Primary or Revision Arthroplasty with an Integrated Acetabular Cup-MUTARS RS Cup System

Overview

Journal Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg

Specialties Critical Care
Emergency Medicine

Date 2022 Mar 31

PMID 35357517

Authors

Maren Janko

Rene Verboket

Maria Genari

Johannes Frank

Ingo Marzi

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this article is to show a new concept of indication and application of the MUTARS RS Cup System in primary and revision hip arthroplasty. This integrated system is applicable for different acetabular cup replacements in patients with acetabular fractures or instable defects, as well as periprosthetic acetabular fractures. The MUTARS RS Cup System is a cementless revision cup for insertion into the acetabulum with an integrated polyethylene cup, which fits to a regular or bipolar head. This system replaces the conventional approach for acetabular revision with a Burch-Schneider ring, in which a normal polyethylene cup is cemented. This interface with its complications is avoided with this system of a titanium revision cup with integrated polyethylene cup. Steps of preoperative planning and the intraoperative implementation will be highlighted in this article.

Material And Methods: This system was applied in 49 patients with 52 MUTARS RS Cup Implantations in 30 males, 22 females, with an average age of 76,1 years (36,9-94,4 years).

Results And Discussion: The system shows a good operative feasibility, as well as a reliable handling and safe method for stable treatment of non-reconstructable acetabular fractures or acetabular incongruencies and instabilities.

Citing Articles

Acetabular fractures treatment needs in the elderly and nonagenarians.

Riemenschneider J, Vollrath J, Muhlenfeld N, Frank J, Marzi I, Janko M EFORT Open Rev. 2022; 7(6):433-445.

PMID: 35638609 PMC: 9257737. DOI: 10.1530/EOR-22-0019.

References

Choplin R, Henley C, Edds E, Capello W, Rankin J, Buckwalter K . Total hip arthroplasty in patients with bone deficiency of the acetabulum. Radiographics. 2008; 28(3):771-86. DOI: 10.1148/rg.283075085. View

Sporer S, Paprosky W . Acetabular revision using a trabecular metal acetabular component for severe acetabular bone loss associated with a pelvic discontinuity. J Arthroplasty. 2006; 21(6 Suppl 2):87-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.015. View

Paprosky W, Perona P, Lawrence J . Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 1994; 9(1):33-44. DOI: 10.1016/0883-5403(94)90135-x. View

Telleria J, Gee A . Classifications in brief: Paprosky classification of acetabular bone loss. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471(11):3725-30. PMC: 3792247. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-3264-4. View

Morison Z, Moojen D, Nauth A, Hall J, McKee M, Waddell J . Total Hip Arthroplasty After Acetabular Fracture Is Associated With Lower Survivorship and More Complications. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015; 474(2):392-8. PMC: 4709316. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-015-4509-1. View

Ahmad A, Schwarzkopf R . Clinical evaluation and surgical options in acetabular reconstruction: A literature review. J Orthop. 2016; 12(Suppl 2):S238-43. PMC: 4796576. DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2015.10.011. View

Ochs B, Marintschev I, Hoyer H, Rolauffs B, Culemann U, Pohlemann T . Changes in the treatment of acetabular fractures over 15 years: Analysis of 1266 cases treated by the German Pelvic Multicentre Study Group (DAO/DGU). Injury. 2010; 41(8):839-51. DOI: 10.1016/j.injury.2010.04.010. View

Munegato D, Bigoni M, Sotiri R, Bruschetta A, Omeljaniuk R, Turati M . Clinical and radiological outcomes of acetabular revision with the Delta Revision TT cup. Hip Int. 2019; 28(2_suppl):54-60. DOI: 10.1177/1120700018813224. View

Gary J, Paryavi E, Gibbons S, Weaver M, Morgan J, Ryan S . Effect of surgical treatment on mortality after acetabular fracture in the elderly: a multicenter study of 454 patients. J Orthop Trauma. 2014; 29(4):202-8. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000223. View

10.

Hayes P, Carroll C, Roberts C, Seligson D, Lau E, Kurtz S . Operative treatment of acetabular fractures in the Medicare population. Orthopedics. 2013; 36(8):e1065-70. DOI: 10.3928/01477447-20130724-25. View

11.

Sporer S, Paprosky W . The use of a trabecular metal acetabular component and trabecular metal augment for severe acetabular defects. J Arthroplasty. 2006; 21(6 Suppl 2):83-6. DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2006.05.008. View

12.

Mears D . Surgical treatment of acetabular fractures in elderly patients with osteoporotic bone. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1999; 7(2):128-41. DOI: 10.5435/00124635-199903000-00006. View

13.

Enocson A, Blomfeldt R . Acetabular fractures in the elderly treated with a primary Burch-Schneider reinforcement ring, autologous bone graft, and a total hip arthroplasty: a prospective study with a 4-year follow-up. J Orthop Trauma. 2013; 28(6):330-7. DOI: 10.1097/BOT.0000000000000016. View

14.

Gaiani L, Bertelli R, Palmonari M, Vicenzi G . Total hip arthroplasty revision in elderly people with cement and Burch-Schneider anti-protrusio cage. Chir Organi Mov. 2009; 93(1):15-9. DOI: 10.1007/s12306-009-0019-1. View

15.

Yu R, Hofstaetter J, Sullivan T, Costi K, Howie D, Solomon L . Validity and reliability of the Paprosky acetabular defect classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013; 471(7):2259-65. PMC: 3676616. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-013-2844-7. View

16.

Fink B . [Tripolar cups]. Z Orthop Unfall. 2015; 153(2):187-91. DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1545682. View

17.

Torres-Campos A, Albareda Albareda J, Seral Garcia B, Blanco Rubio N, Gomez Vallejo J, Herrando L . Burch-Schneider ring associated with morselized bone allografts, survival and clinical outcomes after acetabular revision surgery. Rev Esp Cir Ortop Traumatol (Engl Ed). 2018; 62(6):428-435. DOI: 10.1016/j.recot.2018.02.009. View

18.

Weeden S, Paprosky W . Porous-ingrowth revision acetabular implants secured with peripheral screws. A minimum twelve-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006; 88(6):1266-71. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.E.00540. View