{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,30]],"date-time":"2026-10-30T13:10:19Z","timestamp":1793365819656,"version":"4.5.0"},"reference-count":34,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"4","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,24]],"date-time":"2021-05-24T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1621814400000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,24]],"date-time":"2021-05-24T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1621814400000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100004434","name":"Universit\u00e0 degli Studi di Firenze","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100004434","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Arch Orthop Trauma Surg"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2022,4]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Introduction<\/jats:title><jats:p>Burch\u2013Schneider-like antiprotrusio cages (B-SlAC) still remain helpful implants to bridge severe periacetabular bone losses. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes and estimate both cages\u2019 failures and complication risks in a series of B-SlAC implanted in revision of failed total hip arthroplasties (THA) or after resection of periacetabular primary or secondary bone malignancies. Risk factors enhancing the chance of dislocations and infections were checked.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Materials and methods<\/jats:title><jats:p>We evaluated 73 patients who received a B-SlAC from January 2008 to January 2018. Group A, 40 oncological cases (22 primary tumors; 18 metastases); Group B, 33 failed THAs. We compared both Kaplan\u2013Meier estimates of risk of failure and complication with the cumulative incidence function, taking account the competing risk of death. Cox proportional hazards model was utilized to identify possible predictors of instability and infection. Harris hip score HHS was used to record clinical outcomes.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results<\/jats:title><jats:p>Medium follow-up was 80 months (24\u2013137). Average final HHS was 61 (28\u201392), with no differences within the two groups (<jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009&gt;\u20090.05). The probabilities of failure and complications were 57% and 26%, respectively, lower in the oncologic group than in the rTHA group (<jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=0\u2009.176; risk 0.43) (<jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.52; risk 0.74). Extended ileo-femoral approach and proximal femur replacement (<jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=0.02, risk ratio\u2009=\u20093.2;<jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.04, rr\u2009=\u20092.1) were two significant independent predictors for dislocations, while belonging to group B (<jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.04, rr\u2009=\u20092.6) was predictable for infections.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title><jats:p>Burch\u2013Schneider-like antiprotrusio cages are a classical non-biological acetabular reconstruction method that surgeons should bear in mind when facing gross periacetabular bone losses, independently of their cause. However, dislocation and infection rates are high. Whenever possible, we suggest preserving the proximal femur in revision THA, and to use a less-invasive postero-lateral approach to reduce dislocation rates in non-oncologic cases.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s00402-021-03929-6","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,24]],"date-time":"2021-05-24T11:03:07Z","timestamp":1621854187000},"page":"681-690","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":9,"title":["The use of a non-biological, bridging, antiprotrusio cage in complex revision hip arthroplasty and periacetabular reconstructive oncologic surgery. Is still today a valid option?: A mid\/long-term survival and complications\u2019 analysis"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"142","author":[{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0001-9604-2042","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Matteo","family":"Innocenti","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Francesco","family":"Muratori","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Giacomo","family":"Mazzei","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Davide","family":"Guido","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Filippo","family":"Frenos","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Ersilia","family":"Lucenteforte","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Rodolfo","family":"Capanna","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Domenico Andrea","family":"Campanacci","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,24]]},"reference":[{"key":"3929_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"22","DOI":"10.1302\/0301-620X.100B1.BJJ-2017-0548.R1","volume":"100-B","author":"TS Brown","year":"2018","unstructured":"Brown TS, Salib CG, Rose PS et al (2018) Reconstruction of the hip after resection of periacetabular oncological lesions: a systematic review. Bone Jt J 100-B:22\u201330","journal-title":"Bone Jt J"},{"key":"3929_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"128","DOI":"10.5435\/JAAOS-21-03-128","volume":"21","author":"NP Sheth","year":"2013","unstructured":"Sheth NP, Nelson CL, Springer BD et al (2013) Acetabular bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty: evaluation and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 21:128\u2013139","journal-title":"J Am Acad Orthop Surg"},{"key":"3929_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/01.blo.0000180048.43208.2f","author":"GP Beadel","year":"2005","unstructured":"Beadel GP, McLaughlin CE, Wunder JS et al (2005) Outcome in two groups of patients with allograft-prosthetic reconstruction of pelvic tumor defects. Clin Orthop Relat Res. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/01.blo.0000180048.43208.2f","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"key":"3929_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Fryhofer G, Ramesh S, Sheth N (2019) Acetabular reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Clin Orthop Trauma 11. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jcot.2019.11.004","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcot.2019.11.004"},{"key":"3929_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"183","DOI":"10.1097\/01.blo.0000096814.78689.77","volume":"417","author":"SC Gamradt","year":"2003","unstructured":"Gamradt SC, Lieberman JR (2003) Bone graft for revision hip arthroplasty: biology and future applications. Clin Orthop Relat Res 417:183\u2013194","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"key":"3929_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.5371\/hp.2016.28.1.1","volume":"28","author":"W Shon","year":"2016","unstructured":"Shon W, Santhanam S, Choi J (2016) Acetabular reconstruction in total hip arthroplasty. Hip Pelvis 28:1. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.5371\/hp.2016.28.1.1","journal-title":"Hip Pelvis"},{"key":"3929_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2511","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arth.2019.05.032","volume":"34","author":"I De Martino","year":"2019","unstructured":"De Martino I, Strigelli V, Cacciola G et al (2019) Survivorship and clinical outcomes of custom triflange acetabular components in revision total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Arthroplasty 34:2511\u20132518","journal-title":"J Arthroplasty"},{"key":"3929_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s00264-001-0322-4","author":"PE M\u00fcller","year":"2002","unstructured":"M\u00fcller PE, D\u00fcrr HR, Wegener B et al (2002) Internal hemipelvectomy and reconstruction with a megaprosthesis. Int Orthop. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00264-001-0322-4","journal-title":"Int Orthop"},{"key":"3929_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s00064-012-0161-z","author":"M Rudert","year":"2012","unstructured":"Rudert M, Holzapfel BM, Pilge H et al (2012) Partial pelvic resection (internal hemipelvectomy) and endoprosthetic replacement in periacetabular tumors. Oper Orthop Traumatol. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00064-012-0161-z","journal-title":"Oper Orthop Traumatol"},{"key":"3929_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arth.2005.02.016","author":"H Pieringer","year":"2006","unstructured":"Pieringer H, Auersperg V, B\u00f6hler N (2006) Reconstruction of severe acetabular bone-deficiency. The Burch\u2013Schneider antiprotrusio cage in primary and revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.arth.2005.02.016","journal-title":"J Arthroplasty"},{"key":"3929_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1155\/2014\/194076","author":"D Regis","year":"2014","unstructured":"Regis D, Sandri A, Bonetti I (2014) Acetabular reconstruction with the Burch\u2013Schneider antiprotrusio cage and bulk allografts: minimum 10-year follow-up results. Biomed Res Int. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1155\/2014\/194076","journal-title":"Biomed Res Int"},{"key":"3929_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"2980","DOI":"10.1007\/s11999-010-1391-8","volume":"468","author":"M Clayer","year":"2010","unstructured":"Clayer M (2010) The survivorship of protrusio cages for metastatic disease involving the acetabulum. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:2980\u20132984","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"key":"3929_CR13","first-page":"1409","volume":"25","author":"D Li","year":"2011","unstructured":"Li D, Guo W, Yang R et al (2011) Utilization of reinforced acetabular cages with caudal flange in reconstructing pelvic defect after acetabular tumor resection. Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi 25:1409\u20131413","journal-title":"Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi"},{"key":"3929_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.kjms.2015.08.001","author":"CC Hsu","year":"2015","unstructured":"Hsu CC, Hsu CH, Yen SH, Wang JW (2015) Use of the Burch\u2013Schneider cage and structural allografts in complex acetabular deficiency: 3- to 10-year follow up. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.kjms.2015.08.001","journal-title":"Kaohsiung J Med Sci"},{"key":"3929_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2106\/00004623-197860060-00002","author":"WF Enneking","year":"1978","unstructured":"Enneking WF, Dunham WK (1978) Resection and reconstruction for primary neoplasms involving the innominate bone. J Bone Jt Surg Ser A. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2106\/00004623-197860060-00002","journal-title":"J Bone Jt Surg Ser A"},{"key":"3929_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/0883-5403(94)90135-X","author":"WG Paprosky","year":"1994","unstructured":"Paprosky WG, Perona PG, Lawrence JM (1994) Acetabular defect classification and surgical reconstruction in revision arthroplasty. A 6-year follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/0883-5403(94)90135-X","journal-title":"J Arthroplasty"},{"key":"3929_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jcot.2017.11.019","author":"P Kumar","year":"2019","unstructured":"Kumar P, Sen R, Aggarwal S et al (2019) Reliability of modified Harris hip score as a tool for outcome evaluation of total hip replacements in Indian population. J Clin Orthop Trauma. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.jcot.2017.11.019","journal-title":"J Clin Orthop Trauma"},{"key":"3929_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.2106\/00004623-199072020-00002","author":"RC Johnston","year":"1990","unstructured":"Johnston RC, Fitzgerald RH, Harris WH et al (1990) Clinical and radiographic evaluation of total hip replacement. A standard system of terminology for reporting results. J Bone Jt Surg Ser A. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2106\/00004623-199072020-00002","journal-title":"J Bone Jt Surg Ser A"},{"key":"3929_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/17453674.2010.524594","author":"MH Gillam","year":"2010","unstructured":"Gillam MH, Ryan P, Graves SE et al (2010) Competing risks survival analysis applied to data from the Australian orthopaedic association national joint replacement registry. Acta Orthop. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3109\/17453674.2010.524594","journal-title":"Acta Orthop"},{"key":"3929_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","unstructured":"Robert JG (1988) A class of K-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk. Ann Stat 16(3):1141\u20131154","DOI":"10.1214\/aos\/1176350951"},{"issue":"446","key":"3929_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"496","DOI":"10.1080\/01621459.1999.10474144","volume":"94","author":"JP Fine","year":"1999","unstructured":"Fine JP, Gray RJ (1999) A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk. J Amn Stat Assoc 94(446):496\u2013509. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/01621459.1999.10474144","journal-title":"J Amn Stat Assoc"},{"key":"3929_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00899.x","author":"DR Cox","year":"1972","unstructured":"Cox DR (1972) Regression models and life-tables. J R Stat Soc B. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/j.2517-6161.1972.tb00899.x","journal-title":"J R Stat Soc B"},{"key":"3929_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1302\/0301-620x.74b5.1527119","author":"DJ Berry","year":"1992","unstructured":"Berry DJ, Muller ME (1992) Revision arthroplasty using an anti-protrusio cage for massive acetabular bone deficiency. J Bone Jt Surg Ser B. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1302\/0301-620x.74b5.1527119","journal-title":"J Bone Jt Surg Ser B"},{"key":"3929_CR24","first-page":"24","volume":"90","author":"A Aprato","year":"2019","unstructured":"Aprato A, Olivero M, Vergano LB, Mass\u00e8 A (2019) Outcome of cages in revision arthroplasty of the acetabulum: a systematic review. Acta Biomed 90:24","journal-title":"Acta Biomed"},{"key":"3929_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/CORR.0000000000000725","author":"P Rowell","year":"2019","unstructured":"Rowell P, Lowe M, Sommerville S, Dickinson I (2019) Is an acetabular cage and cement fixation sufficiently durable for the treatment of destructive acetabular metastases? Clin Orthop Relat Res. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/CORR.0000000000000725","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"key":"3929_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1054\/arth.2001.27669","author":"P Udomkiat","year":"2001","unstructured":"Udomkiat P, Dorr LD, Won YY et al (2001) Technical factors for success with metal ring acetabular reconstruction. J Arthroplasty. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1054\/arth.2001.27669","journal-title":"J Arthroplasty"},{"key":"3929_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s00402-011-1351-0","author":"S Hoell","year":"2012","unstructured":"Hoell S, Dedy N, Gosheger G et al (2012) The Burch\u2013Schneider cage for reconstruction after metastatic destruction of the acetabulum: outcome and complications. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00402-011-1351-0","journal-title":"Arch Orthop Trauma Surg"},{"key":"3929_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0883-5403(05)80179-2","author":"CL Peters","year":"1995","unstructured":"Peters CL, Curtain M, Samuelson KM (1995) Acetabular revision with the Burch\u2013Schnieder antiprotrusio cage and cancellous allograft bone. J Arthroplasty. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/S0883-5403(05)80179-2","journal-title":"J Arthroplasty"},{"key":"3929_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1302\/0301-620X.80B6.8658","author":"TJ Gill","year":"1998","unstructured":"Gill TJ, Sledge JB, M\u00fcller ME (1998) The Burch\u2013Schneider anti-protrusio cage in revision total hip arthroplasty. Indications, principles and long-term results. J Bone Jt Surg Ser B. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1302\/0301-620X.80B6.8658","journal-title":"J Bone Jt Surg Ser B"},{"key":"3929_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arth.2011.11.019","author":"D Regis","year":"2012","unstructured":"Regis D, Sandri A, Bonetti I et al (2012) A minimum of 10-year follow-up of the Burch\u2013Schneider cage and bulk allografts for the revision of pelvic discontinuity. J Arthroplasty. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.arth.2011.11.019","journal-title":"J Arthroplasty"},{"key":"3929_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arth.2003.11.015","author":"S Goodman","year":"2004","unstructured":"Goodman S, Saastamoinen H, Shasha N, Gross A (2004) Complications of ilioischial reconstruction rings in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.arth.2003.11.015","journal-title":"J Arthroplasty"},{"key":"3929_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s12306-009-0019-1","author":"L Gaiani","year":"2009","unstructured":"Gaiani L, Bertelli R, Palmonari M, Vicenzi G (2009) Total hip arthroplasty revision in elderly people with cement and Burch\u2013Schneider anti-protrusio cage. Chir Organi Mov. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s12306-009-0019-1","journal-title":"Chir Organi Mov"},{"key":"3929_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/00003086-199002000-00036","author":"Y Yazawa","year":"1990","unstructured":"Yazawa Y, Frassica FJ, Chao EYS et al (1990) Metastatic bone disease: a study of the surgical treatment of 166 pathologic humeral and femoral fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/00003086-199002000-00036","journal-title":"Clin Orthop Relat Res"},{"key":"3929_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s00264-012-1677-4","author":"D Campanacci","year":"2012","unstructured":"Campanacci D, Chacon S, Mondanelli N et al (2012) Pelvic massive allograft reconstruction after bone tumour resection. Int Orthop. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00264-012-1677-4","journal-title":"Int Orthop"}],"container-title":["Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00402-021-03929-6.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s00402-021-03929-6\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s00402-021-03929-6.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2022,12,28]],"date-time":"2022-12-28T10:26:57Z","timestamp":1672223217000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s00402-021-03929-6"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,24]]},"references-count":34,"journal-issue":{"issue":"4","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2022,4]]}},"alternative-id":["3929"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s00402-021-03929-6","relation":{},"ISSN":["0936-8051","1434-3916"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0936-8051","type":"print"},{"value":"1434-3916","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,5,24]]},"assertion":[{"value":"20 September 2020","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"30 April 2021","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"24 May 2021","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"The authors declare that they have no competing interests. The authors have no conflicts of interest.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Conflict of interest"}},{"value":"All patients accepted the proposed treatment and follow-up after an adequate information and written consent. The study and follow-up, respecting the criteria of the Declaration of Helsinki, have been approved by Institutional Review Board of Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Careggi (AOUC) Department of Surgery and Translational Medicine. The Institutional Review Board accepted the proposal of the study, and all selected patients were properly informed before surgery about the treatment and follow-up visits after discharge.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethical approval"}}]}}