ischial) cage and trabecular metal acetabular component for severe acetabular bone loss associated with pelvic discontinuity. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 2009;91-B:870–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gililland JM, Anderson LA, Henninger HB, Kubiak EN, Peters CL. Biomechanical analysis of acetabular revision constructs: is pelvic discontinuity best treated with bicolumnar or traditional unicolumnar fixation? J Arthroplast. 2013;28:178–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ballester Alfaro JJ, Sueiro Fernandez J. Trabecular metal buttress augment and the trabecular metal cup-cage construct in revision hip arthroplasty for severe acetabular bone loss and pelvic discontinuity. Hip Int. 2010;20(Suppl 7):S119–27.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rogers BA, et al. The reconstruction of Periprosthetic pelvic discontinuity. J Arthroplast. 2012;27(8):1499–1506.e1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ballester Alfaro JJ, Sueiro FJ. Trabecular Metal buttress augment and the Trabecular Metal cup-cage construct in revision hip arthroplasty for severe acetabular bone loss and pelvic discontinuity. Hip Int. 2010;20(Suppl. 7):119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goodman S, Sastamoinen H, Shasha N, Gross A. Complications of ilio-ischial reconstruction rings in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2004;19:436–46.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Taunton MJ, Fehring TK, Edwards P, Bernasek T, Holt GE, Christie MJ. Pelvic discontinuity treated with custom triflange component: a reliable option. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:428.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Flecher X, Paprosky W, Grillo JC, Aubaniac JM, Argenson JN. Do tantalum components provide adequate primary fixation in all acetabular revisions? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2010;96(3):235–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sporer SM, Bottros JJ, Hulst JB, Kancherla VK, Moric M, Paprosky WG. Acetabular distraction: an alternative for severe defects with chronic pelvic discontinuity? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2012;470:3156–63.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eustathios Kenanidis
    • 1
  • Eleftherios Tsiridis
    • 2
  • Alan J. Highcock
    • 3
  • Allan E. Gross
    • 4
  • Xavier Flecher
    • 5
    • 6
  • Cameron K. Ledford
    • 7
  • Joseph M. Statz
    • 7
  • Robert T. Trousdale
    • 7
  1. 1.Academic Orthopaedic UnitAristotle University Medical SchoolThessalonikiGreece
  2. 2.Academic Orthopaedic UnitPapageorgiou General Hospital, Aristotle University Medical SchoolThessalonikiGreece
  3. 3.Wirral University Teaching HospitalWirralUK
  4. 4.Division of Orthopaedic SurgeryMount Sinai Hospital, University of TorontoTorontoCanada
  5. 5.Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology Unit, Hospital NordMarseilleFrance
  6. 6.Aix Marseille Univ, APHM, CNRS, ISM, Sainte-Marguerite Hospital, Institute for LocomotionMarseilleFrance
  7. 7.Mayo ClinicRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations