Porous Metal Augments Have Comparable Outcomes to Other Constructs for Severe Acetabular Bone Loss at Mid-Term Follow-up

Abstract

BackgroundAcetabular reconstruction options in the setting of severe bone loss remain limited, with few comparative studies published to date. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for severe bone loss using porous metal augments to cup cage and triflange prostheses. MethodsWe reviewed a consecutive series of 180 patients who had Paprosky 3A or 3B acetabular defects and underwent revision THA. Patients treated with porous augments (n = 141) were compared with those who received cup cages or triflange constructs (n = 39). Failure of the acetabular construct was defined as undergoing acetabular revision surgery or radiographic evidence of loosening. ResultsThere was no difference in acetabular component survivorship in patients undergoing revision THA with porous augments or a cage or triflange prosthesis (92.2 versus 87.2%, P = .470) at a mean follow-up of 6.6 ± 3.4 years. Overall, survivorship free from any revision surgery was comparable between the 2 groups (78.7 versus 79.5%, P = .720). There was also no difference in dislocation (5.7 versus 10.3%, P = .309) or periprosthetic joint infection rates (7.8 versus 10.3%, P = .623). In a subgroup analysis of patients who had pelvic discontinuity (n = 47), survivorship free from any revision surgery was comparable between the 2 groups (79.5 versus 72.2%, P = .543). ConclusionsPorous metal augments in the setting of severe acetabular bone loss demonstrated excellent survivorship at intermediate-term (mean 6.6 years follow-up, even in cases of pelvic discontinuity, with comparable outcomes to cup cages and triflanges. Instability and infection remain major causes of failure in this patient population, and long-term follow-up is needed.