We have investigated whether improvements in design have altered the outcome for patients undergoing endoprosthetic replacement of the distal femur following tumour resection.

Survival of the implant and ‘servicing’ procedures have been documented using a prospective database and review of the implant design records and case records. A total of 335 patients underwent a distal femoral replacement with 162 having a fixed hinge design and 173 a rotating hinge with most of the latter group having a hydroxyapatite collar at the bone prosthesis junction. The median age of the patients was 24 years (range 13-82 yrs). With a minimum follow up of 5 years and a maximum of 30 years, 192 patients remain alive with a median follow-up of 11 years. The risk of revision for any reason was 17% at 5 years, 34% at 10 years and 58% at 20 years. One in ten patients developed an infection and 42% of these patients eventually required an amputation. Aseptic loosening was the most common reason for revision in the fixed hinge knees whilst infection and stem fracture were the most common reason in the rotating hinges. The risk of revision for aseptic loosening in the fixed hinges was 32% at ten years compared with nil for the rotating hinge knees with a hydroxyapatite collar. The overall risk of revision for any reason was halved by use of the rotating hinge, and for patients older than 40 years at time of implant.

The five year results of 8187 primary total knee replacements undertaken for osteoarthritis in patients under the age of 55 years are presented. The casese were submitted to the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry in the period 1st September 1999 to 31st December 2006. This represents 6.3% of the 130,377 primary knee replacements recorded by the registry for this period.

The five year cumulative revision rate for patients under the age of 55 years was 8.0% (95% CI: 7.2 to 8.9). We compared the results to outcomes of older patients aged over 70 years at the time of surgery. The younger patients have a significantly higher risk of revision in the first five years (hazard ratio of 2.9; 95% CI= 2.59 to 3.26; p< 0.0001). Gender, mode of fixation, the use of cruciate retention or substitution prostheses or patella resurfacing did not significantly affect the rate of revision in those patients aged 55 years or less. Survival of fixed bearing implants was significantly better than that of mobile bearings. The most common reason for revision in this group was loosening (32.3%).

Total knee replacement in patients under the age of 55 years is associated with a much higher risk of revision in the first five years. A decision to proceed with total knee replacement in this age group should be accompanied by a careful explanation of this significantly increased risk compared to knee replacement in older individuals.

The Exeter Universal Stem has limited published data with greater than 10 year results, this is from specialist orthopaedic centres using predominantly posterior approach. Our aim was to establish whether the published results could be reproduced in a District General Hospital (DGH) using a Hardinge approach.

We reviewed 131 consecutive primary THRs implanted into 127 patients between 1995 and 1997 (minimum10 year follow up). Surgery was performed through a Hardinge approach using the Exeter universal stem with the Ogee Elite acetabular component.

Outcome was assessed by patient review, completing an Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and reviewing the hospital records. Deceased patients’ hospital records were reviewed and their GP questioned.

5 of 131 hips required revision: 3 for infection at 4–7 years following implantation and 2 for aseptic loosening (one acetabulum only, one both components). There have been no cases of dislocation or sciatic nerve palsy. Kaplan-Meir survival analysis demonstrates ten year survival as follows: 95.3% survival with revision for any cause as the end point; 98.9% with revision for aseptic loosening of the stem as the endpoint, 98.1% with revision for aseptic loosening of the acetabular component as the endpoint, 97.2% with revision for infection as the endpoint.

The mean OHS was 22.7 (median =20, interquartile range 15–26).

This is the first series to report on the 10 year results with the Exeter Universal stem used exclusively in conjunction with the Ogee Elite acetabular component. It is also the first series to report the 10 year results using only the Hardinge approach. Our findings are the first to show that the Exeter universal stem in combination with the Ogee Elite acetabular component can be inserted through a Hardinge approach in a DGH setting with results comparable to surgery performed in a specialist unit and through a posterior approach.

We have investigated whether improvements in design have altered outcome for patients undergoing endoprosthetic replacement of the distal femur following tumour resection.

Survival of the implant and ‘servicing’ procedures has been documented using a prospective database and review of the implant design records and case records.

A total of 335 patients underwent a distal femoral replacement with 162 having a fixed hinge design and 173 a rotating hinge. The median age of the patients was 24 years (range 13–82yrs). With a minimum follow up of 5 years and a maximum of 30 years, 192 patients remain alive with a median follow up of 11 years. The risk of revision for any reason was 17% at 5 years, 33% at 10 years and 58% at 20 years. Aseptic loosening was the most common reason for revision in the fixed hinge knees whilst infection and stem fracture were the most common reason in the rotating hinges. The risk of revision for aseptic loosening in the fixed hinges was 35% at ten years but appears to have been abolished by the use of a the rotating hinge knee with a hydroxyapatite collar. The overall risk of revision for any reason was halved by use of the rotating hinge.

Improvements in design of distal femoral replacements have significantly decreased the risk of revision surgery but infection remains a serious problem for all patients. We believe that a cemented, rotating hinge prosthesis with a hydroxyapatite collar offers the best chance of long term prosthesis survival.

We have investigated whether improvements in design have altered outcome for patients undergoing endoprosthetic replacement of the distal femur following tumour resection.

Survival of the implant and ‘servicing’ procedures has been documented using a prospective database and review of the implant design records and case records.

A total of 335 patients underwent a distal femoral replacement with 162 having a fixed hinge design and 173 a rotating hinge. The median age of the patients was 24 years (range 13–82yrs). With a minimum follow up of 5 years and a maximum of 30 years, 192 patients remain alive with a median follow up of 11 years. The risk of revision for any reason was 17% at 5 years, 34% at 10 years and 58% at 20 years. Aseptic loosening was the most common reason for revision in the fixed hinge knees whilst infection and stem fracture were the most common reason in the rotating hinges. The risk of revision for aseptic loosening in the fixed hinges was 32% at ten years compared with 4% for rotating hinge knees with a hydroxyapatite collar. The overall risk of revision for any reason was halved by use of the rotating hinge.

Conclusion: Improvements in design of distal femoral replacements have significantly decreased the risk of revision surgery. Infection remains a serious problem for these patients.

Full thickness defects of articular cartilage have a poor capacity for biological repair and often progress to osteoarthritis. Various surgical techniques have been developed to overcome the inability of chondrocytes to heal injured cartilage. Arthroscopic lavage and debridement offer temporary symptomatic relief whereas marrow-stimulating techniques like drilling, microfracture and abrasion arthroplasty yield poor quality fibro-cartilage that is incapable of withstanding the mechanical stresses to which healthy articular cartilage is subjected.

We present our experience using the osteochondral graft transfer technique in the treatment of isolated Outerbridge grade 4 lesions of the knee. The study includes nineteen patients with a mean age of 29 years (range 17 to 40) presenting with symptomatic lesions of the knee with a mean defect size of 2.4cm (0.8 to 6). At a mean follow-up of 20 months (6 to 40) our results showed a significant improvement in patient function by a mean of 46 points or a 23% mean improvement as assessed by the Knee Society Score (P< 0.0001; One sample t-test). Similarly there was significant improvement in the Brittberg scores with a mean improvement by 2 clinical grades (p< 0.0001; Wilcoxon Rank test). Quality of life scores as measured by the Short Form 36 were dramatically improved by a mean of 24 points (p< 0.0001; Wilcoxon Rank test). In addition, there was significant reduction in pain post-operatively (p< 0.0001; Wilcoxon Rank test) with patients describing a mean improvement of 6 points as measured on the visual analogue chart. A significant number of patients (84.2%) were able to return to active sporting levels by 6 months (p< 0.0001;McNemar Change test).

The results of the osteochondral graft transfer technique, at relatively short-term follow-up, are encouraging with a high percentage of subjective satisfaction. This procedure proved to be a reliable and valid solution for treating isolated osteochondral defects of the knee, providing functional and durable cartilage that is critical to joint function.