The aim of this study was to identify the optimal lip position for total hip arthroplasties (THAs) using a lipped liner. There is a lack of consensus on the optimal position, with substantial variability in surgeon practice. A model of a THA was developed using a 20° lipped liner. Kinematic analyses included a physiological range of motion (ROM) analysis and a provocative dislocation manoeuvre analysis. ROM prior to impingement was calculated and, in impingement scenarios, the travel distance prior to dislocation was assessed. The combinations analyzed included nine cup positions (inclination 30-40-50°, anteversion 5-15-25°), three stem positions (anteversion 0-15-30°), and five lip orientations (right hip 7 to 11 o’clock).Aims
Methods
We have previously reported on the improved all-cause revision and improved revision for instability risk in lipped liner THAs using the NJR dataset. These findings corroborate studies from the Australian (AOANJRR) and New Zealand (NZOA) joint registries. The optimal orientation of the lip in THAs utilising a lipped liner remains unclear to many surgeons. The aim of this study was to identify impingement-free optimal liner orientations whilst considering femoral stem version, cup inclination and cup version. A cementless THA kinematic model was developed using a 20 degree XLPE liner. Physiological ROM and provocative dislocation manoeuvre analyses were performed. A total of 9 cup positions were analysed (inclination 30–40–50 degrees, anteversion 5-15-25 degrees) and combined with 3 stem positions (anteversion 0-15-30 degrees) and 5 lip orientations (right hip 11 to 7 o'clock). Some lip orientation/component position combinations lead to impingement within the physiological ROM range. Using a lipped liner increases the femoral head travel distance prior to dislocation when impingement occurs in the plane of the lip. In THAs with a cup inclination of 30 and 40 degrees, inferior lip orientations (7–8 o'clock for a right hip) performed best. Superior lip orientation performed best with a cup inclination of 50 degrees. Femoral stem version has a significant effect on the range of movement prior to impingement and hence the preferred lip orientation. The optimal orientation of the lip in lipped liner THA is dependent on the position of both the acetabular and femoral components. In the common component orientation combination of stem anteversion 15, cup inclination 40 and cup anteversion 15, the optimal lip orientation was postero-inferiorly (8 o'clock for a right hip). Preventing impingement during physiological ROM is possible with appropriate lip liner orientation.
The aim of our study was to investigate the effect of asymmetric crosslinked polyethylene liner use on the risk of revision of cementless and hybrid total hip arthroplasties (THAs). We undertook a registry study combining the National Joint Registry dataset with polyethylene manufacturing characteristics as supplied by the manufacturers. The primary endpoint was revision for any reason. We performed further analyses on other reasons including instability, aseptic loosening, wear, and liner dissociation. The primary analytic approach was Cox proportional hazard regression.Aims
Methods
Our previous work presented at BHS revealed a reduced risk of revision for all reasons in THAs using lipped (asymmetric) liners. Some audience members felt that this finding may be due to unaccounted confounders and the hip surgery community remains sceptical. A fully adjusted Cox model was built after exploratory Kaplan-Meier analyses. The following surgical approaches were included in the analysis: Posterior, Hardinge/anterolateral, Other. The variables included in the final Cox model included: Gender, liner asymmetry, age, head composition, stem fixation method, head diameter, indication for implantation and surgical approach. An additional analysis of the 3 most commonly used polyethylene liners with both a flat and asymmetric version was performed. In the fully adjusted Cox model, the use of a flat liner was associated with increased risk of revision for instability (HR: 1.79, 95%CI: 1.52–2.10) and increased risk of revision for all reasons (HR 1.195, 95%CI: 1.104 – 1.293) when compared to THAs utilising flat liners. This finding was upheld in the product specific analysis. When utilising flat liners, the Hardinge/anterolateral approach was associated with a reduced risk of revision for instability compared to the posterior approach (HR 0.56, 95%CI: 0.446 to 0.706). When an asymmetric liner was used, there was no significant difference in the risk of revision for instability between the Hardinge/anterolateral approach and the posterior approach (HR 0.838, 95%CI: 0.633 – 1.110). The use of polyethylene-based bearings gives the surgeon the option to use asymmetric liners. The reduced risk of revision in THAs with asymmetric liners was seen in the analysis of the complete dataset and in the product specific analysis. Our results demonstrate that the posterior approach, when used with asymmetric XLPE liners, is not associated with a higher risk of revision for instability as historical data suggested.
Computer aided Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) surgery is known to improve implantation precision, but clinical trials have failed to demonstrate an improvement in survivorship or patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). Our aim was to compare the risk of revision, PROMs and satisfaction rates between computer guided and THA implanted without computer guidance. We used the National Joint Registry dataset and linked PROMs data. Our sample included THAs implanted for osteoarthritis using cementless acetabular components from a single manufacturer (cementless and hybrid). An additional analysis was performed limiting the sample size to THAs using cementless stems (fully cementless). The primary endpoint was revision (of any component) for any reason. Kaplan Meier survivorship analysis and an adjusted Cox Proportional Hazards model were used. 41683 non computer guided, and 871 (2%) computer guided cases were included in our cementless and hybrid analysis. 943 revisions were recorded in the non-guided and 7 in the computer guided group (adjusted Log-rank test, p= 0.028). Cumulative revision rate at 10 years was 3.88% (95%CI: 3.59 – 4.18) and 1.06% (95%CI: 0.45 – 2.76) respectively. Cox Proportional Hazards adjusted HR: 0.45 (95%CI: 0.21 – 0.96, p=0.038). In the fully cementless group, cumulative revision rate at 10 years was 3.99% (95%CI: 3.62 – 4.38) and 1.20% (95%CI: 0.52 – 3.12) respectively. Cox Proportional Hazards adjusted HR: 0.47 (95%CI: 0.22 – 1.01, p=0.053). There was no statistically significant difference in the 6-month Oxford Hip Score, EQ-5D, EQ-VAS and success rates. Patient Satisfaction (single-item satisfaction outcome measure) was improved in the computer guided group but this finding was limited by a reduced number of responses. In this single manufacturer acetabular component analysis, the use of computer guided surgery was associated with a significant reduction in the early risk of revision. Causality cannot be inferred in view of the observational nature of the study, and further database and prospective studies are recommended to validate these findings.
To investigate the effect of polyethylene manufacturing characteristics and irradiation dose on the survival of cemented and reverse hybrid total hip arthroplasties (THAs). In this registry study, data from the National Joint Registry of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man (NJR) were linked with manufacturing data supplied by manufacturers. The primary endpoint was revision of any component. Cox proportional hazard regression was a primary analytic approach adjusting for competing risk of death, patient characteristics, head composition, and stem fixation.Aims
Methods
To assess the effect of different polyethylene modifications on Total Hip Replacement survival. We combined the NJR dataset with polyethylene manufacturing properties as supplied by the manufacturers. Cause specific and overall reasons for revisions were analysed using Kaplan-Meier and multi-variate Cox proportional hazard regression survival analyses. Revision for aseptic loosening was the primary endpoint. Modification variables included resin type, radiation source, multiple cross-linking treatments, cross-linking dose, terminal sterilisation method, terminal sterilisation radiation dose, stabilisation treatment, total radiation dose, and packaging.Aim
Methods
To assess the effect of the bearing surface and head size on the survival of total hip replacements with modern bearing surface combinations. We combined the NJR dataset with polyethylene manufacturing properties as supplied by the manufacturers to sub-divide polyethylene into conventional (PE) and highly crosslinked (XLPE). Cause specific and overall reasons for revisions were analysed using Kaplan-Meier and multi-variate Cox proportional hazard regression survival analyses. The bearing surface analysis was repeated in patients undergoing THR under the age of 55.Aim
Methods
The aim of this study was to identify the effect of the manufacturing characteristics of polyethylene acetabular liners on the survival of cementless and hybrid total hip arthroplasty (THA). Prospective cohort study using linked National Joint Registry (NJR) and manufacturer data. The primary endpoint was revision for aseptic loosening. Cox proportional hazard regression was the primary analytical approach. Manufacturing variables included resin type, crosslinking radiation dose, terminal sterilization method, terminal sterilization radiation dose, stabilization treatment, total radiation dose, packaging, and face asymmetry. Total radiation dose was further divided into G1 (no radiation), G2 (> 0 Mrad to < 5 Mrad), G3 (≥ 5 Mrad to < 10 Mrad), and G4 (≥ 10 Mrad).Aims
Methods
