Aims

The aim of this study was to conduct a cross-sectional, observational cohort study of patients presenting for revision of a total hip, or total or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, to understand current routes to revision surgery and explore differences in symptoms, healthcare use, reason for revision, and the revision surgery (surgical time, components, length of stay) between patients having regular follow-up and those without.

Aims

Proximal femoral endoprosthetic replacements (PFEPRs) are the most common reconstruction option for osseous defects following primary and metastatic tumour resection. This study aimed to compare the rate of implant failure between PFEPRs with monopolar and bipolar hemiarthroplasties and acetabular arthroplasties, and determine the optimum articulation for revision PFEPRs.

Aseptic loosening of the acetabular component continues to be the most common indication for revision of total hip replacements in younger patients. Early in the evolution of the cemented hip, arthroplasty surgeons switched from removal to retention of the acetabular subchondral bone plate, theorising that unfavourable mechanical forces were the cause of loosening at the bone-cement interface. It is now known that the cause of aseptic loosening is probably biological rather than mechanical and removing the subchondral bone plate may enhance biological fixation of cement to bone. With this in mind, perhaps it is time to revive removal of the subchondral bone as a standard part of acetabular preparation

Aims

Cement-in-cement revision of the femoral component represents a widely practised technique for a variety of indications in revision total hip arthroplasty. In this study, we compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two polished tapered femoral components.

Aims

Adverse local tissue reactions associated with abnormal wear considerably slowed down the general use of metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), now limited to a few specialized centres. In this study, we provide the clinical results of 400 consecutive MoM HRAs implanted more than 20 years ago in one such centre.

We investigated 219 revisions of total hip replacement (THR) in 211 patients using a collarless double-taper cemented femoral component. The mean age of the patients was 72 years (30 to 90). The 137 long and 82 standard length stems were analysed separately. The mean follow-up was six years (2 to 18), and no patient was lost to follow-up. Survival of the long stems to re-revision for aseptic loosening at nine years was 98% (95% confidence interval (CI) 94 to 100), and for the standard stems was 93% (95% CI 85 to 100). At five years, one long stem was definitely loose radiologically and one standard stem was probably loose. Pre-operative femoral bone deficiency did not influence the results for the long stems, and corrective femoral osteotomy was avoided, as were significant subsidence, major stress shielding and persistent thigh pain. Because of these reliable results, cemented long collarless double-taper femoral components are recommended for routine revision THR in older patients

We followed prospectively 69 patients with 78 proximal femoral allografts performed for revision of total hip arthroplasty for an average of 36 months (range 29 to 68). Large fragment proximal femoral allografts and cortical strut allografts were successful in 85%. Grafts smaller than 3 cm in length (calcar grafts) were clinically successful in 81%, but 50% underwent significant radiographic resorption. We conclude that large proximal femoral allografts and cortical strut allografts provide dependable reconstruction of bone stock deficiencies during revision total hip arthroplasty

Dislocation is a common reason for revision following total hip replacement. This study investigated the relationship between the bearing surface and the risk of revision due to dislocation. It was based on 110 239 primary total hip replacements with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis collected by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry between September 1999 and December 2007. A total of 862 (0.78%) were revised because of dislocation. Ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces had a lower risk of requiring revision due to dislocation than did metal-on-polyethylene and ceramic-on-polyethylene surfaces, with a follow-up of up to seven years. However, ceramic-on-ceramic implants were more likely to have larger prosthetic heads and to have been implanted in younger patients. The size of the head of the femoral component and age are known to be independent predictors of dislocation. Therefore, the outcomes were stratified by the size of the head and age. There is a significantly higher rate of revision for dislocation in ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces than in metal-on-polyethylene implants when smaller sizes (≤ 28 mm) of the head were used in younger patients (< 65 years) (hazard ratio = 1.53, p = 0.041) and also with larger (> 28 mm) and in older patients (≥ 65 years) (hazard ratio = 1.73, p = 0.016)

We report 11 patients having revision of total hip arthroplasty using massive structural allografts for failure due to sepsis and associated bone loss. All patients had a two-stage reconstruction and the mean follow-up was 47.8 months (24 to 72). Positive cultures were obtained at the first stage in nine of the 11 patients, with Staphylococcus epidermidis being the most common organism. The other two patients had draining sinuses with negative cultures. There was no recurrence of infection in any patient. The mean increase in the modified Harris hip score was 45 and all the grafts appeared to have united to host bone. Two patients required additional procedures, but only one was related to the allograft. Complications included an incomplete sciatic nerve palsy and one case of graft resorption. Our results support the use of massive allografts in failed septic hip arthroplasty in which there is associated bone loss

In ten patients with sickle-cell disease, we used a new technique of cement injection for the treatment of 16 painful hips with a radiographic crescent line or flattening of the articular surface due to avascular necrosis. The necrotic bone and overlying cartilage are elevated by the injection to restore the sphericity of the femoral head. Five days after the operation, full weight-bearing was allowed with the help of crutches for three weeks. The time in hospital averaged eight days; the average blood loss was 100 ml. There was early pain relief and postoperative radiographs showed improvement in the shape of the femoral head. At a mean follow-up of 5 years (3 to 7), 14 of the 16 hips were still improved although some gave slight pain. Only two hips had required revision to total hip arthroplasty, at one year and two years respectively. The increasing longevity of patients with sickle-cell disease means that avascular necrosis will be an increasing problem. Total hip replacement has a poor prognosis because of the risks of infection, high blood loss, and early loosening. Cement injection does not have these problems and allows for earlier, more conservative surgery

Aims

A lack of supporting clinical studies have been published to determine the ideal length of intramedullary nail in fixation of trochanteric fractures of the hip. Nevertheless, there has been a trend to use shorter intramedullary nails for the internal fixation of trochanteric hip fractures. Our aim was to determine if the length of nail affected the outcome.

It is unusual, if not unique, for three major research papers concerned with the management of the fractured neck of femur (FNOF) to be published in a short period of time, each describing large prospective randomized clinical trials. These studies were conducted in up to 17 countries worldwide, involving up to 80 surgical centers and include large numbers of patients (up to 2,900) with FNOF. Each article investigated common clinical dilemmas; the first paper comparing total hip arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for FNOF, the second as to whether ‘fast track’ care offers improved clinical outcomes and the third, compares sliding hip with multiple cancellous hip screws. Each paper has been deemed of sufficient quality and importance to warrant publication in The Lancet or the New England Journal of Medicine. Although ‘premier’ journals, they only occationally contain orthopaedic studies and thus may not be routinely read by the busy orthopaedic/surgical clinician of any grade. It is therefore our intention with this present article to accurately summarize and combine the results of all three papers, presenting, in our opinion, the most important clinically relevant facts.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-6:198–202.

Aims

We compared implant and patient survival following intraoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures (IOPFFs) during primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) with matched controls.

We compared the rate of revision for instability after total hip replacement (THR) when lipped and non-lipped acetabular liners were used. We hypothesised that the use of a lipped liner in a modular uncemented acetabular component reduces the risk of revision for instability after primary THR. Using data from the New Zealand Joint Registry, we found that the use of a lipped liner was associated with a significantly decreased rate of revision for instability and for all other indications. Adjusting for the size of the femoral head, the surgical approach and the age and gender of the patient, this difference remained strongly significant (p < 0.001). We conclude that evidence from the New Zealand registry suggests that the use of lipped liners with modular uncemented acetabular components is associated with a decreased rate of revision for instability after primary THR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:884–8

We reviewed 1039 revision total hip replacements where an angle-bore acetabular component was used. After a mean follow-up of nine years (0 to 20.6), the incidence of revision for dislocation was 2.1% (22 revisions), a success rate of 97.9%. In 974 revisions, where the indication was other than dislocation, the success rate was 98.5%. Of the 65 revisions for dislocation, 58 (89.2%) were successful after the first revision and a further five after the second revision, an overall success of 96.9%. Two patients elected to have their implants removed. Dislocation after revision of failed total hip replacement is a complex issue. There is often no single cause and no simple solution. The angle-bore acetabular component, in combination with a 22.225-mm diameter femoral head, offers a high level of success

Aims

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and aseptic loosening in total hip arthroplasty (THA) can present with pain and osteolysis. The Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) has provided criteria for the diagnosis of PJI. The aim of our study was to analyze the utility of F18-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) CT scan in the preoperative diagnosis of septic loosening in THA, based on the current MSIS definition of prosthetic joint infection.

Objectives

Modern metal-on-metal (MoM) hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), while achieving good results with well-orientated, well-designed components in ideal patients, is contraindicated in women, men with head size under 50 mm, or metal hypersensitivity. These patients currently have no access to the benefits of HRA. Highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) has demonstrated clinical success in total hip arthroplasty (THA) and, when used in HRA, potentially reduces metal ion-related sequelae. We report the early performance of HRA using a direct-to-bone cementless mono-bloc XLPE component coupled with a cobalt-chrome femoral head, in the patient group for whom HRA is currently contraindicated.

We describe a technique to salvage a painful hemiarthroplasty due to erosion of the acetabular cartilage in the absence of loosening of the femoral component. A press-fit metallic acetabular component which matched the femoral component was used as a metal-on-metal articulation. The procedure offered a shorter operation time with less blood loss and no risk of femoral fracture as might have occurred during conventional revision to a total hip replacement. The patient made an unremarkable recovery with a good outcome at follow-up of 15 months

The removal of well-fixed bone cement from the femoral canal during revision of a total hip replacement (THR) can be difficult and risks the loss of excessive bone stock and perforation or fracture of the femoral shaft. Retaining the cement mantle is attractive, yet the technique of cement-in-cement revision is not widely practised. We have used this procedure at our hospital since 1989. The stems were removed to gain a better exposure for acetabular revision, to alter version or leg length, or for component incompatibility. We studied 136 hips in 134 patients and followed them up for a mean of eight years (5 to 15). A further revision was required in 35 hips (25.7%), for acetabular loosening in 26 (19.1%), sepsis in four, instability in three, femoral fracture in one and stem fracture in one. No femoral stem needed to be re-revised for aseptic loosening. A cement-in-cement revision of the femoral stem is a reliable technique in the medium term. It also reduces the risk of perforation or fracture of the femoral shaft