Do trabecular metal cups achieve better results when compared to hemispherical porous titanium cups in acetabular revision surgery?

Abstract

Background:

Trabecular metal (TM) cups were introduced in order to achieve better ingrowth and stability of the cup in acetabular revision surgery. As their use has evolved over time, we have queried whether TM cups would improve results in terms of the rate of aseptic loosening when compared to historical uncemented porous titanium cups used in revision surgery for acetabular bone loss in Hospital La Paz (Madrid, Spain).

Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed 197 acetabular revisions performed between 1991 and 2015. Titanium cups were used in 81 cases and TM cups in 116. The mean follow-up was 8.1 years (range 1–15); 12.0 ± 7.8 for titanium group and 5.4 ± 3.1 for TM group. The most common reason for revision was aseptic loosening. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine the survival of the cup, with radiological failure and re-revision due to aseptic loosening as the endpoints. Cox multivariate regression analyses were performed to assess different risk factors for failure.

Results:

1 TM cup and 1 titanium cup were re-revised due to aseptic loosening (p = 0.61). Radiological cup loosening was observed in 4 TM cups and 2 titanium cups (p = 1.0). At 6 years, the probability of not having radiological cup loosening was 97.4% (95% CI, 93.9–100) for the titanium cups and 95.1% for the TM cups (95% CI, 90.1–99.9) (p = 0.59). Another 5 cups were re-revised due to dislocation. Hips with a greater Paprosky defect showed a higher risk of loosening (p < 0.05, hazard risk (HR) 3.04; 95% CI, 0.97–9.54).

Conclusions:

This study shows there was no significant difference in re-revision due to aseptic loosening or radiological loosening between titanium and TM cups in revision surgery for acetabular bone loss. Both types of cups demonstrate excellent results with a low failure rate and minimal complications.