Background

Hip Hemiarthroplasty is one of the commonest orthopaedic operation done in UK with recent NHFD data from 2017 report showing that 43% of the 77000 patients who presented to hospital had hemiarthroplasty. Literature suggests dislocation rate of 0.8% – 6.1% for Hip Hemiarthroplasty. Dislocation of hemiarthroplasty may lead to significant morbidity and mortality.

Two of commonest types of hemiarthroplasty used for the treatment of a displaced intracapsular fracture are the uncemented Austin Moore Prosthesis and cemented Thompson hemiarthroplasty. We performed this trial to determine if any difference in outcome exist between these implants.

We undertook a prospective randomised controlled trial of four hundred patients with a displaced intra-capsular hip fracture. All operations were performed or supervised by one orthopaedic surgeon and all by a standard anterolateral approach. Patients were followed by a nurse blinded in the type of prosthesis to assess residual pain and mobility.

The average age of the patients was eighty-three years and 23% were male. 73% came from their own home with the remainder from institutional care. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between groups. Pain scores were less for those treated by a cemented prosthesis (p value < 0.00001). Mobility change was also less for those treated with a cemented implant (p=0002). No difference was found in hospital stay, implant related complications, re-operations or post-operative medical complications between the two groups. One case of non-fatal intraoperative cardiac arrest occurred in the cemented group.

In summary a cemented Thompson Hemiarthroplasty causes less pain and less deterioration in mobility compared to the uncemented Austin Moore hemiarthroplasty, without any increase in complications. The continued use of an uncemented Austin Moore cannot be recommended.

Introduction: Two of commonest types of hemiarthroplasty used for the treatment of a displaced intracapsular fracture are the uncemented Austin Moore Prosthesis and cemented Thompson hemiarthroplasty.

Methods: To determine if any difference in outcome exists between these implants, we undertook a prospective randomised controlled trial of 400 patients with a displaced intracapsular hip fracture. All operations were performed or supervised by one orthopaedic surgeon and all by a standard anterolateral approach. Patients were followed by a nurse blinded in the type of prosthesis to assess residual pain and mobility.

Results: The average age of the patients was 83 years and 23% were male. 73% came from their own home with the remainder from institutional care. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between groups. Pain scores were less for those treated by a cemented prosthesis (p value < 0.00001). Mobility change was also less for those treated with a cemented implant (p=0002). No difference was found in hospital stay, implant related complications, re-operations or post-operative medical complications between the two groups. One case of non-fatal intraoperative cardiac arrest occurred in the cemented group.

Discussion: In summary a cemented Thompson Hemiarthroplasty causes less pain and less deterioration in mobility compared to the uncemented Austin Moore hemiarthroplasty, without any increase in complications. The continued use of an uncemented Austin Moore cannot be recommended.

The admission radiographs for 404 patients with a displaced intracapsular hip fracture treated by reduction and internal fixation were classified using five different variables. These were the Garden grade, a modified Garden grading, a ratio of fracture displacement, direct measurement of fracture shortening and trochanteric shortening. Inter-observer reliability of the various classifications was also studied.

Only trochanteric shortening had an acceptable degree of inter-observer variation. For the Garden grading equal numbers of grade III and IV fracture healed. For the modified Garden grading 36% of Grade III fractures developed non-union against 48% of grade IV fractures (p value =0.02). The ratio method and fracture shortening were related to fracture healing complications, but trochanteric shortening was predictive of fracture healing (15.2 mms versus 11.0 mm), although the usefulness of this measure in clinical practice has to be questioned.

The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine based on evidence from all randomised controlled trials whether closed suction drainage is preferable to no drainage for all types of Orthopaedic surgery. Trials were identified by a search strategy developed by the Cochrane Collaborative involving hand searching of major journals and computer aided searching of other databases.

Twenty-nine studies were identified but nine were excluded owing to problems with study design or under-reporting of outcomes. Twenty studies involving 2749 patients with 2946 wounds were included in our analysis. These studies included 566 THRs, 860 TKRs, 333 proximal femoral fractures, 287 non-emergency fractures and 900 other procedures.

Two reviewers independently extracted data from the papers. Methodology of the studies was assessed using a nine point scoring system. Generally the studies scored poorly, possibly owing to under-reporting of outcomes.

No study clearly differentiated against deep and superficial wound infections therefore all wound infections were considered together. No differences between the drained and the undrained groups was noted for wound infection overall or in any of the operative sub-groups. Similarly no difference was found for the outcomes of wound haematomas, infection, wound dehiscence, transfusion requirements, limb swelling, venous thrombosis, mortality or hospital stay.

There was a tendency to a higher re-operation rate for wound healing complications and significantly more patients required transfusion in the drained group. The only benefit that was shown in favour of the use of drains was that significantly more patients in the undrained group required dressing reinforcement.

Based on the randomised, controlled trials to date, the routine use of closed suction drainage in Orthopaedic surgery is questionable.

The gamma interlocking nail, designed combining the advantages of the sliding hip screw with the intramedullary nail, was initially introduced for the management of unstable proximal femoral fractures. However the unacceptably high incidence of lateral femoral shaft fractures led to the development of the long gamma nail.

This is the result of a prospective study of the use of the long gamma nail in 35 patients over a 7 year period till March 2000. The mean age of the patients was 69.9 years. There were 13 men and 22 women. All but two of the fractures had a subtrochanteric component. Ten were pathological fractures.

An identical size of nail was used in all cases. Elderly patients were permitted to mobilise without restriction, whereas partial weight bearing was imposed on the younger patients till some signs of radiological healing. Patients were reviewed at a hip fracture clinic. Mean clinical follow up was 381 days and radiological follow up was 244 days. Mean hospital stay 22 days. The post operative mortality at 30 days was 20%, rising to 45% at one year.

General complications that occurred were pneumonia – 3, fat embolism – 1, myocardial infarction – 1, and GI bleed – 1. Four cases had superficial wound infection, which resolved with oral antibiotics. Fracture related complications occurred in 4 cases. These were intra-operative femoral shaft fracture – 1, fracture at tip of nail – 1, nail breakage – 2. All went on to heal after exchange nailing.

The long gamma nail does not appear to have reduce the post-operative incidence of femoral fractures, which is most likely related to the large size of the distal locking screws and stress concentration at the tip of the nail. The two cases of nail breakage appear to reflect metal fatigue failure in the setting of delayed union in younger patients.