Aims. Head-taper corrosion is a cause of failure in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Recent reports have described an increasing number of V40 taper failures with
Adverse reaction to wear and corrosion debris
is a cause for concern in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Modular junctions
are a potential source of such wear products and are associated
with secondary pseudotumour formation. We present a consecutive series of 17 patients treated at our
unit for this complication following metal-on-highly cross-linked
polyethylene (MoP) THA. We emphasise the risk of misdiagnosis as
infection, and present the aggregate laboratory results and pathological
findings in this series. The clinical presentation was pain, swelling or instability.
Solid, cystic and mixed soft-tissue lesions were noted on imaging
and confirmed intra-operatively. Corrosion at the head–neck junction
was noted in all cases. No bacteria were isolated on multiple pre-
and intra-operative samples yet the mean erythrocyte sedimentation
rate was 49 (9 to 100) and C-reactive protein 32 (0.6 to 106) and
stromal polymorphonuclear cell counts were noted in nine cases. Adverse soft–tissue reactions can occur in MoP THA owing to corrosion
products released from the head–neck junction. The diagnosis should
be carefully considered when investigating pain after THA. This
may avoid the misdiagnosis of periprosthetic infection with an unidentified
organism and mitigate the unnecessary management of these cases
with complete single- or two-stage exchange. Cite this article:
Fretting and corrosion at the modular head/neck junction, known
as trunnionosis, in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a cause of adverse
reaction to metal debris (ARMD). We describe the outcome of revision
of metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) THA for ARMD due to trunnionosis
with emphasis on the risk of major complications. A total of 36 patients with a MoP THA who underwent revision
for ARMD due to trunnionosis were identified. Three were excluded
as their revision had been to another metal head. The remaining
33 were revised to a ceramic head with a titanium sleeve. We describe
the presentation, revision findings, and risk of complications in
these patients.Aims
Patients and Methods
Aims. The purpose of this study is to examine six types of bearing surfaces implanted at a single institution over three decades to determine whether the reasons for revision vary among the groups and how long it takes to identify differences in survival. Methods. We considered six cohorts that included a total of 1,707 primary hips done between 1982 and 2010. These included 223 conventional polyethylene sterilized with γ irradiation in air (CPE-GA), 114 conventional polyethylene sterilized with gas plasma (CPE-GP), 116 crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE), 1,083 metal-on-metal (MOM), 90 ceramic-on-ceramic (COC), and 81 surface arthroplasties (SAs). With the exception of the COC, all other groups used cobalt-chromium (CoCr) femoral heads. The mean follow-up was 10 (0.008 to 35) years. Descriptive statistics with revisions per 100 component years (re/100 yr) and survival analysis with revision for any reason as the endpoint were used to compare bearing surfaces. Results. XLPE liners demonstrated a lower cumulative incidence of revision at 15 years compared to the CPE-GA and CPE-GP groups owing to the absence of wear-related revisions (4% for XLPE vs 18%, p = 0.02, and 15%, p = 0.003, respectively). Revisions for
Aims. Advances in surgical technique and implant design may influence the incidence and mechanism of failure resulting in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). The purpose of the current study was to characterize aetiologies requiring rTHA, and to determine whether temporal changes existed in these aetiologies over a ten-year period. Methods. All rTHAs performed at a single institution from 2009 to 2019 were identified. Demographic information and mode of implant failure was obtained for all patients. Data for rTHA were stratified into two time periods to assess for temporal changes: 2009 to 2013, and 2014 to 2019. Operative reports, radiological imaging, and current procedural terminology (CPT) codes were cross-checked to ensure the accurate classification of revision aetiology for each patient. Results. In all, 2,924 patients with a mean age of 64.6 years (17 to 96) were identified. There were 1,563 (53.5%) female patients, and the majority of patients were Caucasian (n = 2,362, 80.8%). The three most frequent rTHA aetiologies were infection (27.2%), aseptic loosening (25.2%), and wear (15.2%). The frequency of rTHA for
Aims.
Aims. Hip resurfacing remains a potentially valuable surgical procedure for appropriately-selected patients with optimised implant choices. However, concern regarding high early failure rates continues to undermine confidence in use. A large contributor to failure is
Aims. Modular dual-mobility constructs reduce the risk of dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). However, questions about metal ions from the cobalt-chromium (CoCr) liner persist, and are particularly germane to patients being revised for
Aims. We present a case series of ten metal-on-polyethylene total hip
arthroplasties (MoP THAs) with delayed dislocation associated with
unrecognised
Dislocation remains among the most common complications
of, and reasons for, revision of both primary and revision total
hip replacements (THR). Hence, there is great interest in maximising
stability to prevent this complication. Head size has been recognised
to have a strong influence on the risk of dislocation post-operatively.
As femoral head size increases, stability is augmented, secondary
to an increase in impingement-free range of movement. Larger head
sizes also greatly increase the ‘jump distance’ required for the
head to dislocate in an appropriately positioned cup. Level-one
studies support the use of larger diameter heads as they decrease
the risk of dislocation following primary and revision THR. Highly cross-linked
polyethylene has allowed us to increase femoral head size, without
a marked increase in wear. However, the thin polyethylene liners
necessary to accommodate larger heads may increase the risk of liner
fracture and larger heads have also been implicated in causing soft-tissue
impingement resulting in groin pain. Larger diameter heads also
impart larger forces on the femoral trunnion, which may contribute
to corrosion, metal release, and
Whitehouse MR, Endo M, Zachara S, Nielsen TO,
Greidanus NV, Masri BA, Garbuz DS, Duncan CP.
Objectives. Hips with metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty (MoM THA) have a high rate of
The use of large-diameter metal-on-metal (MoM)
components in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is associated with an increased
risk of early failure due to
Large-head metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip replacements
(THR) have given rise to concern. Comparative studies of small-head
MoM THRs over a longer follow-up period are lacking. Our objective
was to compare the incidence of complications such as infection,
dislocation, revision,
There is little information in the literature about the use of dual-mobility (DM) bearings in preventing re-dislocation in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to compare the use of DM bearings, standard bearings, and constrained liners in revision THA for recurrent dislocation, and to identify risk factors for re-dislocation. We reviewed 86 consecutive revision THAs performed for dislocation between August 2012 and July 2019. A total of 38 revisions (44.2%) involved a DM bearing, while 39 (45.3%) and nine (10.5%) involved a standard bearing and a constrained liner, respectively. Rates of re-dislocation, re-revision for dislocation, and overall re-revision were compared. Radiographs were assessed for the positioning of the acetabular component, the restoration of the centre of rotation, leg length, and offset. Risk factors for re-dislocation were determined by Cox regression analysis. The modified Harris Hip Scores (mHHSs) were recorded. The mean age of the patients at the time of revision was 70 years (43 to 88); 54 were female (62.8%). The mean follow-up was 5.0 years (2.0 to 8.75).Aims
Methods
This study evaluated the definitions developed by the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) 2021, the International Consensus Meeting (ICM) 2018, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) 2013, for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). In this single-centre, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, patients with an indicated revision surgery after a total hip or knee arthroplasty were included between 2015 and 2020. A standardized diagnostic workup was performed, identifying the components of the EBJIS, ICM, and IDSA criteria in each patient.Aims
Methods
The first aim of this study was to evaluate whether preoperative renal function is associated with postoperative changes in whole blood levels of metal ions in patients who have undergone a Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) arthroplasty with a metal-on-metal bearing. The second aim was to evaluate whether exposure to increased cobalt (Co) and chromium (Cr) levels for ten years adversely affected renal function. As part of a multicentre, prospective post-approval study, whole blood samples were sent to a single specialized laboratory to determine Co and Cr levels, and the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The study included patients with 117 unrevised unilateral BHRs. There were 36 females (31%). The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery of 51.3 years (SD 6.5), and they all had preoperative one-, four-, five-, and ten-year laboratory data. The mean follow-up was 10.1 years (SD 0.2).Aims
Methods
The December 2022 Hip & Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: Fix and replace: simultaneous fracture fixation and hip arthroplasty for acetabular fractures in older patients; Is the revision rate for femoral neck fracture lower for total hip arthroplasty than for hemiarthroplasty?; Femoral periprosthetic fractures: data from the COMPOSE cohort study; Dual-mobility cups and fracture of the femur; What’s the deal with outcomes for hip and knee arthroplasty outcomes internationally?; Osteochondral lesions of the femoral head: is costal cartilage the answer?