Resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip is being used increasingly as an alternative to total hip replacement, especially for young active patients. There is concern about necrosis of the femoral head after resurfacing which can result in fracture and loosening. Most systems use a cemented femoral component, with the potential for
Fixation of osteoporotic proximal humerus fractures remains challenging even with state-of-the-art locking plates. Despite the demonstrated biomechanical benefit of screw tip augmentation with bone cement, the clinical findings have remained unclear, potentially as the optimal augmentation combinations are unknown. The aim of this study was to systematically evaluate the biomechanical benefits of the augmentation options in a humeral locking plate using finite element analysis (FEA). A total of 64 cement augmentation configurations were analyzed using six screws of a locking plate to virtually fix unstable three-part fractures in 24 low-density proximal humerus models under three physiological loading cases (4,608 simulations). The biomechanical benefit of augmentation was evaluated through an established FEA methodology using the average peri-screw bone strain as a validated predictor of cyclic cut-out failure.Aims
Methods
The primary purpose of this study of metal-on-metal
(MoM) hip resurfacing was to compare the effect of using a cementless
or cemented femoral component on the subsequent bone mineral density
(BMD) of the femoral neck. This was a single-centre, prospective, double-blinded control
trial which randomised 120 patients (105 men and 15 women) with
a mean age of 49.4 years (21 to 68) to receive either a cemented
or cementless femoral component. Follow-up was to two years. Outcome
measures included total and six-point region-of-interest BMD of
the femoral neck, radiological measurements of acetabular inclination,
neck-shaft and stem-shaft angles, and functional outcome scores
including the Harris hip score, the Western Ontario and McMaster
Universities Osteoarthritis Index and the University of California
at Los Angeles activity scale. In total, 17 patients were lost to follow-up leaving 103 patients
at two years. There were no revisions in the cementless group and
three revisions (5%) in the cemented group (two because of hip pain
and one for pseudotumour). The total BMD was significantly higher in the cementless group
at six months (p <
0.001) and one year (p = 0.01) than in the
cemented group, although there was a loss of statistical significance
in the difference at two years (p = 0.155). All patient outcomes improved significantly: there were no significant
differences between the two groups. The results show better preservation of femoral neck BMD with
a cementless femoral component after two years of follow-up. Further
investigation is needed to establish whether this translates into
improved survivorship. Cite this article:
We aimed to determine the effect of surgical approach on the
histology of the femoral head following resurfacing of the hip. We performed a histological assessment of the bone under the
femoral component taken from retrieval specimens of patients having
revision surgery following resurfacing of the hip. We compared the
number of empty lacunae in specimens from patients who had originally
had a posterior surgical approach with the number in patients having alternative
surgical approaches.Objectives
Methods
Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is an alternative to conventional
total hip arthroplasty for patients with osteonecrosis (ON) of the
femoral head. Our aim was to report the long-term outcome of HRA,
which is not currently known. Long-term survivorship, clinical scores and radiographic results
for 82 patients (99 hips) treated with HRA for ON over a period
of 18 years were reviewed retrospectively. The mean age of the 67
men and 15 women at the time of surgery was 40.8 years (14 to 64).
Patients were resurfaced regardless of the size of the osteonecrotic
lesion.Aims
Patients and Methods
Despite the increasing interest and subsequent published literature on hip resurfacing arthroplasty, little is known about the prevalence of its complications and in particular the less common modes of failure. The aim of this study was to identify the prevalence of failure of hip resurfacing arthroplasty and to analyse the reasons for it. From a multi-surgeon series (141 surgeons) of 5000 Birmingham hip resurfacings we have analysed the modes, prevalence, gender differences and times to failure of any hip requiring revision. To date 182 hips have been revised (3.6%). The most common cause for revision was a fracture of the neck of the femur (54 hips, prevalence 1.1%), followed by loosening of the acetabular component (32 hips, 0.6%), collapse of the femoral head/avascular necrosis (30 hips, 0.6%), loosening of the femoral component (19 hips, 0.4%), infection (17 hips, 0.3%), pain with aseptic lymphocytic vascular and associated lesions (ALVAL)/metallosis (15 hips, 0.3%), loosening of both components (five hips, 0.1%), dislocation (five hips, 0.1%) and malposition of the acetabular component (three hips, 0.1%). In two cases the cause of failure was unknown. Comparing men with women, we found the prevalence of revision to be significantly higher in women (women = 5.7%; men = 2.6%, p <
0.001). When analysing the individual modes of failure women had significantly more revisions for loosening of the acetabular component, dislocation, infection and pain/ALVAL/metallosis (p <
0.001, p = 0.004, p = 0.008, p = 0.01 respectively). The mean time to failure was 2.9 years (0.003 to 11.0) for all causes, with revision for fracture of the neck of the femur occurring earlier than other causes (mean 1.5 years, 0.02 to 11.0). There was a significantly shorter time to failure in men (mean 2.1 years, 0.4 to 8.7) compared with women (mean 3.6 years, 0.003 to 11.0) (p <
0.001).
When fracture of an extensively porous-coated
femoral component occurs, its removal at revision total hip arthroplasty
(THA) may require a femoral osteotomy and the use of a trephine.
The remaining cortical bone after using the trephine may develop
thermally induced necrosis. A retrospective review identified 11
fractured, well-fixed, uncemented, extensively porous-coated femoral
components requiring removal using a trephine with a minimum of
two years of follow-up. The mean time to failure was 4.6 years (1.7 to 9.1, standard
deviation ( A total of four patients (36.4%) required further revision: three
for instability and one for fracture of the revision component.
There was no statistically significant difference in the mean Harris
hip score before implant fracture (82.4; These findings suggest that removal of a fractured, well-fixed,
uncemented, extensively porous-coated femoral component using a
trephine does not compromise subsequent fixation at revision THA
and the patient’s pre-operative level of function can be restored.
However, the loss of proximal bone stock before revision may be associated
with a high rate of dislocation post-operatively. Cite this article:
We undertook a multicentre, prospective study of a series of 112 unstable trochanteric fractures in order to evaluate if internal fixation with a sliding screw device combined with augmentation using a calcium phosphate degradable cement (Norian SRS) could improve the clinical, functional and radiological outcome when compared with fractures treated with a sliding screw device alone. Pain, activities of daily living, health status (SF-36), the strength of the hip abductor muscles and radiological outcome were analysed. Six weeks after surgery, the patients in the augmented group had significantly lower global and functional pain scores (p <
0.003), less pain after walking 50 feet (p <
0.01), and a better return to the activities of daily living (p <
0.05). At follow-up at six weeks and six months, those in the augmented group showed a significant improvement compared with the control group in the SF-36 score. No other significant differences were found between the groups. We conclude that augmentation with calcium phosphate cement in unstable trochanteric fractures provides a modest reduction in pain and a slight improvement in the quality of life during the course of healing when compared with conventional fixation with a sliding screw device alone.