Revision Total Hip Replacement for Recurrent Instability
Surgical technique guide for Revision Total Hip Replacement for Recurrent Instability - FRCS exam preparation
Reviewed by OrthoVellum Editorial Team
Editorial maintenance, source checking, and correction workflow • Published by OrthoVellum Medical Education Team
Utilise the previous surgical approach where possible to minimise soft-tissue trauma. The posterior approach is the most common worldwide and carries the highest baseline dislocation risk. Extended exposure is often needed for component assessment and reconstruction. | advanced
Critical Danger Structures
Danger 1: Sciatic Nerve
Location: Exits pelvis through greater sciatic notch inferior to piriformis, runs 2cm posterior to posterior capsule and short external rotators, courses along posterior aspect of hip joint descending toward posterior thigh. Protection: Early identification and vessel loop placement, gentle retraction, avoid excessive leg lengthening (>2cm increases palsy risk exponentially), minimize traction time. Revision for dislocation has highest sciatic nerve palsy risk (2-7%) of all hip revisions due to scar tissue and exposure needs.
Danger 2: Superior Gluteal Neurovascular Bundle
Location: Exits pelvis above piriformis through greater sciatic notch, enters undersurface of gluteus medius 3-5cm superior to tip of greater trochanter, provides motor innervation to gluteus medius and minimus (hip abductors). Protection: Limit proximal dissection to less than 5cm above GT, avoid placing retractors in superior capsular region, identify and preserve if extended trochanteric osteotomy performed. Injury causes permanent Trendelenburg gait.
Danger 3: Femoral Neurovascular Bundle
Location: Lies anterior to hip joint capsule in femoral triangle - nerve most lateral, then femoral artery, then femoral vein (NAV from lateral to medial). Courses 2-3cm anterior to anterior hip capsule. Protection: Relevant if anterior approach used or anterior capsule released, avoid vigorous anterior retraction, identify and protect during acetabular exposure and screw placement (avoid anteroinferior quadrant screws). Rarely at risk in posterior approach but consider during trialing.
Danger 4: Obturator Neurovascular Bundle
Location: Exits pelvis through obturator foramen on medial wall of acetabulum, runs in obturator canal giving branches to hip adductors and medial thigh skin, lies 1-2cm medial to quadrilateral plate. Protection: Avoid medial acetabular wall perforation during reaming, avoid medial or anteroinferior screw placement, recognize quadrilateral plate as medial boundary during cup reaming. Injury causes adductor weakness and medial thigh numbness.
Danger 5: Posterior Acetabular Wall
Location: Posterior column and wall of acetabulum, often compromised in chronic posterior dislocators due to repeated trauma and stress. Typically thin and fragile in revision setting, especially posterosuperior quadrant. Protection: Gentle reaming with hand pressure, avoid power reaming posteriorly, assess wall integrity before and during cup insertion, consider protected weight bearing if wall deficient, use screws in safe posterosuperior zone for supplemental fixation. Fracture rate 1-2% in revision for instability.
DUALDUAL - Dual Mobility Cup Advantages
REVISIONREVISION - Systematic Assessment for Instability
Primary Indications
Absolute Indications:
- Recurrent dislocation (≥2 episodes) after primary THR despite closed reduction and rehabilitation
- Chronic instability affecting quality of life and activities of daily living
- Failed conservative management (bracing, activity modification, physiotherapy)
- Identifiable correctable cause (component malposition, soft tissue deficiency)
Relative Indications:
- Single dislocation with identifiable mechanical cause (malpositioned components)
- Persistent subluxation episodes causing pain and apprehension
- Patient request after single traumatic dislocation in context of high-risk activities
Contraindications:
- Active infection (must stage with explant and spacer first)
- Medical comorbidities precluding major revision surgery
- Severe abductor deficiency with no reconstruction option (consider expectant management)
- Neuromuscular disorder causing instability (Parkinson's, seizures) - surgery may not solve problem
- Patient non-compliance with post-operative precautions (relative contraindication)
Preoperative Assessment
History:
- Number of dislocations, direction (posterior 80%, anterior 15%, superior 5%)
- Provocative activities (bending, sitting low chairs, specific movements)
- Timing (early <6 weeks vs late >6 weeks post-primary)
- Previous closed reductions, attempts at conservative management
- Impact on quality of life, activities of daily living
Clinical Examination:
- Trendelenburg test (abductor integrity)
- Hip range of motion, stability testing
- Leg length assessment
- Neurovascular status (baseline documentation)
- Gait assessment
Imaging:
- AP pelvis: Measure cup inclination (normal 40-45°, >50° = superior escape, <35° = instability)
- Lateral hip or cross-table lateral: Assess anteversion (15-25° normal)
- CT with 3D reconstruction: ESSENTIAL for precise cup version measurement, stem version, impingement assessment
- Consider MRI: Abductor integrity, fatty infiltration, capsular deficiency
Laboratory Investigation:
- MANDATORY infection workup: ESR, CRP, joint aspiration
- Aspiration: Cell count (>3000 concerning), differential (>80% PMNs concerning), 14-day culture, alpha-defensin or synovial CRP/IL-6
- Cannot proceed without ruling out infection
Component Assessment:
- Cup position (in/out of Lewinnek safe zone)
- Cup type, liner wear pattern
- Stem version, offset restoration
- Head size (small heads <32mm higher risk)
- Impingement signs (eccentric wear)
Reconstruction Planning:
- Decision: Component repositioning alone? Dual mobility? Constrained liner?
- Soft tissue reconstruction needs (abductor repair, capsule reconstruction)
- Implant ordering (dual mobility system or constrained liner, backups)
Clinical Decision Scenarios
Use these scenarios to practise clinical reasoning and management decisions
"A 72-year-old woman presents with her 4th dislocation of a primary THR performed 2 years ago. All dislocations have been posterior with closed reduction. How do you assess and manage this patient?"
"What is the Lewinnek safe zone and why is it important in revision for instability? Compare dual mobility cup to constrained liner - indications, advantages, disadvantages, and outcomes."
"A revision for instability performed elsewhere 18 months ago with dual mobility cup now presents with re-dislocation. X-rays show cup inclination 55°, anteversion difficult to assess on plain films. How do you investigate and manage this failed revision?"
Revision Total Hip Replacement for Recurrent Instability - Exam Summary
Clinical summary
Key Evidence
What Safe Zone? The Vast Majority of Dislocated THAs Are Within the Lewinnek Safe Zone for Acetabular Component Position
Risk factors for dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty
Use of a dual mobility socket to manage total hip arthroplasty instability
Cementless dual-mobility cup in total hip arthroplasty revision
Dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of risk factors and treatment options
References
-
Alberton GM, High WA, Morrey BF. Dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of risk factors and treatment options. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84(10):1788-1792. PMID: 12377909
-
Guyen O, Pibarot V, Vaz G, Chevillotte C, Bejui-Hugues J. Use of a dual mobility socket to manage total hip arthroplasty instability. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(2):465-472. PMID: 18780135
-
Lewinnek GE, Lewis JL, Tarr R, Compere CL, Zimmerman JR. Dislocations after total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978;60(2):217-220. PMID: 641088
-
Philippot R, Adam P, Reckhaus M, et al. Prevention of dislocation in total hip revision surgery using a dual mobility design. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009;95(6):407-413. PMID: 19656750
-
Wetters NG, Murray TG, Moric M, Sporer SM, Paprosky WG, Della Valle CJ. Risk factors for dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(2):410-416. PMID: 22956236
-
Biedermann R, Tonin A, Krismer M, Rachbauer F, Eibl G, Stockl B. Reducing the risk of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty: the effect of orientation of the acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(6):762-769. PMID: 15911655
-
Springer BD, Fehring TK, Griffin WL, Odum SM, Masonis JL. Why revision total hip arthroplasty fails. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(1):166-173. PMID: 18975043
-
De Martino I, Triantafyllopoulos GK, Sculco PK, Sculco TP. Dual mobility cups in total hip arthroplasty. World J Orthop. 2014;5(3):180-187. PMID: 25035820
-
Prudhon JL, Steffann F, Ferreira A, Verdier R, Aslanian T, Caton J. Cementless dual-mobility cup in total hip arthroplasty revision. Int Orthop. 2014;38(12):2463-2468. PMID: 25078366
-
Abdel MP, von Roth P, Jennings MT, Hanssen AD, Pagnano MW. What safe zone? The vast majority of dislocated THAs are within the Lewinnek safe zone for acetabular component position. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2016;474(2):386-391. PMID: 26150264
-
Murray TG, Wetters NG, Moric M, Sporer SM, Paprosky WG, Della Valle CJ. The use of abduction bracing for the prevention of early postoperative dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(8 Suppl):126-129. PMID: 22608688
-
National joint replacement registries report converging evidence on dual mobility and instability revision - including the National Joint Registry (NJR, UK), the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR, US), the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), and the Swedish Arthroplasty Register (SHAR). Annual reports are published by each registry and document implant survival and revision-for-instability rates.