A modular hemiarthroplasty has a Metal-on-Metal (MoM) taper-trunnion junction, which may lead to increased wear and Adverse-Reaction-to-Metal-Debris (ARMD). To-date no wear related issues have been described in the elderly and less active that receives a hemiarthroplasty. This study aims to determine in vivo wear (i.e. serum metal ion levels) in hip hemiarthroplasty, and identify factors associated with increased wear.

This is a prospective, IRB approved, single-centre, cohort study of patients that received an uncemented, modular hemiarthroplasty of proven design for the treatment of hip fracture between 2013–2015. All, alive, patients at 12-months post-implantation with AMTS≥6 were invited to participate. Of the 125 eligible patients, 50 accepted the invitation and were reviewed, including clinical/radiological assessment, metal-ion ([Chromium (Cr) and Cobalt (Co)]) measurement and Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Acetabular erosion was graded (0–3: normal-protrusio). Metal ion levels were considered high if ≥7ppb.

The mean OHS was 37 (SD: 10). No acetabular erosion was detected in 21, whilst the remaining had either grade-1 (n=21) or grade-2 (n=8). The median Cr and Co levels were 2.9 (SD:9) and 2.2 (SD:4) respectively. There were 8 cases (16%) with high ion levels. To-date only 2 of them has an ARMD lesion, and none have been revised. Patients with metal ion levels had similar pre-fall mobility, taper- and head- size and OHS to those with low metal ion levels (p=0.2–0.7) However, all hips with high metal ion levels had evidence of acetabular erosion (≥1).

Modular Hip hemiarthroplasties and their taper-trunnion junction are not immune to high wear and ARMD despite being implanted in a less active cohort. Acetabular erosion should alert clinicians, as it is associated with 20× increased-risk of taper wear, presumably due to the increased transmitted torque. Whether the use of modular hemiarthroplasties should remain is debatable.

Degenerative hip and spine pathologies often co-exist, as Hip-Spine-Syndrome (HSS). Many patients eventually need surgery in both hip (THR) and spine [decompression-spinal-arthrodesis (DSA)]. This case-control study aims to determine whether the presence of a DSA compromised THR outcome and whether outcome of THR is better if performed prior to- (THR-1^st) or after- DSA (THR-2^nd).

This is a single centre, multi-surgeon, retrospective, case-control study. Of the 748 patients that underwent DSA between 2004–15, 43 patients (54 THRs) have also had a 1° THR(s) at our unit and formed the cases. Thirty-two THRs were performed prior to the DSA (THR-1^st) and 22 were done following the DSA (THR-2^nd). Most cases had either 1- (n=3) or 2-level (n=20) DSA. The most common DSA level was L4/5 (n=23). The mean THR-DSA interval was 3.6 years. Controls were patients (n=67) without DSA or previous spinal surgery, that had a THR in our unit over the same study period matched for age, gender and type of THR implanted.

Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) were obtained using the Oxford-Hip- and Harris-Hip-Scores (OHS/HHS), with the difference between post- and pre-operative scores defined as Δ. Outcome was compared between Cases and Controls and between THR-1^st and THR-2^nd Groups. Outcome measures included complications, revisions, PROMs and cup orientations achieved.

The mean age at THR was 67 years old (SD: 11) and most patients were female (n=82, 68%). The mean cup inclination and anteversion angles were 41° (SD:8) and 21° (SD:8). At a mean follow-up of 6 years, the OHS improved from OHS_pre:16 (SD: 7) to OHS_fu:41 (SD:10) and the HHS improved from HHS_pre:51 (SD:14) to HHS_fu:88 (SD:13).

A greater incidence of complications were seen in the Cases (n=10; ARMD-3, infection-4, loosening-2, dislocation-1) compared to the Controls (n=3; dislocation-2, loosening-1) (p=0.01). Consequently, more THRs required revision in the Cases (n=7) compared to the Controls (n=1) (p=0.01). There were no differences in OHS_pre/OHS_fu/ΔOHS/HHS_pre/HHS_fu/ΔHHS between cases and controls (p=0.1 – 0.9).

There were no difference in complications (7/29 Vs. 3/25; p=0.3), nor revision rates (5/29 Vs. 2/25; p=0.3) between THA-1^st and THA-2^nd Groups. Greater differences in PROMs were detected between the groups. The THA-1^st Group, compared to the THA-2^nd Group had higher OHS_pre (19 Vs 12), HHS_pre (54 Vs 48), OHS_fu (43 Vs 32) and HHS_fu (93 Vs 76), (p=0.001–0.005). However, no statistically significant difference in ΔOHS (24 Vs 17) and ΔHHS (39 Vs 26) were seen between the THA-1^st and THA-2^nd Groups (p=0.1).

Patients with a 1° THR and DSA, had a greater rate complications and revisions compared to a matched control. Overall, no difference in PROMs were seen between Cases and Controls. No significantly increased risk of dislocation was seen in this predominantly 1- and 2-level DSA cohort. The superior PROMs detected in the THA-1^st Group provide evidence that the hip pathology should be addressed 1^st (in cases with 1- or 2-level planned DSA).