Aims

Metal-on-metal total hip replacements (MoM THRs) are frequently revised. However, there is a paucity of data on clinical outcomes following revision surgery in this cohort. We report on outcomes from the largest consecutive series of revisions from MoM THRs and consider pre-revision factors which were prognostic for functional outcome.

Introduction

The prevalence of adverse reactions to metal debris around metal-on-metal (MOM) hip replacements has been reported to range from 7 to 69%. Little has been published on MRI scans with conventional total hip bearing surfaces. This study aimed to establish the prevalence of soft tissue lesions associated with metal-on-polyethylene (MOP) and ceramic-on-ceramic (COC) bearings, compared to MOM prostheses.

The Fixion expandable nailing system provides an intramedullary fracture fixation solution without the need for locking screws. Proponents of this system have demonstrated shorter surgery times with rapid fracture healing, but several centres have reported suboptimal results with loss of fixation. This is the largest comparative series to be reported to date.

We compared outcomes between 50 consecutive diaphyseal tibial fractures treated with a Fixion device at our institution to an age, sex and fracture configuration matched series of 57 fractures at a neighbouring hospital treated with a conventional interlocked intramedullary nail. Minimum follow up time was 2 years.

Operating time was significantly reduced in the Fixion group (mean 61 minutes, range 20–99) compared to the interlocked group (88 minutes, 52–93), p< 0.00001. The union rate was no different between the Fixion group (93.9%) and the interlocked group (96.5%), p=0.527. Time to clinical and radiological union was significantly faster in the Fixion group (median 85 days, range 42–243) compared to the interlocked group (119, 70–362), p< 0.0001. The overall reoperation rate was lower in the Fixion series (24.5% vs 38.6%, p=0.121), although the majority of reoperations in the interlocked group were more minor, for screw removal. 3 Fixion nails were revised for fixation failure and 2 manipulations were required for rotational deformities after falls; all of these patients were non-compliant with post-operative instructions. There were no fixation failures in the interlocked group. 3 fractures were noted to propagate during inflation of Fixion nails.

The Fixion nail is faster to implant and allows more physiological loading of the fracture, with a faster union time. However, these advantages are offset by a reduction in construct stability. Our results have demonstrated a learning curve with a reduction in complications as our indications were narrowed, avoiding osteoporotic, multifragmentary, unstable fractures and non-compliant patients

Aims

Several national studies have shown that the rates of joint replacement are rising and this increase may be greater than that expected by population ageing. The aim of this study was to assess local rates of joint replacement at a district general hospital (DGH) and to investigate whether there had been a change in pre-operative functional status of patients over the study period to account for any change in rates of arthroplasty.

Introduction

Large head total hip arthroplasty (THA) reduces dislocation rates and provides a theooretically larger range of motion. We hypothesised that this would translate into greater improvement in functional scores when compared to 28mm metal-on-polyethylene THA at 5 years. We believe ours to be the first in vivo comparison study.

It is established good practice that hip and knee replacements should have regular follow-up and for the past seven years at the North Hampshire Hospital a local joint register has been used for this purpose and we compare this with results of the Swedish and UK national and the Trent Regional registries.

Since March 1999, all primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasties performed at North Hampshire Hospital, Basingstoke have been prospectively recorded onto a database set up by one of the senior authors (JMB). Data from patients entered in the first five years of the register were analysed. All patients have at least one year clinical and radiological review then a minimum of yearly postal follow-up. 3266 operations (1524 hips and 1742 knees) were performed under the care of 13 consultants. Osteoarthritis was the most common primary diagnosis in over 75% of hips and knees. Our revision burden was 7.5% (10.2% hips and 3.5% knees). As of 31/12/2006 6.2% of patients had died and 5.5% were lost to follow-up.

Revision rates were 1.5% and 1.4% for primary total hip and knee replacements respectively.

Our data analysis of revisions and patello-femoral replacements has allowed us to change our practice following local audit which is ongoing. Oxford scores at 2 years had improved from a mean of 19 and 21 pre-operatively to 40 and 39 for primary hips and knees respectively. Our costs are estimated at approximately £35 per patient for their lifetime on the register.

Compared to other registries:

Our dataset is more complete and comprehensive

Method: This study reports upon 216 patients (97 Minimally invasive and 119 Standard) enrolled into a randomised control trial comparing a standard posterior approach to the hip with a single incision minimally invasive surgery (MIS) posterior approach at 6 weeks and 1 year post-operatively. Primary outcome measures included operative time, blood loss, length of stay and functional hip scores.

Results: The demographics and pre-operative hip scores for both cohorts were statistically similar. Intra-operative blood loss was significantly reduced in the MIS cohort (p=< 0.01). There was no difference in surgical time (p=0.37), time to discharge (p=0.24) or complication rate between the two groups.

Both groups had statistically improved post-operative hip scores, however, at the 1 year follow-up the MIS group were significantly better in terms of WOMAC, Harris Hip, Merle d’Aubigne and SF-12 scores when compared with a standard posterior approach.

Conclusion: This study demonstrates that MIS THA is a safe, reproducible technique in a DGH. We recommend the use of MIS techniques in primary THA and adhere to the principle that an incision need be no longer than necessary to perform the procedure safely.

Introduction and Aims: The management of diaphyseal tibial fractures remains controversial. This paper looks at the use of an innovative, unlocked, inflatable intra-medullary nail (Fixion, Disc-O-Tech). The study aim is to assess the performance of this nail relative to a traditional locked nail.

Method: This study compares a prospectively recruited cohort of patients treated with the fixion nail to a consecutive series of patients treated with the Russel Taylor locked nail prior to the introduction of the new device. All the fractures were classified using the AO system. Operating time and the x-ray screening time were recorded, along with any peri or post-operative complications, and need for secondary procedures. Follow-up x-rays were assessed for time to radiological union.

Results: Thirty-six patients were identified, 17 undergoing fixion tibial nailing and 19 having locked Russell Taylor nails. AO classification of fractures ranged from 42-A1 to 42-C3 and was similar in the two groups. In the Fixion group were 15 males and two females with an age range of 15 to 76 years. Two cases required secondary procedures. In the locked nail group were 19 cases, 16 males and three females. Eleven of the cases required secondary procedures, principally removal of locking screws for dynamisation of the nail in cases of delayed bone union and four patients had the nail removed.

The mean operating time for the fixion nail was 58 minutes and 89 minutes for the locked Russell Taylor nail, a statistically significant difference (p< 0.002, unpaired t-test). There was also a significant difference in the need for secondary procedures with at least one further procedure in 11/18 Russel Taylor nails and only 2/17 Fixion nails (p< 0.006, Fisher’s exact test). There was no significant difference in image intensifier screening time between the two groups. There was a trend to reduced time to bone union with the Fixion nail which did not reach statistical significance in this small cohort (p = 0.06), but may do so as a larger number of patients are studied.

Conclusions: Our results show that operative time was significantly less with the fixion nail, there were many fewer secondary procedures and all fractures went on to union. Our study demonstrates that an unlocked, inflatable nail compares favourably with a locked nail and should be considered in tibial diaphyseal fractures.