In a time of limited resources, the debate continues over which types of hip prosthesis are clinically superior and more cost-effective. Orthopaedic surgeons increasingly need robust economic evidence to understand the full value of the operation, and to aid decision making on the ‘package’ of procedures that are available and to justify their practice beyond traditional clinical preference.

In this paper we explore the current economic debate about the merits of cemented and cementless total hip replacement, an issue that continues to divide the orthopaedic community.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:874–6.

The June 2013 Knee Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: knee arthroplasty in diabetic patients; whether TKR is a timebomb; the use of antidepressants for knee OA; trochleoplasty; articulated spacers; mental health and joint replacement; and the use of physiotherapy for meniscal tear.

The June 2012 Knee Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: ACI and mosaicplasty; ACI after microfracture; exercise therapy and the degenerate medial meniscal tear; intra-articular bupivacaine or ropivacaine at knee arthroscopy; lateral trochlear inclination and patellofemoral osteoarthritis; bone loss and ACL reconstruction; assessing stability using the contralateral knee; tranexamic acid and a useful review of knee replacement.

We present the extended follow-up (≥ 20 years) of a series of fully hydroxyapatite-coated femoral components used in 72 primary total hip replacements (THRs). Earlier results of this cohort have been previously published. All procedures were performed between 1986 and 1991. The series involved 45 women and 15 men with 12 bilateral procedures. Their mean age at the time of surgery was 60 years (46 to 80) and the mean duration of follow-up was 22.5 years (20 to 25). At final follow-up, the mean Merle d’Aubigné and Postel hip scores were 5.5 (4.5 to 6), 3.8 (3.5 to 5) and 3.3 (3.0 to 5.0) for pain, mobility and function, respectively. Of the patients 92% were very satisfied at the time of final follow-up.

There were seven revisions: six of the acetabular component for aseptic loosening and one of both the stem and the acetabular component for loosening due to deep infection. The survival of this prosthesis at 22.5 years with revision for any reason as the endpoint was 91.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 84 to 99). Survival with aseptic loosening of the stem as the endpoint was 100% (95% CI 90 to 100).

This prosthesis provides pain relief in the long term. Survival of this component is comparable to the best results for primary THR with any means of fixation.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:467–71.

The popularity of cementless total hip replacement (THR) has surpassed cemented THR in England and Wales. This retrospective cohort study records survival time to revision following primary cementless THR with the most common combination (accounting for almost a third of all cementless THRs), and explores risk factors independently associated with failure, using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Patients with osteoarthritis who had a DePuy Corail/Pinnacle THR implanted between the establishment of the registry in 2003 and 31 December 2010 were included within analyses. There were 35 386 procedures. Cox proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which the risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates. The overall rate of revision at five years was 2.4% (99% confidence interval 2.02 to 2.79). In the final adjusted model, we found that the risk of revision was significantly higher in patients receiving metal-on-metal (MoM: hazard ratio (HR) 1.93, p < 0.001) and ceramic-on-ceramic bearings (CoC: HR 1.55, p = 0.003) compared with the best performing bearing (metal-on-polyethylene). The risk of revision was also greater for smaller femoral stems (sizes 8 to 10: HR 1.82, p < 0.001) compared with mid-range sizes. In a secondary analysis of only patients where body mass index (BMI) data were available (n = 17 166), BMI ≥ 30 kg/m² significantly increased the risk of revision (HR 1.55, p = 0.002). The influence of the bearing on the risk of revision remained significant (MoM: HR 2.19, p < 0.001; CoC: HR 2.09, p = 0.001). The risk of revision was independent of age, gender, head size and offset, shell, liner and stem type, and surgeon characteristics.

We found significant differences in failure between bearing surfaces and femoral stem size after adjustment for a range of covariates in a large cohort of single-brand cementless THRs. In this study of procedures performed since 2003, hard bearings had significantly higher rates of revision, but we found no evidence that head size had an effect. Patient characteristics, such as BMI and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, also influence the survival of cementless components.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:747–57.

The February 2013 Children’s orthopaedics Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: ABC treated with suction and curettage; peri-acetabular osteotomy; cast index; Perthes’ disease associated with accidental injury; brachial plexus birth palsy; MRI assessment of DDH; total meniscectomy; and paediatric septic arthritis.

Despite excellent results, the use of cemented total hip replacement (THR) is declining. This retrospective cohort study records survival time to revision following primary cemented THR using the most common combination of components that accounted for almost a quarter of all cemented THRs, exploring risk factors independently associated with failure. All patients with osteoarthritis who had an Exeter V40/Contemporary THR (Stryker) implanted before 31 December 2010 and recorded in the National Joint Registry for England and Wales were included in the analysis. Cox’s proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates, with a significance threshold of p < 0.01. A total of 34 721 THRs were included in the study. The overall seven-year rate of revision for any reason was 1.70% (99% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 2.12). In the final adjusted model the risk of revision was significantly higher in THRs with the Contemporary hooded component (hazard ratio (HR) 1.88, p < 0.001) than with the flanged version, and in smaller head sizes (< 28 mm) compared with 28 mm diameter heads (HR 1.50, p = 0.005). The seven-year revision rate was 1.16% (99% CI 0.69 to 1.63) with a 28 mm diameter head and flanged component. The overall risk of revision was independent of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, surgeon volume, surgical approach, brand of cement/presence of antibiotic, femoral head material (stainless steel/alumina) and stem taper size/offset. However, the risk of revision for dislocation was significantly higher with a ‘plus’ offset head (HR 2.05, p = 0.003) and a hooded acetabular component (HR 2.34, p < 0.001).

In summary, we found that there were significant differences in failure between different designs of acetabular component and sizes of femoral head after adjustment for a range of covariates.

The June 2013 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: whether suture anchors are still the gold standard; infection and revision elbow arthroplasty; the variable success of elbow replacements; sliding knots; neurologic cuff pain and the suprascapular nerve; lies, damn lies and statistics; osteoarthritis; and one- or two-stage treatment for the infected shoulder revision.

Current analysis of unicondylar knee replacements (UKRs) by national registries is based on the pooled results of medial and lateral implants. Consequently, little is known about the differential performance of medial and lateral replacements and the influence of each implant type within these pooled analyses. Using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales (NJR) we aimed to determine the proportion of UKRs implanted on the lateral side of the knee, and their survival and reason for failure compared with medial UKRs. By combining information on the side of operation with component details held on the NJR, we were able to determine implant laterality (medial versus lateral) for 32 847 of the 35 624 unicondylar replacements (92%) registered before December 2010. Of these, 2052 (6%) were inserted on the lateral side of the knee. The rates of survival at five years were 93.1% (95% confidence interval (CI) 92.7 to 93.5) for medial and 93.0% (95% CI 91.1 to 94.9) for lateral UKRs (p = 0.49). The rates of failure remained equivalent after adjusting for patient age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, indication for surgery and implant design using Cox’s proportional hazards method (hazard ratio for lateral relative to medial replacement = 0.88 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.13); p = 0.32). Aseptic loosening/lysis and unexplained pain were the main reasons for revision in both groups, although the reasons did vary depending on whether a mobile- or a fixed-bearing design was used. At a maximum of eight years the mid-term survival rates of medial and lateral UKRs are similar.

The August 2012 Oncology Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: prolonged symptom duration; peri-operative mortality and above-knee amputation; giant cell tumour of the spine; surgical resection for Ewing’s sarcoma; intercalary allograft reconstruction of the femur for tumour defects; and an induced membrane technique for large bone defects.

We present the development and results of a nationwide, prospective, observational follow-up programme including patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. The programme started in 2002 and has gradually expanded to include all units performing total hip replacement in Sweden. The self-administered PROMs protocol comprises the EQ-5D instrument, the Charnley class categorisation and visual analogue scales for pain and satisfaction. These current analyses include 34 960 total hip replacements with complete pre- and one-year post-operative questionnaires.

Patients eligible for total hip replacement generally report low health-related quality of life and suffer from pain. One year post-operatively the mean EQ-5D index increased to above the level of an age- and gender-matched population, with a considerable reduction of pain (p < 0.001). Females, younger patients and those with Charnley category C reported a lower EQ-5D index pre-operatively than males, older patients and Charnley category A or B, respectively (all p < 0.001). In a multivariable regression analysis Charnley category C, male gender and higher age were associated with less improvement in health-related quality of life (p < 0.001).

Nationwide implementation of a PROMs programme requires a structured organisation and effective data capture. Patients’ response rates to the Registry are good. The continuous collection of PROMs permits local and national improvement work and allows for further health-economic evaluation.

This was a retrospective analysis of the medium- to long-term results of 46 TC3 Sigma revision total knee replacements using long uncemented stems in press-fit mode.

Clinical and radiological analysis took place pre-operatively, at two years post-operatively, and at a mean follow-up of 8.5 years (4 to 12). The mean pre-operative International Knee Society (IKS) clinical score was 42 points (0 to 74), improving to 83.7 (52 to 100) by the final follow-up. The mean IKS score for function improved from 34.3 points (0 to 80) to 64.2 (15 to 100) at the final follow-up. At the final follow-up 30 knees (65.2%) had an excellent result, seven (15.2%) a good result, one (2.2%) a medium and eight (17.4%) a poor result. There were two failures, one with anteroposterior instability and one with aseptic loosening.

The TC3 revision knee system, when used with press-fit for long intramedullary stems and cemented femoral and tibial components, in both septic and aseptic revisions, results in a satisfactory clinical and radiological outcome, and has a good medium- to long-term survival rate.

Increased femoral head size may reduce dislocation rates following total hip replacement. The National Joint Registry for England and Wales has highlighted a statistically significant increase in the use of femoral heads ≥ 36 mm in diameter from 5% in 2005 to 26% in 2009, together with an increase in the use of the posterior approach. The aim of this study was to determine whether rates of dislocation have fallen over the same period. National data for England for 247 546 procedures were analysed in order to determine trends in the rate of dislocation at three, six, 12 and 18 months after operation during this time. The 18-month revision rates were also examined.

Between 2005 and 2009 there were significant decreases in cumulative dislocations at three months (1.12% to 0.86%), six months (1.25% to 0.96%) and 12 months (1.42% to 1.11%) (all p < 0.001), and at 18 months (1.56% to 1.31%) for the period 2005 to 2008 (p < 0.001). The 18-month revision rates did not significantly change during the study period (1.26% to 1.39%, odds ratio 1.10 (95% confidence interval 0.98 to 1.24), p = 0.118). There was no evidence of changes in the coding of dislocations during this time.

These data have revealed a significant reduction in dislocations associated with the use of large femoral head sizes, with no change in the 18-month revision rate.

Revision arthroplasty of the hip is expensive owing to the increased cost of pre-operative investigations, surgical implants and instrumentation, protracted hospital stay and drugs. We compared the costs of performing this surgery for aseptic loosening, dislocation, deep infection and peri-prosthetic fracture. Clinical, demographic and economic data were obtained for 305 consecutive revision total hip replacements in 286 patients performed at a tertiary referral centre between 1999 and 2008. The mean total costs for revision surgery in aseptic cases (n = 194) were £11 897 (sd 4629), for septic revision (n = 76) £21 937 (sd 10 965), for peri-prosthetic fracture (n = 24) £18 185 (sd 9124), and for dislocation (n = 11) £10 893 (sd 5476). Surgery for deep infection and peri-prosthetic fracture was associated with longer operating times, increased blood loss and an increase in complications compared to revisions for aseptic loosening. Total inpatient stay was also significantly longer on average (p < 0.001). Financial costs vary significantly by indication, which is not reflected in current National Health Service tariffs.

We present our experience with a double-mobility acetabular component in 155 consecutive revision total hip replacements in 149 patients undertaken between 2005 and 2009, with particular emphasis on the incidence of further dislocation. The mean age of the patients was 77 years (42 to 89) with 59 males and 90 females. In all, five patients died and seven were lost to follow-up. Indications for revision were aseptic loosening in 113 hips, recurrent instability in 29, peri-prosthetic fracture in 11 and sepsis in two. The mean follow-up was 42 months (18 to 68). Three hips (2%) in three patients dislocated within six weeks of surgery; one of these dislocated again after one year. All three were managed successfully with closed reduction. Two of the three dislocations occurred in patients who had undergone revision for recurrent dislocation. All three were found at revision to have abductor deficiency. There were no dislocations in those revised for either aseptic loosening or sepsis.

These results demonstrate a good mid-term outcome for this component. In the 29 patients revised for instability, only two had a further dislocation, both of which were managed by closed reduction.

An international faculty of orthopaedic surgeons presented their work on the current challenges in hip surgery at the London Hip Meeting which was attended by over 400 delegates. The topics covered included femoroacetabular impingement, thromboembolic phenomena associated with hip surgery, bearing surfaces (including metal-on-metal articulations), outcomes of hip replacement surgery and revision hip replacement. We present a concise report of the current opinions on hip surgery from this meeting with appropriate references to the current literature.

The removal of all prosthetic material and a two-stage revision procedure is the established standard management of an infected total hip replacement (THR). However, the removal of well-fixed femoral cement is time-consuming and can result in significant loss of bone stock and femoral shaft perforation or fracture. We report our results of two-stage revision THR for treating infection, with retention of the original well-fixed femoral cement mantle in 15 patients, who were treated between 1989 and 2002. Following partial excision arthroplasty, patients received local and systemic antibiotics and underwent reconstruction and re-implantation at a second-stage procedure, when the infection had resolved.

The mean follow-up of these 15 patients was 82 months (60 to 192). Two patients had positive microbiology at the second stage and were treated with six weeks of appropriate antibiotics; one of these developed recurrent infection requiring further revision. Successful eradication of infection was achieved in the remaining 14 patients.

We conclude that when two-stage revision is used for the treatment of peri-prosthetic infection involving a THR, a well-fixed femoral cement mantle can be safely left in situ, without compromising the treatment of infection. Advantages of this technique include a shorter operating time, reduced loss of bone stock and a technically more straightforward second-stage procedure.

We evaluated the cost and consequences of proximal femoral fractures requiring further surgery because of complications. The data were collected prospectively in a standard manner from all patients with a proximal femoral fracture presenting to the trauma unit at the John Radcliffe Hospital over a five-year period. The total cost of treatment for each patient was calculated by separating it into its various components. The risk factors for the complications that arose, the location of their discharge and the mortality rates for these patients were compared to those of a matched control group. There were 2360 proximal femoral fractures in 2257 patients, of which 144 (6.1%) required further surgery. The mean cost of treatment in patients with complications was £18 709 (£2606.30 to £60.827.10), compared with £8610 (£918.54 to £45 601.30) for uncomplicated cases (p < 0.01), with a mean length of stay of 62.8 (44.5 to 79.3) and 32.7 (23.8 to 35.0) days, respectively. The probability of mortality after one month in these cases was significantly higher than in the control group, with a mean survival of 209 days, compared with 496 days for the controls. Patients with complications were statistically less likely to return to their own home (p < 0.01).

Greater awareness and understanding are required to minimise the complications of proximal femoral fractures and consequently their cost.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication which can follow a total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Although rare, this ongoing threat undermines the success of TJA, a historically reputable procedure. It has haunted the orthopedic community for decades and several ongoing studies have provided insights and new approaches to effectively battle this multilayered problem.

Between 1999 and 2005, 10 264 patients who had undergone total hip replacement (THR) for subcapital fracture of the hip were compared with 76 520 in whom THR had been performed for other reasons. All the cases were identified through the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. The THRs performed as primary treatment for fracture were also compared with those done after failure of internal fixation.

After seven years the rate of revision was higher in THR after fracture (4.4% vs 2.9%). Dislocation and periprosthetic fracture were the most common causes of revision. The risk was higher in men than in women. The type of femoral component and the surgical approach influenced the risk. After correction for gender, type of component and the surgical approach the revision rates were similar in the primary and secondary fracture THR groups.

Total hip replacement is therefore a safe method for both the primary and secondary management of fracture of the hip.