Powered Versus Manual Acetabular Component Extraction in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background: Revision total hip arthroplasty (R-THA) often requires removal of well-fixed acetabular components, where minimizing bone loss and operative time are critical. While manual extraction tools have been the traditional approach, powered systems device may improve efficiency, yet comparative clinical data remain limited. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 98 R-THAs (32 powered, 66 manual) from an institutional database (2021-2024). Patient demographics, operative characteristics, extraction times, and healthcare utilization outcomes (length of stay [LOS], discharge disposition, 90-day readmission, 90-day complications, and 1-year reoperations) were analyzed using nonparametric and categorical statistical tests. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar across groups. Cup sizes removed and reimplanted were largely comparable between groups, indicating minimal differences in bone preservation. Time to cup removal was significantly shorter with the powered device, with 82% completed in ≤10 minutes and none exceeding 20 minutes, compared with the manual group where 58% required 5 to 10 minutes, 33% required 10 to 20 minutes, and 8% exceeded 20 minutes (p < 0.001). Healthcare utilization metrics, including LOS ≥3 days (50.0% vs. 56.4%, p = 1.000), nonhome discharge (25.0% vs. 18.2%, p = 0.572), 90-day readmission (21.9% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.054), 1-year reoperation (6.3% vs. 7.6%, p = 1.000), and 90-day complications (21.9% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.457), did not differ significantly. Conclusion: The use of the powered acetabular extraction system was associated with significantly reduced extraction times compared with a manual extraction device in R-THA. One-year reoperation rates were comparable, as were complication/readmission rates and replacement cup sizes. These findings highlight the efficiency benefits of powered explantation as well as its safety. Level of evidence: Level III (Retrospective comparative cohort study). See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JBJS Open Access
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.oa.26.00049
Primary Topic
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Powered Versus Manual Acetabular Component Extraction in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Matthew J. Hadad, Dimitri Mabarak, Brian Benyamini, Shujaa T. Khan et al.
JBJS Open Access
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
article

Powered Versus Manual Acetabular Component Extraction in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Matthew J. Hadad, Dimitri Mabarak, Brian Benyamini, Shujaa T. Khan, Matthew E. Deren, Shlok V. Patel, Nicolas S. Piuzzi, Khaled A. Elmenawi
article en

Abstract

Background: Revision total hip arthroplasty (R-THA) often requires removal of well-fixed acetabular components, where minimizing bone loss and operative time are critical. While manual extraction tools have been the traditional approach, powered systems device may improve efficiency, yet comparative clinical data remain limited. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 98 R-THAs (32 powered, 66 manual) from an institutional database (2021-2024). Patient demographics, operative characteristics, extraction times, and healthcare utilization outcomes (length of stay [LOS], discharge disposition, 90-day readmission, 90-day complications, and 1-year reoperations) were analyzed using nonparametric and categorical statistical tests. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar across groups. Cup sizes removed and reimplanted were largely comparable between groups, indicating minimal differences in bone preservation. Time to cup removal was significantly shorter with the powered device, with 82% completed in ≤10 minutes and none exceeding 20 minutes, compared with the manual group where 58% required 5 to 10 minutes, 33% required 10 to 20 minutes, and 8% exceeded 20 minutes (p < 0.001). Healthcare utilization metrics, including LOS ≥3 days (50.0% vs. 56.4%, p = 1.000), nonhome discharge (25.0% vs. 18.2%, p = 0.572), 90-day readmission (21.9% vs. 7.6%, p = 0.054), 1-year reoperation (6.3% vs. 7.6%, p = 1.000), and 90-day complications (21.9% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.457), did not differ significantly. Conclusion: The use of the powered acetabular extraction system was associated with significantly reduced extraction times compared with a manual extraction device in R-THA. One-year reoperation rates were comparable, as were complication/readmission rates and replacement cup sizes. These findings highlight the efficiency benefits of powered explantation as well as its safety. Level of evidence: Level III (Retrospective comparative cohort study). See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

JBJS Open AccessVol. 11(2)
Cleveland Clinic (US)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 33%
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.