Early micromotion of hip implants measured with radiostereometric analysis (RSA) is a predictor for late aseptic loosening. Computed Tomography Radiostereometric Analysis (CT-RSA) can be used to determine implant micro-movements using low-dose CT scans. CT-RSA enables a non-invasive measurement of implants. We evaluated the precision of CT-RSA in measuring early stem migration. Standard marker-based RSA was used as reference. We hypothesised that CT-RSA can be used as an alternative to RSA in assessing implant micromotions.

We included 31 patients undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). Distal femoral stem migration at 1 year was measured with both RSA and CT-RSA. Comparison of the two methods was performed with paired-analysis and Bland-Altman plots. Furthermore, the inter- and intraobserver reliability of the CT-RSA method was evaluated.

No statistical difference was found between RSA and CTMA measurements. The Bland-Altman plots showed good agreement between marker-based RSA and CT-RSA. The intra- and interobserver reliability of the CT-RSA method was found to be excellent (≥0.992).

CT-RSA is comparable to marker-based RSA in measuring distal femoral stem migration. CTMA can be used as an alternative method to detect early implant migration.

In 2022, approximately 60% of inserted cups and stems in Sweden utilized cemented fixation. Two predominant brands, Refobacin Bone Cement R and Palacos R+G, both incorporating gentamicin, were employed in over 90% of primary cemented Total Hip Arthroplasties (THAs) between 2012 and 2022. This study investigates whether the choice between these cement types affects the risk of revision.

The five most frequently used cemented cups and the three most common stems were studied. Inclusion criteria encompassed hips with non-tumour diagnoses, operated through a direct lateral or posterior incision, featuring a 28–36 mm metal or ceramic head. Outcomes were assessed for cup revisions (n=55,457 Refobacin, 37,210 Palacos), stem revisions (n=51,732 Refobacin, 30,018 Palacos), and all-cemented THAs with either brand (n=45,265 Refobacin, 26,347 Palacos). Kaplan-Meier life tables and hazard ratios (HR) utilizing Cox regression were computed, adjusting for age, sex, diagnosis, implant type, femoral head size, and material.

Over a 10-year period, the cumulative percent revision with Refobacin was consistently higher than Palacos in all three analyses (cups: Refobacin 2.4 (2.3–2.5), Palacos 2.1 (2.0–2.2); stems: Refobacin 2.6 (2.5–2.7), Palacos 2.1 (2,0–2,2); all-cemented: Refobacin 3.2 (2.9–3.5), Palacos 2.9 (2.6–3.2)). Both unadjusted and adjusted HR were 13–25% lower with Palacos. In the analysis of all-cemented THAs, the adjusted HR for Palacos was 0.85 (0.76–0.95). Separating revisions into infectious and non-infectious reasons revealed a lower risk of infectious revisions with Palacos in all three analyses (all-cemented: adjusted HR infection 0.66 (0.56–0.78); non-infectious 1.10 (0.94–1.28)).

Hips cemented with Refobacin may face an increased risk of infection, potentially due to a smaller release of antibiotics into surrounding tissues. Unaccounted factors like different mixing systems or unknown biases could also influence outcomes, emphasizing the need for further investigation.

Introduction

While fixation on the acetabular side in resurfacing implants has been uncemented, the femoral component is usually cemented. The most common causes for early revision in hip resurfacing are femoral head and or neck fractures and aseptic loosening of the femoral component. Later failures appear to be more related to adverse soft-tissue reactions due to metal wear. Little is known about the effect of cementing techniques on the clinical outcome in hip resurfacing, since retrieval analysis of failed hip resurfacing show large variations. Two cementing techniques have dominated. The indirect low viscosity (LV) technique as for the Birmingham Hip resurfacing (BHR) system and the direct high viscosity (HV) technique as for the Articular Surface replacement (ASR) system. The ASR was withdrawn from the market in 2010 due to inferior short and midterm clinical outcome. This study presents an in vitro experiment on the cement mantle parameters and penetration into ASR resurfaced femoral heads comparing both techniques.