The December 2014 Knee Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: national guidance on arthroplasty thromboprophylaxis is effective; unicompartmental knee replacement has the edge in terms of short-term complications; stiff knees, timing and manipulation; neuropathic pain and total knee replacement; synovial fluid α-defensin and CRP: a new gold standard in joint infection diagnosis?; how to assess anterior knee pain?; where is the evidence? Five new implants under the spotlight; and a fresh look at ACL reconstruction

Acetabular bone loss is a challenging problem facing the revision total hip replacement surgeon. Reconstruction of the acetabulum depends on the presence of anterosuperior and posteroinferior pelvic column support for component fixation and stability. The Paprosky classification is most commonly used when determining the location and degree of acetabular bone loss. Augments serve the function of either providing primary construct stability or supplementary fixation.

When a pelvic discontinuity is encountered we advocate the use of an acetabular distraction technique with a jumbo cup and modular porous metal acetabular augments for the treatment of severe acetabular bone loss and associated chronic pelvic discontinuity.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):36–42.

The differential diagnosis of the painful total hip arthroplasty (resurfacing or total hip) includes infection, failure of fixation (loosening), tendinitis, bursitis, synovitis, adverse local tissue reaction (ALTR) to cobalt-chromium alloys, and non-hip issues, such as spinal disorders, hernia, gynecologic, and other pelvic pain. Assuming that the hip is the source of pain, the first level question is prosthetic or non-prosthetic pain generator? The second level prosthetic question is septic or aseptic? The third level question (aseptic hips) is well-fixed or loose? ALTR is best diagnosed by cross-sectional imaging. Successful treatment is dependent on correct identification and elimination of the pain generator. Treatment recommendations for ALTR and taper corrosion are evolving.

Aims

We assessed the difference in hospital based and early clinical outcomes between the direct anterior approach and the posterior approach in patients who undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA).

The February 2015 Knee Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Intra-operative sensors for knee balance; Mobile bearing no advantage; Death and knee replacement: a falling phenomenon; The swings and roundabouts of unicompartmental arthroplasty; Regulation, implants and innovation; The weight of arthroplasty responsibility!; BMI in arthroplasty

We evaluated the rates of survival and cause of revision of seven different brands of cemented primary total knee replacement (TKR) in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register during the years 1994 to 2009. Revision for any cause, including resurfacing of the patella, was the primary endpoint. Specific causes of revision were secondary outcomes.

Three posterior cruciate-retaining (PCR) fixed modular-bearing TKRs, two fixed non-modular bearing PCR TKRs and two mobile-bearing posterior cruciate-sacrificing TKRs were investigated in a total of 17 782 primary TKRs. The median follow-up for the implants ranged from 1.8 to 6.9 years. Kaplan-Meier 10-year survival ranged from 89.5% to 95.3%. Cox’s relative risk (RR) was calculated relative to the fixed modular-bearing Profix knee (the most frequently used TKR in Norway), and ranged from 1.1 to 2.6. The risk of revision for aseptic tibial loosening was higher in the mobile-bearing LCS Classic (RR 6.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.8 to 12.1)), the LCS Complete (RR 7.7 (95% CI 4.1 to 14.4)), the fixed modular-bearing Duracon (RR 4.5 (95% CI 1.8 to 11.1)) and the fixed non-modular bearing AGC Universal TKR (RR 2.5 (95% CI 1.3 to 5.1)), compared with the Profix. These implants (except AGC Universal) also had an increased risk of revision for femoral loosening (RR 2.3 (95% CI 1.1 to 4.8), RR 3.7 (95% CI 1.6 to 8.9), and RR 3.4 (95% CI 1.1 to 11.0), respectively). These results suggest that aseptic loosening is related to design in TKR.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:636–42.

We determined the efficacy of a devitalised autograft (n = 13) and allograft (n = 16) cortical strut bone graft combined with long-stem endoprosthetic reconstruction in the treatment of massive tumours of the lower limb. A total of 29 patients (18 men:11 women, mean age 20.1 years (12 to 45) with a ratio of length of resection to that of the whole prosthesis of > 50% were treated between May 2003 and May 2012. The mean follow-up was 47 months (15 to 132). The stem of the prosthesis was introduced through bone graft struts filled with cement, then cemented into the residual bone. Bone healing was achieved in 23 patients (86%). The mean Musculoskeletal Tumour Society functional score was 85% (57 to 97). The five-year survival rate of the endoprostheses was 81% (95% confidence intervals 67.3 to 92.3). The mean length of devitalised autografts and allografts was 8.6 cm (5 to 15), which increased the ratio of the the length of the stem of the prosthesis to that of the whole length of the prosthesis from a theoretical 35% to an actual 55%.

Cortical strut bone grafting and long-stem endoprosthetic reconstruction is an option for treating massive segmental defects following resection of a tumour in the lower limb. Patients can regain good function with a low incidence of aseptic loosening. The strut graft and the residual bone together serve as a satisfactory bony environment for a revision prosthesis, if required, once union is achieved.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:544–9.

Large ceramic femoral heads offer several advantages that are potentially advantageous to patients undergoing both primary and revision total hip replacement. Many high-quality studies have demonstrated the benefit of large femoral heads in reducing post-operative instability. Ceramic femoral heads may also offer an advantage in reducing polyethylene wear that has been reported in vitro and is starting to become clinically apparent in mid-term clinical outcome studies. Additionally, the risk of taper corrosion at a ceramic femoral head–neck junction is clearly lower than when using a metal femoral head. With improvements in the material properties of both modern ceramic femoral heads and polyethylene acetabular liners that have reduced the risk of mechanical complications, large ceramic heads have gained popularity in recent years.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:63–6.

We reviewed the outcome of 69 uncemented, custom-made, distal femoral endoprosthetic replacements performed in 69 patients between 1994 and 2006. There were 31 women and 38 men with a mean age at implantation of 16.5 years (5 to 37). All procedures were performed for primary malignant bone tumours of the distal femur. At a mean follow-up of 124.2 months (4 to 212), 53 patients were alive, with one patient lost to follow-up. All nine implants (13.0%) were revised due to aseptic loosening at a mean of 52 months (8 to 91); three implants (4.3%) were revised due to fracture of the shaft of the prosthesis and three patients (4.3%) had a peri-prosthetic fracture. Bone remodelling associated with periosteal cortical thinning adjacent to the uncemented intramedullary stem was seen in 24 patients but this did not predispose to failure. All aseptically loose implants in this series were diagnosed to be loose within the first five years.

The results from this study suggest that custom-made uncemented distal femur replacements have a higher rate of aseptic loosening compared to published results for this design when used with cemented fixation. Loosening of uncemented replacements occurs early indicating that initial fixation of the implant is crucial.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:263–9.

Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is projected to increase by 137% from the years 2005 to 2030. Reconstruction of the femur with massive bone loss can be a formidable undertaking. The goals of revision surgery are to create a stable construct, preserve bone and soft tissues, augment deficient host bone, improve function, provide a foundation for future surgery, and create a biomechanically restored hip. Options for treatment of the compromised femur include: resection arthroplasty, allograft prosthetic composite (APC), proximal femoral replacement, cementless fixation with a modular tapered fluted stem, and impaction grafting. The purpose of this article is to review the treatment options along with their associated outcomes in the more severe femoral defects (Paprosky types IIIb and IV) in revision THA.

We evaluated an operative technique, described by the Exeter Hip Unit, to assist accurate introduction of the femoral component. We assessed whether it led to a reduction in the rate of leg-length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty (THA).

A total of 100 patients undergoing THA were studied retrospectively; 50 were undertaken using the test method and 50 using conventional methods as a control group. The groups were matched with respect to patient demographics and the grade of surgeon. Three observers measured the depth of placement of the femoral component on post-operative radiographs and measured the length of the legs.

There was a strong correlation between the depth of insertion of the femoral component and the templated depth in the test group (R = 0.92), suggesting accuracy of the technique. The mean leg-length discrepancy was 5.1 mm (0.6 to 21.4) pre-operatively and 1.3 mm (0.2 to 9.3) post-operatively. There was no difference between Consultants and Registrars as primary surgeons. Agreement between the templated and post-operative depth of insertion was associated with reduced post-operative leg-length discrepancy. The intra-class coefficient was R ≥ 0.88 for all measurements, indicating high observer agreement. The post-operative leg-length discrepancy was significantly lower in the test group (1.3 mm) compared with the control group (6.3 mm, p < 0.001).

The Exeter technique is reproducible and leads to a lower incidence of leg-length discrepancy after THA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:154–9.

A key to the success of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a safe surgical approach using an exposure that minimises complications. In most patients, a medial parapatellar arthrotomy with complete synovectomy is sufficient. If additional exposure is needed, a quadriceps snip performed through the quadriceps tendon often provides the additional exposure required. It is simple to perform and does not alter the post-operative rehabilitative protocol. In rare cases, in which additional exposure is needed, or when removal of a cemented long-stemmed tibial component is required, a tibial tubercle osteotomy (TTO) may be used. Given the risk of post-operative extensor lag, a V-Y quadricepsplasty is rarely indicated and usually considered only if TTO is not possible.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):113–15.

The term developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) describes a spectrum of disorders that results in abnormal development of the hip joint. If not treated successfully in childhood, these patients may go on to develop hip symptoms and/or secondary osteoarthritis in adulthood. In this review we describe the altered anatomy encountered in adults with DDH along with the management options, and the challenges associated with hip arthroscopy, osteotomies and arthroplasty for the treatment of DDH in young adults.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:732–7.

The custom triflange is a patient-specific implant for the treatment of severe bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Through a process of three-dimensional modelling and prototyping, a hydroxyapatite-coated component is created for acetabular reconstruction. There are seven level IV studies describing the clinical results of triflange components. The most common complications include dislocation and infection, although the rates of implant removal are low. Clinical results are promising given the challenging problem. We describe the design, manufacture and implantation process and review the clinical results, contrasting them to other methods of acetabular reconstruction in revision THA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):68–72.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) complicates between 0.5% and 1.2% primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and may have devastating consequences. The traditional assessment of patients suffering from PJI has involved the serological study of inflammatory markers and microbiological analysis of samples obtained from the joint space. Treatment has involved debridement and revision arthroplasty performed in either one or two stages.

We present an update on the burden of PJI, strategies for its diagnosis and treatment, the challenge of resistant organisms and the need for definitive evidence to guide the treatment of PJI after THA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):27–30.

The August 2013 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: are we getting it right first time?; tantalum augments in revision hip surgery; lower wear in dual mobility?; changing faces changes outcomes; synovial fluid aspiration in MOM hips; taper disease: the new epidemic of hip surgery; the super-obese and THR; and whether well fixed stems can remain in infected hips

Version of the femoral stem is an important factor influencing the risk of dislocation after total hip replacement (THR) as well as the position of the acetabular component. However, there is no radiological method of measuring stem anteversion described in the literature. We propose a radiological method to measure stem version and have assessed its reliability and validity. In 36 patients who underwent THR, a hip radiograph and CT scan were taken to measure stem anteversion. The radiograph was a modified Budin view. This is taken as a posteroanterior radiograph in the sitting position with 90° hip flexion and 90° knee flexion and 30° hip abduction. The angle between the stem-neck axis and the posterior intercondylar line was measured by three independent examiners. The intra- and interobserver reliabilities of each measurement were examined. The radiological measurements were compared with the CT measurements to evaluate their validity. The mean radiological measurement was 13.36° (sd 6.46) and the mean CT measurement was 12.35° (sd 6.39) (p = 0.096). The intra- and interobserver reliabilities were excellent for both measurements. The radiological measurements correlated well with the CT measurements (p = 0.001, r = 0.877). The modified Budin method appears reliable and valid for the measurement of femoral stem anteversion.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:877–80.

The ‘jumbo’ acetabular component is now commonly used in acetabular revision surgery where there is extensive bone loss. It offers high surface contact, permits weight bearing over a large area of the pelvis, the need for bone grafting is reduced and it is usually possible to restore centre of rotation of the hip. Disadvantages of its use include a technique in which bone structure may not be restored, a risk of excessive posterior bone loss during reaming, an obligation to employ screw fixation, limited bone ingrowth with late failure and high hip centre, leading to increased risk of dislocation. Contraindications include unaddressed pelvic dissociation, inability to implant the component with a rim fit, and an inability to achieve screw fixation. Use in acetabulae with < 50% bone stock has also been questioned. Published results have been encouraging in the first decade, with late failures predominantly because of polyethylene wear and aseptic loosening. Dislocation is the most common complication of jumbo acetabular revisions, with an incidence of approximately 10%, and often mandates revision. Based on published results, a hemispherical component with an enhanced porous coating, highly cross-linked polyethylene, and a large femoral head appears to represent the optimum tribology for jumbo acetabular revisions.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):64–7.

Peri-acetabular tumour resections and their subsequent reconstruction are among the most challenging procedures in orthopaedic oncology. Despite the fact that a number of different pelvic endoprostheses have been introduced, rates of complication remain high and long-term results are mostly lacking.

In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate the outcome of reconstructing a peri-acetabular defect with a pedestal cup endoprosthesis after a type 2 or type 2/3 internal hemipelvectomy.

A total of 19 patients (11M:8F) with a mean age of 48 years (14 to 72) were included, most of whom had been treated for a primary bone tumour (n = 16) between 2003 and 2009. After a mean follow-up of 39 months (28 days to 8.7 years) seven patients had died. After a mean follow-up of 7.9 years (4.3 to 10.5), 12 patients were alive, of whom 11 were disease-free. Complications occurred in 15 patients. Three had recurrent dislocations and three experienced aseptic loosening. There were no mechanical failures. Infection occurred in nine patients, six of whom required removal of the prosthesis. Two patients underwent hindquarter amputation for local recurrence.

The implant survival rate at five years was 50% for all reasons, and 61% for non-oncological reasons. The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score at final follow-up was 49% (13 to 87).

Based on these poor results, we advise caution if using the pedestal cup for reconstruction of a peri-acetabular tumour resection.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1706–12.