Objectives. Wear debris released from bearing surfaces has been shown to provoke negative immune responses in the recipient. Excessive wear has been linked to early failure of prostheses. Analysis using coordinate measuring machines (CMMs) can provide estimates of total volumetric material loss of explanted prostheses and can help to understand device failure. The accuracy of volumetric testing has been debated, with some investigators stating that only protocols involving hundreds of thousands of measurement points are sufficient. We looked to examine this assumption and to apply the findings to the clinical arena. . Methods. We examined the effects on the calculated material loss from a ceramic femoral head when different CMM scanning parameters were used. Calculated wear volumes were compared with gold standard gravimetric tests in a blinded study. . Results. Various scanning parameters including point pitch, maximum point to point distance, the number of scanning contours or the total number of points had no clinically relevant effect on volumetric wear calculations. Gravimetric testing showed that material loss can be calculated to provide clinically relevant degrees of accuracy. . Conclusions. Prosthetic surfaces can be analysed accurately and rapidly with currently available technologies. Given these results, we believe that routine analysis of explanted hip components would be a feasible and logical extension to National Joint Registries. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2014;3:60–8

Aims

The Exeter V40 cemented polished tapered stem system has demonstrated excellent long-term outcomes. This paper presents a systematic review of the existing literature and reports on a large case series comparing implant fractures between the Exeter V40 series; 125 mm and conventional length stem systems.

Cementless knee arthroplasty has seen a recent resurgence in popularity due to conceptual advantages, including improved osseointegration providing biological fixation, increased surgical efficiency, and reduced systemic complications associated with cement impaction and wear from cement debris. Increasingly younger and higher demand patients are requiring knee arthroplasty, and as such, there is optimism cementless fixation may improve implant survivorship and functional outcomes.

Compared to cemented implants, the National Joint Registry (NJR) currently reports higher revision rates in cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but lower in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, recent studies are beginning to show excellent outcomes with cementless implants, particularly with UKA which has shown superior performance to cemented varieties. Cementless TKA has yet to show long-term benefit, and currently performs equivalently to cemented in short- to medium-term cohort studies. However, with novel concepts including 3D-printed coatings, robotic-assisted surgery, radiostereometric analysis, and kinematic or functional knee alignment principles, it is hoped they may help improve the outcomes of cementless TKA in the long-term. In addition, though cementless implant costs remain higher due to novel implant coatings, it is speculated cost-effectiveness can be achieved through greater surgical efficiency and potential reduction in revision costs. There is paucity of level one data on long-term outcomes between fixation methods and the cost-effectiveness of modern cementless knee arthroplasty.

This review explores recent literature on cementless knee arthroplasty, with regards to clinical outcomes, implant survivorship, complications, and cost-effectiveness; providing a concise update to assist clinicians on implant choice.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(1):48–57.

There is a large amount of evidence available about the relative merits of unicompartmental and total knee arthroplasty (UKA and TKA). Based on the same evidence, different people draw different conclusions and as a result, there is great variability in the usage of UKA.

The revision rate of UKA is much higher than TKA and so some surgeons conclude that UKA should not be performed. Other surgeons believe that the main reason for the high revision rate is that UKA is easy to revise and, therefore, the threshold for revision is low. They also believe that UKA has many advantages over TKA such as a faster recovery, lower morbidity and mortality and better function. They therefore conclude that UKA should be undertaken whenever appropriate.

The solution to this argument is to minimise the revision rate of UKA, thereby addressing the main disadvantage of UKA. The evidence suggests that this will be achieved if surgeons use UKA for at least 20% of their knee arthroplasties and use implants that are appropriate for these broad indications.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B(10 Suppl A):3–8.

Mechanical alignment has been a fundamental tenet of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) since modern knee replacement surgery was developed in the 1970s. The objective of mechanical alignment was to infer the greatest biomechanical advantage to the implant to prevent early loosening and failure. Over the last 40 years a great deal of innovation in TKA technology has been focusing on how to more accurately achieve mechanical alignment. Recently the concept of mechanical alignment has been challenged, and other alignment philosophies are being explored with the intention of trying to improve patient outcomes following TKA.

This article examines the evolution of the mechanical alignment concept and whether there are any viable alternatives.