Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is being offered as a viable alternative to total hip arthroplasty (THA). For very young patients (under 30 years old), THA achieves fair results but with high revision and complication rates. This retrospective study was designed to evaluate the results of HRA performed in patients under 30 years old with a long follow-up. During the inclusion period (2007–2021), we collected in a single operator database, all HRA performed in patients under 30 with a minimum follow up of 2 years. 103 HRA in 93 patients (77 male / 16 females; a mean age at operation 27.7 years (18 to 29.9)) were included. The two mean preoperative diagnoses were osteoarthritis in 54 HRA (52.5%) and DDH or hip dislocation in 19.4% (20 cases). No patient was lost to follow-up and 3 patients (5 HRA) deceased. There were 2 revisions (one for femoral aseptic loosening and one infection recurrence (pediatric osteoarthritis)). No dislocation and adverse wear-related failures were found. At a mean follow-up of 10.4 years (2–17.4), mean UCLA activity and Oxford Hip score improved respectively from 5.4 (1 to 7) and 39.9 (25–55) pre-operatively to 7.9 (3 to 10) and 15.8 (12–34) post-operatively (p<0.001). Mean Harris hip score increased from 41.6 (22–63) to 91.8 (72–100) (p<0.001). There were no radiological cases exhibiting lysis while two cases displayed limited partial radiolucency around the femoral stem. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, with the endpoint revision for any reason, showed a 10.8-year survival rate of 98% (95% expected with NICE guidelines). This cohort of HRA performed under 30 is the longest follow-up ever reported in the literature. Despite a challenging cohort of patients, HRA exceeds the stricter NICE survivorship criteria. HRA remains an effective treatment with excellent functional outcomes and a very low rate of complications

Aims. Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) with prior multiple failed surgery for reinfection represent a huge challenge for surgeons because of poor vascular supply and biofilm formation. This study aims to determine the results of single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion in treating this condition. Methods. A retrospective analysis included 78 PJI patients (29 hips; 49 knees) who had undergone multiple prior surgical interventions. Our cohort was treated with single-stage revision using a supplementary intra-articular antibiotic infusion. Of these 78 patients, 59 had undergone more than two prior failed debridement and implant retentions, 12 patients had a failed arthroplasty resection, three hips had previously undergone failed two-stage revision, and four had a failed one-stage revision before their single-stage revision. Previous failure was defined as infection recurrence requiring surgical intervention. Besides intravenous pathogen-sensitive agents, an intra-articular infusion of vancomycin, imipenem, or voriconazole was performed postoperatively. The antibiotic solution was soaked into the joint for 24 hours for a mean of 16 days (12 to 21), then extracted before next injection. Recurrence of infection and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Results. A total of 68 patients (87.1%) were free of infection at a mean follow-up time of 85 months (24 to 133). The seven-year infection-free survival was 87.6% (95% confidence interval (CI) 79.4 to 95.8). No significant difference in infection-free survival was observed between hip and knee PJIs (91.5% (95% CI 79.9 to 100) vs 84.7% (95% CI 73.1 to 96.3); p = 0.648). The mean postoperative Harris Hip Score was 76.1 points (63.2 to 92.4) and Hospital for Special Surgery score was 78. 2 (63.2 to 92.4) at the most recent assessment. Polymicrobial and fungal infections accounted for 14.1% (11/78) and 9.0% (7/78) of all cases, respectively. Conclusion. Single-stage revision with intra-articular antibiotic infusion can provide high antibiotic concentration in synovial fluid, thereby overcoming reduced vascular supply and biofilm formation. This supplementary route of administration may be a viable option in treating PJI after multiple failed prior surgeries for reinfection. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):867–874

Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) with prior multiple failed surgeries for re-infection (PMFSR) represented a huge challenge for surgeons because of poor vascular supply and biofilm formation. This study aims to determine the results of single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion for treatment of PJIs with PMFSR. A retrospective analysis included 78 PJIs (29 hips; 49 knees) with PMFSR, who were treated with single-stage revision using intra-articular antibiotic infusion. Previous failure was defined as infection recurrence requiring surgical intervention. Besides intravenous pathogen-sensitive agents, a intra-articular infusion of vancomycin, imipenem or voriconazole was performed post-operatively. The antibiotic solution was soaked into the joint for 24 hours then extracted before next injection. Recurrence of infection and clinical outcomes were evaluated. Of these 78 patients, 59 had more than twice failed debridement and implant retentions, 12 patients had a failed arthroplasty resection, 3 hips underwent a failed two-stage revision and 4 cases had a failed one-stage revision before their single-stage revision. A total of 68 patients (87.1%) were free of infection at a mean follow-up time of 85 months. No significant difference in infection control rate was observed between hip and knee PJIs (89.7% versus 85.7%). The mean postoperative Harris hip score was 76.1 points and HSS score was 78. 2 at the most recent assessment. Single-stage revision with intra-articular antibiotic infusion can provide high antibiotic concentration in synovial fluid therefore overcome poor vascular supply and biofilm formation, which can be a viable option in treating PJI with PMFSR

Previous studies showed that a fast-resorbable antibacterial hydrogel coating (DAC®, Novagenit Srl, Mezzolombardo, TN, Italy) composed of covalently linked hyaluronan and poly-D, L-lactide, is able to reduce early post-surgical infection both after joint replacement and osteosynthesis. Aim of the present report is to investigate medium-term safety and efficacy of the coating in patients undergoing primary and revision cementless total hip replacement (THR). We designed a two-phases study. In both phases, DAC was prepared according to manufacturer's instructions. In brief, the syringe prefilled with 300 mg of sterile DAC powder was mixed, at the time of surgery, with a solution of 5 mL of sterile water and with the tailored antibiotics, at a concentration ranging from 25 mg/mL to 50 mg/mL. The resulting antibacterial hydrogel was then spread on the outer surface of the prosthesis just before implantation. In the first phase, safety was assessed. Forty-six patients (13 primary and 33 revision THR) were treated with DAC between 2013 and 2015 and evaluated at a 2.8 ± 0.7 years follow up (FU). Antibiotics used for DAC reconstruction were Vancomycin in 33 cases, Vancomycin + Meropenem in 10, Vancomycin + Rifampicin, Teicoplanin or Ceftazidime in 1 case, respectively. Patients were evaluated at 3, 6, 12 months and yearly after with a clinical and radiographic FU. No evidence of infection and no failure/loosening of the prosthesis were observed. No adverse events were reported. The second phase was designed to evaluate efficacy of DAC in preventing infection recurrences after a two stage revision for infected THR. Twenty-seven patients, treated with DAC coating, were compared with a control group of 32, treated in the same time period, without the coating. Demographics, host type and and identified bacteria were similar in the two groups (18.6% of MRSA in DAC group vs 18.5% MRSA in no-DAC group). Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically at 3, 6, 12 months and yearly thereafter. At a minimum 2 years FU (mean 2.7), we observed 1 dislocation in each group and 2 cases of loosening in the no-DAC group. 4 cases (11%) of recurrence of infection in the no-DAC group (1 MRSA and 3 St. Epidermidis) and no infection recurrences in the DAC group. Due to the small cohort of patients this difference is not statistically significant (Fisher's exact test, p=0.18). This is, to our knowledge, the longest observation concerning the safety and efficacy of the DAC antibacterial coating, applied to hip replacement. The results are in line with those previously reported and point out the absence of side effects of the antibacterial coating in this application and the tendency to reduce re-infection in second stage. This finding needs to be confirmed by a larger dataset

Aims

The number of revision arthroplasties being performed in the elderly is expected to rise, including revision for infection. The primary aim of this study was to measure the treatment success rate for octogenarians undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) compared to a younger cohort. Secondary outcomes were complications and mortality.

Aims

The aims of this study were to determine the incidence and factors for developing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following hemiarthroplasty (HA) for hip fracture, and to evaluate treatment outcome and identify factors associated with treatment outcome.

Aims

One-stage revision hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has several advantages; however, resection of the proximal femur might be necessary to achieve higher success rates. We investigated the risk factors for resection and re-revisions, and assessed complications and subsequent re-revisions.

Aims

Femoral cement-in-cement revision is a well described technique to reduce morbidity and complications in hip revision surgery. Traditional techniques for septic revision of hip arthroplasty necessitate removal of all bone cement from the femur. In our two centres, we have been using a cement-in-cement technique, leaving the distal femoral bone cement in selected patients for septic hip revision surgery, both for single and the first of two-stage revision procedures. A prerequisite for adoption of this technique is that the surgeon considers the cement mantle to be intimately fixed to bone without an intervening membrane between cement and host bone. We aim to report our experience for this technique.

Aims

To explore the effect of different types of articulating antibiotic-loaded cement spacers in two-stage revision for chronic hip prosthetic joint infection (PJI).

The aim of this review is to evaluate the current available literature evidencing on peri-articular hip endoscopy (the third compartment). A comprehensive approach has been set on reports dealing with endoscopic surgery for recalcitrant trochanteric bursitis, snapping hip (or coxa-saltans; external and internal), gluteus medius and minimus tears and endoscopy (or arthroscopy) after total hip arthroplasty. This information can be used to trigger further research, innovation and education in extra-articular hip endoscopy.