Aims. We compared the clinical outcomes of curved intertrochanteric varus osteotomy (CVO) with bone impaction grafting (BIG) with CVO alone for the treatment of osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH). Methods. This retrospective comparative study included 81 patients with ONFH; 37 patients (40 hips) underwent CVO with BIG (BIG group) and 44 patients (47 hips) underwent CVO alone (CVO group). Patients in the BIG group were followed-up for a mean of 12.2 years (10.0 to 16.5). Patients in the CVO group were followed-up for a mean of 14.5 years (10.0 to 21.0). Assessment parameters included the Harris Hip Score (HHS), Oxford Hip Score (OHS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Hip-Disease Evaluation Questionnaire (JHEQ), complication rates, and survival rates, with conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA) and radiological failure as the endpoints. Results. There were no significant differences in preoperative and postoperative HHS or postoperative OHS and JHEQ between the BIG group and the CVO group. Complication rates were comparable between groups. Ten-year survival rates with conversion to THA and radiological failure as the endpoints were not significantly different between groups. Successful CVO (postoperative coverage ratio of more than one-third) exhibited better ten-year survival rates with radiological failure as the endpoint in the BIG group (91.4%) than in the CVO group (77.7%), but this difference was not significant (p = 0.079). Conclusion. Long-term outcomes of CVO with BIG were favourable when proper patient selection and accurate surgery are performed. However, this study did not show improvements in treatment results with the concomitant use of BIG. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):665–671

Aims. Osseointegrated prosthetic limbs allow better mobility than socket-mounted prosthetics for lower limb amputees. Fractures, however, can occur in the residual limb, but they have rarely been reported. Approximately 2% to 3% of amputees with socket-mounted prostheses may fracture within five years. This is the first study which directly addresses the risks and management of periprosthetic osseointegration fractures in amputees. Methods. A retrospective review identified 518 osseointegration procedures which were undertaken in 458 patients between 2010 and 2018 for whom complete medical records were available. Potential risk factors including time since amputation, age at osseointegration, bone density, weight, uni/bilateral implantation and sex were evaluated with multiple logistic regression. The mechanism of injury, technique and implant that was used for fixation of the fracture, pre-osseointegration and post fracture mobility (assessed using the K-level) and the time that the prosthesis was worn for in hours/day were also assessed. Results. There were 22 periprosthetic fractures; they occurred exclusively in the femur: two in the femoral neck, 14 intertrochanteric and six subtrochanteric, representing 4.2% of 518 osseointegration operations and 6.3% of 347 femoral implants. The vast majority (19/22, 86.4%) occurred within 2 cm of the proximal tip of the implant and after a fall. No fractures occurred spontaneously. Fixation most commonly involved dynamic hip screws (10) and reconstruction plates (9). No osseointegration implants required removal, the K-level was not reduced after fixation of the fracture in any patient, and all retained a K-level of ≥ 2. All fractures united, 21 out of 22 patients (95.5%) wear their osseointegration-mounted prosthetic limb longer daily than when using a socket, with 18 out of 22 (81.8%) reporting using it for ≥ 16 hours daily. Regression analysis identified a 3.89-fold increased risk of fracture for females (p = 0.007) and a 1.02-fold increased risk of fracture per kg above a mean of 80.4 kg (p = 0.046). No increased risk was identified for bilateral implants (p = 0.083), time from amputation to osseointegration (p = 0.974), age at osseointegration (p = 0.331), or bone density (g/cm2, p = 0.560; T-score, p = 0.247; Z-score, p = 0.312). Conclusion. The risks and sequelae of periprosthetic fracture after press-fit osseointegration for amputation should not deter patients or clinicians from considering this procedure. Females and heavier patients are likely to have an increased risk of fracture. Age, years since amputation, and bone density do not appear influential. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(2):162–169

Aims

This study aimed to identify risk factors (patient, healthcare system, and socioeconomic) for mortality after hip fractures and estimate their relative importance. Further, we aimed to elucidate mortality and survival patterns following fractures and the duration of excess mortality.

Aims

We assessed the value of the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) in the prediction of adverse outcome after hip fracture.

Aims

The aim of this study to compare 30-day survival and recovery of mobility between patients mobilized early (on the day of, or day after surgery for a hip fracture) and patients mobilized late (two days or more after surgery), and to determine whether the presence of dementia influences the association between the timing of mobilization, 30-day survival, and recovery.