High Failure Rate of Modular Exchange With a Specific Design of a Constrained Liner in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Brian P. Chalmers, Diren Arsoy, Rafael J. Sierra, David G. Lewallen, Robert T. Trousdale

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Addressing recurrent instability in patients with poor bone stock and inadequate abductor tensioning remains a challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty. One treatment method is implantation of a constrained liner. The purpose of this study was to determine clinical outcomes, redislocation rate, and revisions of a focally constrained liner in a high-risk patient cohort. Methods: Fifty-eight hips between 2008 and 2011 underwent implantation of a focally constrained liner. Nineteen were placed concurrent with acetabular component revision and 39 were placed into a well-fixed acetabular shell. Mean age was 69 years and mean number of previous ipsilateral hip surgeries was 4.2. At mean follow-up of 3.5 years, we analyzed clinical outcomes, redislocation, and revisions. Results: Mean Harris Hip Scores was 74. Fourteen hips (24%) were revised and 3 hips (5%) required reoperation at final follow-up. Eleven hips (19%) redislocated at a mean time to dislocation of 12.2 months; 31% (11 of 36 patients) that underwent modular exchange specifically for instability redislocated. Risk factors for redislocation included number of previous surgeries (P = .013), implantation of a 28 mm femoral head (hazards ratio 12.8), revision indication of instability (P = .04), and modular exchange with constrained liner implantation without acetabular shell revision (P = .01). Conclusion: Implantation of a focally constrained liner in revision total hip arthroplasty for recurrent instability has a high failure rate, especially with a modular exchange. Although concurrent acetabular revision had a lower redislocation rate, the decision to revise a well-fixed cup should be weighed with potential complications associated with cup revision.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalJournal of Arthroplasty
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Dec 9 2015

Fingerprint

Arthroplasty
Hip
Thigh
Reoperation
Bone and Bones

Keywords

  • Cemented liner
  • Constrained liner
  • Dislocation
  • Instability
  • Modular exchange
  • Revision total hip arthroplasty

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cite this

High Failure Rate of Modular Exchange With a Specific Design of a Constrained Liner in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty. / Chalmers, Brian P.; Arsoy, Diren; Sierra, Rafael J.; Lewallen, David G.; Trousdale, Robert T.

In: Journal of Arthroplasty, 09.12.2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{0fba0015c232400e9b6c8decfb01dfb8,
title = "High Failure Rate of Modular Exchange With a Specific Design of a Constrained Liner in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty",
abstract = "Background: Addressing recurrent instability in patients with poor bone stock and inadequate abductor tensioning remains a challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty. One treatment method is implantation of a constrained liner. The purpose of this study was to determine clinical outcomes, redislocation rate, and revisions of a focally constrained liner in a high-risk patient cohort. Methods: Fifty-eight hips between 2008 and 2011 underwent implantation of a focally constrained liner. Nineteen were placed concurrent with acetabular component revision and 39 were placed into a well-fixed acetabular shell. Mean age was 69 years and mean number of previous ipsilateral hip surgeries was 4.2. At mean follow-up of 3.5 years, we analyzed clinical outcomes, redislocation, and revisions. Results: Mean Harris Hip Scores was 74. Fourteen hips (24{\%}) were revised and 3 hips (5{\%}) required reoperation at final follow-up. Eleven hips (19{\%}) redislocated at a mean time to dislocation of 12.2 months; 31{\%} (11 of 36 patients) that underwent modular exchange specifically for instability redislocated. Risk factors for redislocation included number of previous surgeries (P = .013), implantation of a 28 mm femoral head (hazards ratio 12.8), revision indication of instability (P = .04), and modular exchange with constrained liner implantation without acetabular shell revision (P = .01). Conclusion: Implantation of a focally constrained liner in revision total hip arthroplasty for recurrent instability has a high failure rate, especially with a modular exchange. Although concurrent acetabular revision had a lower redislocation rate, the decision to revise a well-fixed cup should be weighed with potential complications associated with cup revision.",
keywords = "Cemented liner, Constrained liner, Dislocation, Instability, Modular exchange, Revision total hip arthroplasty",
author = "Chalmers, {Brian P.} and Diren Arsoy and Sierra, {Rafael J.} and Lewallen, {David G.} and Trousdale, {Robert T.}",
year = "2015",
month = "12",
day = "9",
doi = "10.1016/j.arth.2016.02.021",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Journal of Arthroplasty",
issn = "0883-5403",
publisher = "Churchill Livingstone",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - High Failure Rate of Modular Exchange With a Specific Design of a Constrained Liner in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

AU - Chalmers, Brian P.

AU - Arsoy, Diren

AU - Sierra, Rafael J.

AU - Lewallen, David G.

AU - Trousdale, Robert T.

PY - 2015/12/9

Y1 - 2015/12/9

N2 - Background: Addressing recurrent instability in patients with poor bone stock and inadequate abductor tensioning remains a challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty. One treatment method is implantation of a constrained liner. The purpose of this study was to determine clinical outcomes, redislocation rate, and revisions of a focally constrained liner in a high-risk patient cohort. Methods: Fifty-eight hips between 2008 and 2011 underwent implantation of a focally constrained liner. Nineteen were placed concurrent with acetabular component revision and 39 were placed into a well-fixed acetabular shell. Mean age was 69 years and mean number of previous ipsilateral hip surgeries was 4.2. At mean follow-up of 3.5 years, we analyzed clinical outcomes, redislocation, and revisions. Results: Mean Harris Hip Scores was 74. Fourteen hips (24%) were revised and 3 hips (5%) required reoperation at final follow-up. Eleven hips (19%) redislocated at a mean time to dislocation of 12.2 months; 31% (11 of 36 patients) that underwent modular exchange specifically for instability redislocated. Risk factors for redislocation included number of previous surgeries (P = .013), implantation of a 28 mm femoral head (hazards ratio 12.8), revision indication of instability (P = .04), and modular exchange with constrained liner implantation without acetabular shell revision (P = .01). Conclusion: Implantation of a focally constrained liner in revision total hip arthroplasty for recurrent instability has a high failure rate, especially with a modular exchange. Although concurrent acetabular revision had a lower redislocation rate, the decision to revise a well-fixed cup should be weighed with potential complications associated with cup revision.

AB - Background: Addressing recurrent instability in patients with poor bone stock and inadequate abductor tensioning remains a challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty. One treatment method is implantation of a constrained liner. The purpose of this study was to determine clinical outcomes, redislocation rate, and revisions of a focally constrained liner in a high-risk patient cohort. Methods: Fifty-eight hips between 2008 and 2011 underwent implantation of a focally constrained liner. Nineteen were placed concurrent with acetabular component revision and 39 were placed into a well-fixed acetabular shell. Mean age was 69 years and mean number of previous ipsilateral hip surgeries was 4.2. At mean follow-up of 3.5 years, we analyzed clinical outcomes, redislocation, and revisions. Results: Mean Harris Hip Scores was 74. Fourteen hips (24%) were revised and 3 hips (5%) required reoperation at final follow-up. Eleven hips (19%) redislocated at a mean time to dislocation of 12.2 months; 31% (11 of 36 patients) that underwent modular exchange specifically for instability redislocated. Risk factors for redislocation included number of previous surgeries (P = .013), implantation of a 28 mm femoral head (hazards ratio 12.8), revision indication of instability (P = .04), and modular exchange with constrained liner implantation without acetabular shell revision (P = .01). Conclusion: Implantation of a focally constrained liner in revision total hip arthroplasty for recurrent instability has a high failure rate, especially with a modular exchange. Although concurrent acetabular revision had a lower redislocation rate, the decision to revise a well-fixed cup should be weighed with potential complications associated with cup revision.

KW - Cemented liner

KW - Constrained liner

KW - Dislocation

KW - Instability

KW - Modular exchange

KW - Revision total hip arthroplasty

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84960384877&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84960384877&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.arth.2016.02.021

DO - 10.1016/j.arth.2016.02.021

M3 - Article

JO - Journal of Arthroplasty

JF - Journal of Arthroplasty

SN - 0883-5403

ER -