MPFL reconstruction has demonstrated a very high success rate with improved patella stability, physical function, and patient-reported outcomes. However technical error and a lack of consideration of anatomic risk factors have been shown to contribute to failure after MPFL reconstruction. Previous research has also reported a complication rate of 26% following surgery. The purposes of this study were to determine the re-dislocation rate, type and number of complications, and most common additional surgical procedures following MPFL reconstruction. Patients with symptomatic recurrent patellofemoral instability underwent an MPFL reconstruction (n = 268) and were assessed with a mean follow-up of 31.5 months (minimally 24-months). Concomitant procedures were performed in addition to the MPFL reconstruction in order to address significant anatomic or biomechanical characteristics. Failure of the patellofemoral stabilization procedure was defined as post-operative re-dislocation of the patella. Rates of complications and re-procedures were assessed for all patients. The re-dislocation rate following MPFL reconstruction was 5.6% (15/268). There were no patella fractures. A total of 49/268 patients (18.3%) returned to the operating room for additional procedures following surgery. The most common reason for additonal surgery was removal of symptomatic tibial tubercle osteotomy hardware in 24/268 patients (8.9%). A further 9.3% of patients underwent addtional surgery including revision MPFL reconstruction: with trochleoplasty 8/268 (3.0%), with tibial tubercule osteotomy 4/286 (1.5%) and with femoral derotation osteotomy 3/268 (1.1%); manipulation under anaesthesia for reduced knee range of motion 4/268 (1.5%); knee arthroscopy for pain 8/268 (3.0%); and cartilage restoration procedures 3/268 (1.1%). There was 1 case of wound debridement for surgical incision infection. MPFL reconstruction using an a la carte approach to surgical selection demonstrated a post-operative redislocation rate of 5.6%. The rate of complications following surgical stabilization was low, with the most common reason for additional surgery being removal of hardware

Previously, we conducted a multi-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair with and without remplissage. The end point for the randomized controlled trial was two years post-operative, providing support for the benefits of remplissage in the short term in reducing recurrent instability. The aim of this study was to compare the medium term (3 to 9 years) outcomes of patients previously randomized to have undergone isolated Bankart repair (NO REMP) or Bankart repair with remplissage (REMP) for the management of recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. The rate of recurrent instability and instances of re-operation were examined. The original study was a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial with two 1:1 parallel groups with recruitment undertaken between 2011 and 2017. For this medium-term study, participants were reached for a telephone follow-up in 2020 and asked a series of standardized questions regarding ensuing instances of subluxation, dislocation or reoperation that had occurred on their shoulder for which they were randomized. Descriptive statistics were generated for all variables. “Failure” was defined as occurrence of a dislocation. “Recurrent instability” was defined as the participant reporting a dislocation or two or more occurences of subluxation greater than one year post-operative. All analyses were undertaken based on intention-to-treat whereby their data was analyzed based on the group to which they were originally allocated. One-hundred and eight participants were randomized of which 50 in the NO REMP group and 52 in the REMP group were included in the analyses in the original study. The mean number of months from surgery to final follow-up was 49.3 for the NO REMP group and 53.8 for the REMP group. The rates of re-dislocation or failure were 8% (4/52) in the REMP group at an average of 23.8 months post-operative versus 22% (11/50) in the NO REMP at an average of 16.5 months post-operative. The rates of recurrent instability were 10% (5/52) in the REMP group at an average of 24 months post-operative versus 30% (15/50) in the NO REMP group at an average of 19.5 months post-operative. Survival curves were significantly different favouring REMP in both scenarios. Arthroscopic Bankart repair combined with remplissage is an effective procedure in the treatment of patients with an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion and minimal glenoid bone loss (<15%). Patients can expect favourable rates of recurrent instability when compared with isolated Bankart repair at medium term follw-up

Recurrent shoulder instability in those with bony defects is a difficult surgical problem to resolve. Burkhart and De Beer described an unacceptably high recurrence rate for arthroscopic Bankart repair in the presence of an inverted-pear glenoid with or without an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion, with suggestions that an open modified Latarjet procedure should be recommended in such patients. The Congruent-Arc Latarjet is a modification of the Latarjet open bony stabilisation for shoulder instability developed by Burkhart and De Beer. It involves rotation of the coracoid so the curved under-surface lies congruent with the glenoid. At the Royal Derby Hospital, UK, this procedure has been adopted by our four shoulder surgeons, two of whom undertook fellowship training with De Beer, we studied the outcomes of the patients who had undergone the modified Congruent-Arc Latarjet procedure in our department. Fifty-two consecutive patients were identified over a five-year period at the Royal Derby Hospital or Derbyshire Royal Infirmary between 2006 and 2010 inclusive. With the approval of the clinical audit department, the data was collected using theatre records and clinical coding information to identify the patient group. A review of the case notes and local PACS system was undertaken to establish pre and post-operative examination findings, radiology findings regarding Hill-Sachs defects and glenoid bone loss, re-dislocation rates and post-operative function with return to normal activity. The endpoints of this study were aimed at finding out whether patients did return to normal function, were able to continue doing activity that would have provoked dislocation prior to surgery, and how many of the cases re-dislocated. No surgeon consultant had a patient who re-dislocated after this procedure. The follow-up period was from 1 year to 6 years post-operatively. The complications of this procedure were found to be the dislodgement of bone anchors in 2 patients, who required further arthroscopy to remove the suture anchor from the gleno-humeral joint. One patient had prolonged functionally limiting loss of external rotation, which resolved after intensive physiotherapy at 7 months follow up. We will provide graphical representation of the pre and post operative functional scores. We have demonstrated that the Congruent-Arc Latarjet is a reproducible procedure in the hands of surgeons other than the original authors, particularly when comparing our current 0% re-dislocation rate with the published literature, which suggests that 3.9% of patients undergoing this procedure with greater than 25% bone loss of the glenoid or an engaging Hill-Sachs will re-dislocate post-operatively, and this is better than the 6% re-dislocation rate of the standard Bristow-Latarjet procedure

Optimal management of acute patellar dislocation is still a topic of debate. Although, conventionally it has been managed by non-operative measures, recent literature recommends operative treatment to prevent re-dislocations. Our study recommends that results of non-operative measures comparable to that of operative management. Our study is the retrospective with 46 consecutive patients (47 knees) of first time patellar dislocation managed between 2012 and 2014. The study methodology highlighted upon the etiology, mechanism of injury and other characteristics of first time dislocations and also analysed outcomes of conservative management including re-dislocation rates. The duration of follow up ranged from 1 to 4 years. Average age at first-time dislocation was 23 years (Range 10–62 years). Male:Female ratio was 30:17. Twisting injury was the commonest cause. 1 patient required open reduction but all others relocated spontaneously or had successful closed reduction. Medial Patello-Femoral Ligament injury was frequent associated feature. 11 knees (24%) re-dislocated during follow up. Age was the significant risk factor for re-dislocations. All patients with re-dislocation were less than 30 years old. Maximum redislocations happened between 6 months to 1 year after index dislocation. Skeletal abnormality was the commonest pathology in re-dislocators. Only 4 patients (8.6%) finally required surgical intervention. One patient had persistent knee pain as a complication. Conservative management of primary patellar dislocation is successful in majority of patients. Surgery should be reserved for the carefully selected patients with specific indications

Recurrent dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a complex, multifactorial problem that has been shown to be the most common indication for revision THA. At our center, we have tried to approach the unstable hip by identifying the primary cause of instability and correcting that at the time of revision surgery. Type 1:. Malposition of the acetabular component treated with revision of the acetabular component and upsizing the femoral head. Type 2:. Malposition of the femoral component treated with revision of the femur and upsizing the femoral head. Type 3:. Abductor deficiency treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility bearing. Type 4:. Soft tissue or bony impingement treated with removal of impingement sources and upsizing the femoral head. Type 5:. Late wear of the bearing treated with bearing surface exchange and upsizing the femoral head. Type 6:. Unclear etiology treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility articulation. These may be patients with abnormal spino-pelvic motion. The most common etiologies of instability in our experience include cup malposition (Type 1) and abductor deficiency (Type 3). We reviewed 75 hips revised for instability and at a mean 35.3 months 11 re-dislocations occurred (14.6%). Acetabular revisions were protective against re-dislocation (p<0.02). The number of previous operations (p=0.04) and previously failed constrained liners (p<0.02) were risk factors for failure. The highest risk of failure was in patients with abductor insufficiency with revisions for other etiologies having a success rate of 90%. Although instability can be multifactorial, by identifying the primary cause of instability, a rational approach to treatment can be formulated. In general the poorest results were seen in patients with abductor deficiency. Given the high rate of failure of constrained liners (9 of the 11 failures were constrained), we currently are exploring alternatives such as dual mobility articulations. Our early experience with dual mobility suggests improved results when compared to constrained liners

Recurrent dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a complex, multifactorial problem that has been shown to be the most common indication for revision THA. At our center, we have tried to approach the unstable hip by identifying the primary cause of instability and correcting that at the time of revision surgery. Type 1: Malposition of the acetabular component treated with revision of the acetabular component and upsizing the femoral head. Type 2: Malposition of the femoral component treated with revision of the femur and upsizing the femoral head. Type 3: Abductor deficiency treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility bearing. Type 4: Soft tissue or bony impingement treated with removal of impingement sources and upsizing the femoral head. Type 5: Late wear of the bearing treated with bearing surface exchange and upsizing the femoral head. Type 6: Unclear etiology treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility articulation. The most common etiologies of instability in our experience include cup malposition (Type 1) and abductor deficiency (Type 3). We reviewed 75 hips revised for instability and at a mean 35.3 months, 11 re-dislocations occurred (14.6%). Acetabular revisions were protective against re-dislocation (p<0.02). The number of previous operations (p=0.04) and previously failed constrained liners (p<0.02) were risk factors for failure. The highest risk of failure was in patients with abductor insufficiency with revisions for other etiologies having a success rate of 90%. Although instability can be multifactorial, by identifying the primary cause of instability, a rational approach to treatment can be formulated. In general, the poorest results were seen in patients with abductor deficiency. Given the high rate of failure of constrained liners (9 of the 11 failures were constrained), we currently are exploring alternatives such as dual mobility articulations. Our early experience with dual mobility suggests improved results when compared to constrained liners

Recurrent dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a complex, multifactorial problem that has been shown to be the most common indication for revision THA. At our center, we have tried to approach the unstable hip by identifying the primary cause of instability and correcting that at the time of revision surgery. Type 1: Malposition of the acetabular component treated with revision of the acetabular component and upsizing the femoral head. Type 2: Malposition of the femoral component treated with revision of the femur and upsizing the femoral head. Type 3: Abductor deficiency treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility bearing. Type 4: Soft tissue or bony impingement treated with removal of impingement sources and upsizing the femoral head. Type 5: Late wear of the bearing treated with bearing surface exchange and upsizing the femoral head. Type 6: Unclear etiology treated with a constrained liner or dual mobility articulation. The most common etiologies of instability in our experience include cup malposition (Type 1) and abductor deficiency (Type 3). We reviewed 75 hips revised for instability and at a mean 35.3 months 11 re-dislocations occurred (14.6%). Acetabular revisions were protective against re-dislocation (p<0.015). The number of previous operations (p=0.0379) and previously failed constrained liners (p<0.02) were risk factors for failure. The highest risk of failure was in patients with abductor insufficiency with revisions for other etiologies having a success rate of 90%. Although instability can be multifactorial, by identifying the primary cause of instability, a rational approach to treatment can be formulated. In general the poorest results were seen in patients with abductor deficiency. Given the high rate of failure of constrained liners (9 of the 11 failures were constrained), we currently are exploring alternatives such as dual mobility articulations

Treatment of recurrent dislocation: approximately: 1/3 of failures (probably higher in the absence of a clear curable cause). In the US: most popular treatment option: constrained liners with high redislocation and loosening rates in most reports. Several interfaces leading to various modes of failures. In Europe: dual mobility cups (or tripolar unconstrained): first design Gilles Bousquet 1976 (Saint Etienne, France), consisting of a metal shell with a highly polished inner surface articulating with a mobile polyethylene insert (large articulation). The femoral head is captured into the polyethylene (small articulation) using a snap fit type mechanism leading to a large effective unconstrained head inside the metal cup. With dual mobility, most of the movements occur in the small articulation therefore limiting wear from the large polyethylene on metal articulation. Contemporary designs include: CoCr metal cup for improved friction, outer shell coated with titanium and hydroxyapatite, possible use of screws to enhance primary stability (revision), cemented version in case of major bone defect requiring bone reconstruction. Increased stability obtained through an ultra-large diameter effective femoral head increasing the jumping distance. Dual mobility in revision for recurrent dislocation provided hip stability in more than 94% of the cases with less than 3% presenting redislocation up to 13-year follow-up. A series from the UK concerning 115 revisions including 29 revisions for recurrent dislocation reported 2% dislocation in the global series and 7% re-dislocation in patients revised for instability. A recent report of the Swedish hip arthroplasty register including 228 patients revised for recurrent dislocation showed 99% survival with revision for dislocation as the endpoint and 93% with revision for any reason as the endpoint. One specific complication of dual mobility sockets: intra-prosthetic dislocation (ie: dislocation at the small articulation): often asymptomatic or slight discomfort, eccentration of the neck on AP radiograph, related to wear and fatigue of the polyethylene rim at the capturing are through aggressive stem neck to mobile polyethylene insert contact (3rd articulation). Risk factors include: large and aggressive femoral neck design implants, small head/neck ratio, skirted heads, major fibrosis and periprosthetic ossifications. Current (over ?) use in France: 30% of primary THA, 60% in revision THA. Proposed (reasonable) indications: primary THA at high risk for dislocation, revision THA for instability and/or in case of abductors deficiency, Undisputed indication: recurrent dislocation

Patellofemoral instability is common injury and proximal soft tissue stabilisation via MPFL reconstruction or imbrication is the mainstay of treatment. The contribution of certain pathoanatomies to the failure of patellofemoral stabilisation is unknown. The purpose of this study was to analyse the failure rate of patellar stabilisation procedures in a large cohort as measured by re-dislocation of the patella. A secondary purpose was to identify the pathoantomical features that may have predisposed these patients to failure. Between May 2008 and March 2014, 207 MPFL reconstructions and 70 MPFL imbrications were performed by a single surgeon. Post-operative assessment included clinical examination to assess the integrity of the MPFL graft, plain radiographs and the Banff Patellofemoral Instability Instrument (BPII), a disease-specific outcome measure. Failures were identified and risk factors including trochlear dysplasia, patella alta, generalised ligamentous laxity (GLL), femoral tunnel position and rotational abnormalities were evaluated as contributing factors. There were 48 male and 178 female patients. The mean duration of follow-up was 24.1 months (SD 9.4, range 12–74). The average age at time of surgery was 24.81 years (SD 8.87, range 50.35–8.99). The average BMI was 23.75 (SD 3.62, range 36.70–14.90). There were 10 failures in the MPFL reconstruction group (4.8%), 1 male and 9 females. Femoral tunnel position was assessed in relation to Schottle's point as good or excellent in all 10 cases. In terms of pathoanotomy, 8/10 failures had high-grade trochlear dysplasia, 1/10 had patella alta, 6/10 had a Beighton score of >/= 4, and 3/10 had clinically significant rotational abnormalities of the lower extremity. The primary cause attributed to the 10 failure cases was trauma in two, trochlear dysplasia in three, rotational abnormalities in one, combined femoral anteversion and GLL in two, and combined trochlear dysplasia and GLL in two. There were 13 failures in the MPFL imbrication group (18.6%), 2 males and 11 females. Among these failures, 4/13 had high-grade trochlear dysplasia, 3/13 had patella alta, 10/13 had a Beighton score of >/= 4, and one had clinically significant rotational abnormalities of the lower extremity. The primary pathology that was considered to contribute to the imbrication failure cases was trochlear dysplasia in four, generalised ligamentous laxity in six, rotational abnormalities in one, patella alta with trochlear dysplasia in one, and generalised ligamentous laxity with trochlear dysplasia in one. Prior to surgical failure the mean BPII score for the failure group was 71.5/100, compared with 74.6/100 for the remainder of the cohort. MPFL reconstruction is highly successful surgical procedure for stabilising the unstable patella with a failure rate of only 4.8%. Higher failure rates are seen in patients undergoing imbrication of the MPFL compared to a reconstruction. Pathoanatomies that contribute to failure vary between patients with the most common being trochlear dysplasia and generalised ligamentous laxity

(Case) 79-year-old woman. Past history, in 1989, right femur valgus osteotomy. in 1991, THA at left side. Follow-up thereafter. Hyaluronic acid injection for both knee osteoarthritis. (Clinical course)Her right hip pain getting worse and crawling indoors from the beginning of July 2013. We did right hybrid THA at August 2013(posterior approach, TridentHA cup, Exeter stem, Biolox Forte femoral head 28mm). But immediately, she dislocated twice than the third day after surgery because she became a delirium. It has been left by nurse for about 6 hours because of the midnight after the second dislocation. Next morning, check the dislocation limb position, closed reduction wasdone under intravenous anesthesia. As a result of waking up from the anesthesia, and complained of paralysis and violent pain in the right leg backward. A right lower extremity nerve findings, there is pain in the lower leg after surface about the calf, there was no apparent perception analgesia. Toe movement is weak, but the G-toe planter anddorsiflexion possible about M2, and neurological symptoms to relieved by flexion(above 70 degrees) of the right hip joint. Therefore, we thought that she suffered anterior dislocation of the sciatic nerve by the stem neck (retraction), judged to closed reduction was impossible, open reduction surgery was performed after waitingat hip flex position. But paralysis is gradually worsened during waiting surgery, toes movement had become impossible to operating room admission. Sciatic nerve is caught in front of the stem neck as expected, operative findings were able to finally reduction after removing the femoral head after dislocation. Anteversion of the cup was changed to 25 degrees from 15 degrees, and changed to 32mm diameter metal head and polyethylene liner. And we needed Intensive Care Unit(ICU) management after surgery for prevent recurrence of dislocation. Fitted with a hip brace for her, has not been re-dislocation. The sciatic nerve palsy improved in three months after the operation, the patient became able to walk without a cane. (Summary) We experienced a rare case suffered anterior dislocation of the sciatic nerve by the stem neck, and she had a good result after open reduction surgery

Instability after total hip arthroplasty is the primary cause for revision surgery and is a frequent complication following revision surgery for any reason (Bozic et al, JBJS 2009). Surgical management of the unstable hip has not been uniformly successful with the best results occurring in those hips in which an identifiable cause of instability can be determined (Daly & Morrey, JBJS 1992). It was these sobering findings that led to the development of and increased use of constrained acetabular components. While the results of revision surgery for instability using constrained components have been encouraging (Shapiro, Padgett, Sculco J Arthroplasty 2003) with a re-dislocation rate of less than 3%, reoperation for other reasons have noted to increase with time. The commonly used tripolar configuration has been susceptible to bearing damage at both the inner and outer bearing surface by the nature of the constrained mechanism (Shah, Padgett, Wright, J Arthroplasty 2009). In addition, we have noted instances of fixation failure directly related to the constrained acetabular device either from loss of implant fixation to the pelvis with or without cement (Yun, Padgett, Dorr, J Arthroplasty 2005). The observation of these failure modes ranging from either fixation failures to overt biomaterial failure have led us to be extremely cautious in the “routine” use of constrained liners in revision THR. Stratification of the recurrent dislocator has been nicely described by Wera et al (J Arthroplasty, 2012). The etiology of dislocation includes: acetabular malposition, femoral malposition, abductor deficiency, impingement, late bearing wear and unknown causes. Implant instability due to malposition, impingement, and poly wear should be revised as appropriate to correct the underlying problem in addition to the use of either larger diameter heads. The emerging use of dual mobility articulations remains to be determined. However, the indiscriminate use of constrained liners should be avoided as the risk of problems outweighs their benefits

Instability after total hip arthroplasty is the primary cause for revision surgery and is a frequent complication following revision surgery for any reason (Bozic et al, JBJS 2009). Surgical management of the unstable hip has not been uniformly successful with the best results occurring in those hips in which an identifiable cause of instability can be determined (Daly & Morrey, JBJS 1992). It was these sobering findings that lead to the development of and increased use of constrained acetabular components. While the results of revision surgery for instability using constrained components have been encouraging (Shapiro, Padgett, Sculco, J Arthroplasty 2003) with a re-dislocation rate of less than 3%, reoperation for other reasons have noted to increase with time. The commonly used tripolar configuration has been susceptible to bearing damage at both the inner and outer bearing surface by the nature of the constrained mechanism (Shah, Padgett, Wright, J Arthroplasty 2009). In addition, we have noted instances of fixation failure directly related to the constrained acetabular device either from loss of implant fixation to the pelvis with or without cement (Yun, Padgett, Dorr, J Arthroplasty 2005). The observation of these failure modes ranging from either fixation failures to overt biomaterial failure have lead us to be extremely cautious in the “routine” use of constrained liners in revision THR. Implant instability due to poor position should be revised as appropriate to correct alignment. The use of either larger diameter heads or the emerging use of dual mobility articulations seems more appropriate at this time