The aim of this study was to analyze and compare clinical, radiological and mortality outcomes of patients who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced neck of femur fractures using a SPAIRE technique when compared to a pair-matched control cohort who underwent the same procedure using the direct lateral approach.

A retrospective review of patients who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced neck of femur fractures by a single surgeon using a SPAIRE technique over a two-year period between July 2019 and July 2021 was performed. These were subsequently pair matched in a 5:1 ratio for age, gender, ASA grade and residential status with a control group who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty by 4 other surgeons using a direct lateral approach

The study included a total of 240 patients (40 and 200 pairmatched to SPAIRE and control groups respectively), with a mean age of 81.0 ± 8.2 years (63–99) and a mean follow-up of 12 ± 3 months (3–30). Overall, there was no significant difference in any of the radiological or mortality outcome scores assessed between the SPAIRE and control groups (p > 0.05 for all). There was a significantly lower number of patients in the SPAIRE group who dropped a level of mobility from their pre-injury baseline at 30-days post-operatively (8.1% versus 31.6%; p = 0.003). However, this appeared to have resolved at 120-day follow-up with no significant differences between the groups in terms of those acquiring a new baseline mobility at 120-days post-operatively (2.7% versus 13.2%, p = 0.09).

In cases of cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular neck of femur fractures, the SPAIRE technique appears to offer patients an earlier return to levels of baseline pre-injury mobility when compared to a direct lateral approach.

Introduction

Improvements in function after THA can be evaluated using validated health outcome surveys but studies have shown that PROMs are unreliable in following the progress of individuals. Formal gait lab analysis is expensive, time consuming and fixed in terms of location. Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) containing accelerometers and gyroscopes can determine aspects of gait kinematics in a portable package and can be used in the outpatient setting (Figure 1). In this study multiple metrics describing gait were evaluated pre- and post THA and comparisons made with the normal population

Introduction

Post-operative gait abnormalities are recognized following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Despite global improvement in functional outcome, gait abnormality persists for a decade or more. In this study 3-dimensional gait analysis (3DGA) was performed using a portable system with Inertial Measurement Units (IMUs) to quantify this abnormality.

Introduction

Wound closure following orthopaedic surgery is an important step requiring careful technique and suitable suture material. The use of subcuticular sutures has been advocated following use in animal models and has also been reported in the literature having been used in specialities such as Orthopaedic Surgery, Plastic Surgery and Obstetrics.

Revision of the femoral component during revision hip arthroplasty may pose significant technical challenges, most notably femoral fracture and bone perforation. The in-cementing technique allows use of the original bone-cement interface which has been proven to be biomechanically stronger than recementing after complete removal of the original cement mantle.

This study reviews a series of 54 consecutive revision hip arthroplasty procedures carried out by the senior author using the in-cementing technique from November 1999 to March 2003. Patients were followed up clinically and radiologically with serial outpatient reviews and their functional outcome was assessed using the Harris hip scoring system, the Oxford hip scoring system and the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity profile. Their physical and mental well-being was also assessed using the SF-36 self-questionnaire.

Fifty-four procedures were performed on 51 patients. There were 31 males and 20 females. The average age was 70.3+/-8.1 years (range: 45-83 years). The average time to revision from the original procedure was 132.8+/-59.0 months (range: 26-286 months). The average length of follow-up was 29.2+/-13.4 months (range: 6-51 months) post revision arthroplasty. Two patients suffered dislocations, one of which was recurrent and was revised with a Girdlestone's procedure. No patient displayed any evidence of radiographical loosening. The average Harris hip score of the study group was 85.2+/-11.6 (range: 51.9-98.5). The average Oxford hip score recorded was 19.6+/-7.7 (range: 12-41) and the average UCLA activity profile score was 5.9+/-1.6 (range: 3-8). The SF-36 questionnaire had an average value of 78.0+/-18.3 (range: 31.6-100).

In conclusion, the results of this study show excellent clinical and radiological results of the in-cementing technique with high patient satisfaction in terms of functional outcome. This technique merits consideration where possible in revision hip arthroplasty.

Introduction: Duchenne’s Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) is a progresssive sex linked recessive disorder predominantly involving skeletal muscle. Scoliosis is almost universal in patients with DMD. Surgical stabilisation carries significant risks and complications with per-operative mortality of < 6%. Cardiopulmonary complications along with severe intraoperative blood loss requiring massive nlood transfusion are the major cause of morbidity.

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy of single rod fusion technique in reducing the peroperative and post operative complications especially blood loss, duration of surgery and progression of curve.

Materials and Methods: Retrospective review- 32 patients with scoliosis secondary to DMD with an average age of 14 years (range, 11–18) underwent either single rod fusion technique (19 patients) using Isola rod system or Hartshill rectangle/double rod fusion technique (13 patients). Blood loss was measured directly from the peroperative suction and postoperative drainage, indirectly by weighing swabs. Vapour free hypotensive anaesthesia was used in all cases. Progression of curve was followed up in the outpatients.

Results: The mean operative time was 130 minutes (range, 80–180) for the single rod fusion technique in comparison to 250 minutes (range, 170–300) for the Hartshill/Double rod technique. The average blood loss for the single rod fusion technique was reduced, 2.2 L (range 0.4–4) versus 3.1L (0.8–4). The mean follow up was 35 months (range, 5–72). The inpatient stay was 12 days (range, 6–23). Seven patients developed complications: 3 ileus, 2 respiratory tract infections, one patient had loosening and migration of the rod, which required revision under LA, and one patient developed a superficial wound infection, which resolved with intravenous antibiotics.

Conclusion: In our experience, single rod stabilisation is a safe and quick method of correcting the DMD scoliotic spine, with less blood loss and complications compared to traditional methods.

Revision of the femoral component during revision hip arthroplasty may pose significant technical challenges, most notably femoral fracture and bone perforation. The in-cementing technique allows use of the original bone-cement interface that has been proven to be biomechanically stronger than recementing after complete removal of the original cement mantle.

This historical prospective study reviews a series of 54 consecutive revision hip arthroplasty procedures carried out by the senior author using the in-cementing technique from November 1999 to March 2003. Patients were followed up clinically and radiologically with serial outpatient reviews and their functional outcome was assessed using the Harris hip scoring system, the Oxford hip scoring system and the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) activity profile. Their physical and mental well being was also assessed using the SF-36 self-questionnaire.

Fifty-four procedures were performed on 51 patients. There were 31 males and 20 females. The average age was 70.3+/−8.1 years (range: 45 – 83 years). The average time to revision from the original procedure was 132.8+/−59.0 months (range: 26 – 286 months). The average length of follow up was 29.2+/−13.4 months (range: 6 – 51 months) post revision arthroplasty. Two patients suffered dislocations, one of which was recurrent and was revised with a Girdlestone’s procedure. No patient displayed any evidence of radiographical loosening. The average Harris hip score of the study group was 85.2+/−11.6 (range: 51.9 – 98.5). The average Oxford hip score recorded was 19.6+/−7.7 (range: 12 – 41) and the average UCLA activity profile score was 5.9+/−1.6 (range: 3 – 8). The SF-36 questionnaire had an average value of 78.0+/−18.3 (range: 31.6 – 100) with an average physical score of 73.3+/−22.2 (range: 20.5 – 100).

In conclusion, we feel the results of this study show excellent clinical and radiological results of the in-cementing technique with high patient satisfaction in terms of functional outcome. This technique merits consideration where possible in revision hip arthroplasty.