There remains concern with the use of constrained liners (CL) implanted at the time of acetabular cup revision in revision total hip replacement (rTHA). The aim of this study was to determine the implant survival in rTHA when a CL was implanted at the same time as acetabular cup revision. We reviewed our institutional database to identify all consecutive rTHAs where a CL was implanted simultaneously at the time acetabular cup revision from 2001 to 2021. One-hundred and seventy-four revisions (173 patients) were included in the study. Mean follow-up of 8.7 years (range two – 21.7). The most common indications for rTHA were instability (35%), second-stage periprosthetic joint infection (26.4%), and aseptic loosening (17.2%). Kaplan Meier Analysis was used to determine survival with all-cause re-revision and revision for cup aseptic loosening (fixation failure) as the endpoints. A total of 32 (18.3%) patients underwent re-revision at a mean time of 2.9 years (range 0.1 – 14.1). The most common reasons for re-revision were instability (14), periprosthetic joint infection (seven), and loosening of the femoral component (four). Three (1.7%) required re-revision due to aseptic loosening of the acetabular component (fixation failure) at a mean of two years (0.1 – 5.1). Acetabular component survival free from re-revision due to aseptic loosening was 98.9% (95% CI 97.3 – 100) at five-years and 98.1% (95% CI 95.8 – 100) at 10-years. There were no acetabular component fixation failures in modern highly porous shells. CLs implanted at the time acetabular cup revision in rTHA have a 98.1% 10-year survival free from acetabular cup aseptic loosening (fixation failure). There were no cup fixation failures in modern highly porous shells. Thus, when necessary, implanting a CL during revision of an acetabular component with stable screw fixation is safe with an extremely low risk of cup fixation failure.
To date, the literature has not yet revealed superiority of Minimally Invasive (MI) approaches over conventional techniques. We performed a systematic review to determine whether minimally invasive approaches are superior to conventional approaches in total hip arthroplasty for (1) clinical and (2) functional outcomes. We performed a meta-analysis of level 1 evidence to determine whether (3) minimally invasive approaches are superior to conventional approaches for clinical outcomes. All studies comparing MI approaches to conventional approaches were eligible for analysis. The PRISMA guidelines were adhered to throughout this study. Registries were searched using the following MeSH terms: ‘minimally invasive’, ‘muscle-sparing’, ‘THA’, ‘THR’, ‘hip arthroplasty’ and ‘hip replacement’. Locations searched included PubMed, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, the EU clinical trials register and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (World Health Organisation). Twenty studies were identified. There were 1,282 MI THAs and 1,351 conventional THAs performed. There was no difference between MI and conventional approaches for all clinical outcomes of relevance including all-cause revision (p=0.959), aseptic revision (p=0.894), instability (p=0.894), infection (p=0.669) and periprosthetic fracture (p=0.940). There was also no difference in functional outcome at early or intermediate follow-up between the two groups (p=0.38). In level I studies exclusively, random-effects meta-analysis demonstrated no difference in the rate of aseptic revision (p=0.461) between both groups. Intermuscular MI approaches are equivalent to conventional THA approaches when considering all-cause revision, aseptic revision, infection, dislocation, fracture rates and functional outcomes. Meta-analysis of level 1 evidence supports this claim.
Our objective is to describe early and midterm results with the use of a new knee prosthesis as an articulating spacer in planned two-stage management for infected total knee arthroplasty. As a second objective, we compared outcomes between the group with a retained first stage and those with a completed 2-stage revision. Forty-seven patients (48 knees) from January 2012 and November 2017 underwent a 2-stage exchange with an articulating spacer with new implants was used for a chronic knee periprosthetic joint infection with a mean follow-up of 3.7 years (2–6.5 years). The most frequently identified infecting organism was MSSA (31%), MRSA (21%) or MRSE (20%). At the first stage, a new PS femoral component and a new all-polyethylene posterior stabilized (PS) tibial component or a standard PS tibial liner were cemented with antibiotic-cement, typically 3.6 gm tobramycin and vancomycin 1.5 gm. IV antibiotics for six weeks were administered. The planned reimplantation was at 3 months, but ninetteen spacers (14 all poly tibias and 5 tibial liner) were retained for over 12 months. Postoperative assessment included knee range of motion (ROM), quality of life (QOL) scores (SF-12, WOMAC, KOOS, Oxford, and UCLA scores), and a satisfaction scale from 0–100%.Introduction
Methods
The number of medial unicompartmental knee replacements (UKR) performed for arthritis has increased and as such, revisions to total knee replacement (TKR) is increasing. Previous studies have investigated survivorship of UKR to TKR revision and functional outcomes compared to TKR to TKR revision, but have failed to detail the surgical considerations involved in these revisions. Our objectives are to investigate the detailed surgical considerations involved in UKR to TKR revisions. This study is a retrospective comparative analysis of a prospectively collected database. From 2005 to 2017, 61 revisions of UKR to TKR were completed at a single center. Our inclusion criteria included: revision of UKR to TKR or TKR to TKR with minimum 1 year follow-up. Our exclusion criteria include: single component and liner revisions and revision for infection. The 61 UKR to TKR revisions were matched 2:1 with respect to age, ASA and BMI to a group of 122 TKR to TKR revisions. The following data was collected: indication for and time to revision, operative skin to skin surgical time, the use of specialized equipment (augment size/location, stem use), intraoperative and postoperative complications, re-operations and outcome scores (WOMAC, Oxford 12, SF 12, satisfaction score).Introduction
Methods
The practice of overlapping surgery has been increasing in the delivery of orthopaedic care, aiming to provide efficient, high-quality care. However, there have been concerns about the safety of this practice. The purpose of this study is to examine safety and efficacy of a model of partially overlapping surgery that we termed “the swing room” in practice in primary hip and knee arthroplasty. A retrospective review of prospectively collected data using an administrative database was carried out on patients who underwent primary unilateral total hip and total knee arthroplasty from 2006 to 2017 at two sites of one academic center staffed by four arthroplasty surgeons. All revisions and bilateral primary procedures were excluded. Cases were stratified as overlapping or non-overlapping. Overlapping was defined when a surgeon had access to two operating rooms with two teams, and non-overlapping was defined as when a surgeon only had access to a single operating room on a particular day. Patient demographic characteristics, operating room time, procedure time, length of stay, Postoperative complications within 30 days of the procedure, unplanned hospital readmissions, unplanned reoperations, and emergency department visits were collected. The Fisher's exact Wilcoxon rank-sum test and logistic regression analysis were used for statistical analysis.Introduction
Methods
There is a postulated association between increased serum metal ions and pseudotumour formation in patients with metal-on-metal hip replacements. The primary aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of pseudotumour in 31 asymptomatic patients with a large femoral head (LFH) metal-on-metal hip implant. This was compared to the prevalence of pseudotumour in 20 matched asymptomatic patients with a hip resurfacing (HRA) and 24 matched asymptomatic patients with a standard metal-on-polyethylene (MOP) total hip. A secondary objective was to assess possible correlation between increased serum metal ions and pseudotumour formation Ultrasound examination of the three groups was performed at a minimum follow up of two years. Serum metal ions were measured in the metal-on-metal LFH and HRA groups at a minimum of two years.Purpose
Method
The outcome following isolated liner exchange for revision knee arthroplasty, while an attractive option for its simplicity, has a mixed outcome reported in the literature. We report our experience in patients who had a minimum of two years follow-up. From our database we identified 44 cases in 41 patients who had an isolated liner exchange for a failed primary knee replacement. Twenty were female and the mean body mass index was 33 (range 20 to 49). The mean time to revision from their index procedure was 76 months (range 8 to 152). The mean age at revision was 69 years (range 45 to 90). Patients were assessed by use of validated quality of life questionnaires: Oxford-12, UCLA Activity Level, WOMAC and SF-12. Patients current scores were compared to pre-operative scores in 19 cases. Radiographs were assessed for polyethylene wear, osteolysis and alignment with respect to the mechanical axis. Intra-operative findings were compared to radiographic findings.Purpose
Method
The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the MIS Anterolateral Approach to that of the MIS Posterolateral and MIS Direct Lateral Approach. A prospective randomized control trial was designed and conducted to compare the MIS Anterolateral Approach to that of the MIS Posterolateral and MIS Direct Lateral Approach. Contemporary methods for economic evaluation were used to ascertain direct and indirect costs (in Canadian dollars) along with clinical effectiveness outcomes (SF6D and Pat5D utility measures). University and hospital ethics was obtained and patients were recruited and consented to participate in the RCT resulting in the assignment of 130 patients MIS hip arthroplasty procedures. Baseline patient demographics, comorbidity, quality of life, and utility were obtained for all patients. In-hospital costing data was obtained including operating room and patient room costs as well as medication, rehab and complications. Post-discharge costs were calculated from direct and indirect costs of medication, rehab, medical costs and complications until one year post-operatively. Clinical effectiveness measures were administered at intervals until one year post-operatively.Purpose
Method
Revision of a failed acetabular reconstruction in total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be challenging when associated with significant bone loss. In cementless revision THA, achieving initial implant stability and maximising host bone contact is key to the success of reconstruction. Porous tantalum acetabular shells may represent an improvement from conventional porous coated uncemented cups in revision acetabular reconstruction associated with severe acetabular bone defects.
determine predictors of pain, function and activity level 1–2 years after revision hip arthroplasty and define quality of life outcomes after revision total hip replacement.
When considering WOMAC pain as an outcome variable, factors predictive of improving category outcome included baseline WOMAC function (p= 0.001), age between 60–70 (p<
0.004), male gender (p= 0.005), lower Charnley class (p<
0.001) and no previous revisions (p <
0.023). Baseline WOMAC pain did not predict final pain outcome. Baseline WOMAC function (p=0.001), the indication for the operation (p=0.007), and the operating surgeon were significant predictors of UCLA activity at follow up. Peri or post-operative complications were not an adverse predictor of physical function, pain or activity.