Positioning of the hip resurfacing is crucial for its long term survival and is critical in young patients for some reasons; manly increase the wear in the components and change the load distribution. THR have increased in the last years, mainly in young patients between 45 to 59 years old. The resurfacing solution is indicated for young patients with good bone quality. A long term solution is required for these patients to prevent hip revision. The resurfacing prosthesis Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) was analyzed in the present study by in vitro experimental studies. This gives indications for surgeons when placing the acetabular cup. One synthetic left model of composite femur (Sawbones®, model 3403), which replicates the cadaveric femur, and four composite pelvic bones (Sawbones®, model 3405), were used to fix the commercial models of Hip resurfacing (Birmingham model). The resurfacing size was chosen according to the head size of femurs with 48 mm head diameter and a cup with 58 mm. They were introduced by an experimented surgeon with instrumental of prosthesis. The cup is a press fit system and the hip component was cemented using bone cement Simplex, Stryker Corp. The acetabular cup was analyzed in 4 orientations; in anteverion with 15º and 20°; and in inclination 40 and 45°. Combinations of these were also considered The experimental set-up was applied according to a system previously established by Ramos When the femur was instrumented with three rosettes in medial, anterior and posterior aspect, the maximum strain magnitude was observed in the medial aspect of femur with a minimum principal strain of −2070µε for 45° inclination and 20° of anterversion. The pubic region was found most critical region after instrumenting the Iliac bone with four rosettes, with a minimum principal strain around −2500µε (rosette 1), for the 45° inclination and 20° of anterversion. We have observed the great influence of the inclination on the strain distribution, changing its magnitude from compression to traction in different bone regions. The minimum principal strain is more critical in medial aspect of the femur and the influence of strain is about 7% when orientation and inclination change. The maximum influence was observed in the anterior aspect, where the anteversion presents a significant influence. The results show the interaction between inclination and anterversion in all aspects, being observed lower values in lower angles. The orientation of the acetabular cup significantly influences the strain distribution on the iliac surface. Besides, as anterversion increases, more strains are induced, mainly in the region of iliac body (rosette 3).
Infection after total knee replacement, which is a serious and expensive complication, often represent a diagnostic and therapeutic problem. The current incidence of infection after the primary procedure is 1 to 3%, depending on the published series. A correct and timely diagnosis, classification between early and delayed infection, and which microorganisms are involved, are crucial steps in defining prevention and treatment strategies. Determination of the annual and three years incidence of infection after primary total knee replacement; evaluation of the microorganisms involved and its resistance patterns; assessment of treatment – surgical approach and selection of antibiotics. Collection of clinical and laboratorial data of all patients who underwent primary total knee arthroplasty between 2011 and 2013 in our hospital; definition of periprosthesic infection cases following the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. During the study period, 526 primary knee replacements were performed in 521 patients; with 41 patients having bilateral replacements. The mean follow-up period was 30 months; 5 patients had no follow up and 1 died in the post operatory. We reported 9 prosthetic infections, of which 2 did not reached the MSIS criteria, but were also considered based on high clinical suspicion. The majority of the cases (6) were delayed infections. The calculated 3 year incidence of infection after primary knee replacement was 1,6%, with annual rates of 3,0% (2011), 1,7% (2012) and 0,9% (2013). The microorganisms isolated were as follows: Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci, resistant to penicillin; Streptococcus agalactiae and one isolate of Serratia marcescens, both showing multiple antibiotic resistances. Only one case was treated with surgical debridement and conservation of prosthesis, in the other 8 cases a two-stage implant revision procedure was performed. The antibiotics selected were vancomycin, fluoroquinolones and association of gentamicin and clindamycin. Our local infection rates are in line with the published series from reference surgical centers. The annual incidence is decreasing, probably because the majority of our infection cases are delayed (recent years, shorter follow up period) and our preventive measures are improving. The microorganisms identified are also in agreement with published data, and our antibiotic resistance pattern is a valuable information to consider in a first empirical approach. Treatment options suitable to each case, and antibiotic protocols need to be improved in our local practice. Preventive measures in delayed infections are still under debate, and represent another future challenge.
