The objective of this study was to evaluate the short term clinical and radiological results of a new short stem hip implant. In 29 consecutive patients suffering from osteoarthritis with 33 affected hip joints, the clinical and radiological results of 33 cementless hip arthroplasties using a cementless implanted short stem prosthesis type Aida and a cementless cup type Ecofit were evaluated prospectively between October 2009 and June 2015 in two hospitals. The median age of patients at time of surgery was 55 years (range, 30–71 years), 23 male and 10 female patients were included in the study. The median clinical follow up was 24 months (range, 1.5–51 months), and the median radiological follow up was 12 months (range, 1–51 months). Two patients were lost to follow up and two patients had only one immediate postoperative x- ray. The Harris Hip Score improved from a median preoperative value of 53 to a median postoperative value of 93 at follow up. Radiological analysis showed that 19 stems (58%) showed stable bony ingrowth, five cases (15%) showed stable fibrous ingrowth. Four cases need further follow up for proper evaluation of stem fixation. The short term survival of this new short stem is very promising, and achieving the goals of standard hip arthroplasty.

Aim

The objective of this study was to evaluate the intermediate term clinical and radiological results of a new short stem hip implant.

Problem: Deep infection after hip- or knee-replacement is a severe complication that may lead to implant removal or arthrodesis.

Aim: In our hospital intraoperativ subcoutanues culture samples were taken before wound closure. We wanted to know if positive cultures are of any predicitive value in relation to early or late periprosthetic infection. If so, is there a consequence in treatment ? Also costs were analysed.

Material and methods: In 2002 we performed 167 primary hip and knee replacements. We retrospectivaly analysed the outcome of 159 cases over a follow-up period of up to 28 month.

Results: In 96.8% of the cases a culture sample was taken. Of these 5.8% showed germ growth. In only 4 cases positive cultures were followed by a change in treatment, either antibiotics or revision. Of nine patients with revision surgery only one had a positive culture. Four cases showed germ growth during revision surgery after sterile cultures during implantation. Most often different bacterias were found in primary and revision surgery. In 1.25% deep periprosthetic infection occured. One required second stage knee-replacement, one case ended in resection arthroplasty.

Conclusion: Intraoperative culture sample is of no predictive value in primary joint replacement. There is no correlation between positiv cultures and indication for revision surgery. However costs for culture analysis and antibiotics are low compared to the increase of expense caused by periprosthetic infections.