Aims. Cemented hemiarthroplasty is an effective form of treatment for most patients with an intracapsular fracture of the hip. However, it remains unclear whether there are subgroups of patients who may benefit from the alternative operation of a modern uncemented hemiarthroplasty – the aim of this study was to investigate this issue. Knowledge about the heterogeneity of treatment effects is important for surgeons in order to target operations towards specific subgroups who would benefit the most. Methods. We used causal forest analysis to compare subgroup- and individual-level treatment effects between cemented and modern uncemented hemiarthroplasty in patients aged > 60 years with an intracapsular fracture of the hip, using data from the World Hip Trauma Evaluation 5 (WHiTE 5) multicentre randomized clinical trial. EuroQol five-dimension index scores were used to measure health-related quality of life at one, four, and 12 months postoperatively. Results. Our analysis revealed a complex landscape of responses to the use of a cemented hemiarthroplasty in the 12 months after surgery. There was heterogeneity of effects with regard to baseline characteristics, including age, pre-injury health status, and lifestyle factors such as alcohol consumption. This heterogeneity was greater at the one-month mark than at subsequent follow-up timepoints, with particular regard to subgroups based on age. However, for all subgroups, the effect estimates for quality of life lay within the confidence intervals derived from the analysis of all patients. Conclusion. The use of a cemented hemiarthroplasty is expected to increase health-related quality of life compared with modern uncemented hemiarthroplasty for all subgroups of patients aged > 60 years with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):656–661

The aim of this study was to analyze and compare clinical, radiological and mortality outcomes of patients who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced neck of femur fractures using a SPAIRE technique when compared to a pair-matched control cohort who underwent the same procedure using the direct lateral approach. A retrospective review of patients who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced neck of femur fractures by a single surgeon using a SPAIRE technique over a two-year period between July 2019 and July 2021 was performed. These were subsequently pair matched in a 5:1 ratio for age, gender, ASA grade and residential status with a control group who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty by 4 other surgeons using a direct lateral approach. The study included a total of 240 patients (40 and 200 pairmatched to SPAIRE and control groups respectively), with a mean age of 81.0 ± 8.2 years (63–99) and a mean follow-up of 12 ± 3 months (3–30). Overall, there was no significant difference in any of the radiological or mortality outcome scores assessed between the SPAIRE and control groups (p > 0.05 for all). There was a significantly lower number of patients in the SPAIRE group who dropped a level of mobility from their pre-injury baseline at 30-days post-operatively (8.1% versus 31.6%; p = 0.003). However, this appeared to have resolved at 120-day follow-up with no significant differences between the groups in terms of those acquiring a new baseline mobility at 120-days post-operatively (2.7% versus 13.2%, p = 0.09). In cases of cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular neck of femur fractures, the SPAIRE technique appears to offer patients an earlier return to levels of baseline pre-injury mobility when compared to a direct lateral approach

Aims. The aims of this study were to evaluate the incidence of reoperation (all cause and specifically for periprosthetic femoral fracture (PFF)) and mortality, and associated risk factors, following a hemiarthroplasty incorporating a cemented collarless polished taper slip stem (PTS) for management of an intracapsular hip fracture. Methods. This retrospective study included hip fracture patients aged 50 years and older treated with Exeter (PTS) bipolar hemiarthroplasty between 2019 and 2022. Patient demographics, place of domicile, fracture type, delirium status, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, length of stay, and mortality were collected. Reoperation and mortality were recorded up to a median follow-up of 29.5 months (interquartile range 12 to 51.4). Cox regression was performed to evaluate independent risk factors associated with reoperation and mortality. Results. The cohort consisted of 1,619 patients with a mean age of 82.2 years (50 to 104), of whom 1,100 (67.9%) were female. In total, 29 patients (1.8%) underwent a reoperation; 12 patients (0.7%) sustained a PFF during the observation period (United Classification System (UCS)-A n = 2; UCS-B n = 5; UCS-C n = 5), of whom ten underwent surgical management. Perioperative delirium was independently associated with the occurrence of PFF (hazard ratio (HR) 5.92; p = 0.013) and surgery for UCS-B PFF (HR 21.7; p = 0.022). Neither all-cause reoperation nor PFF-related surgery was independently associated with mortality (HR 0.66; p = 0.217 and HR 0.38; p = 0.170, respectively). Perioperative delirium, male sex, older age, higher ASA grade, and pre-fracture residential status were independently associated with increased mortality risk following hemiarthroplasty (p < 0.001). Conclusion. The cumulative incidence of PFF at four years was 1.1% in elderly patients following cemented PTS hemiarthroplasty for a hip fracture. Perioperative delirium was independently associated with a PFF. However, reoperation for PPF was not independently associated with patient mortality after adjusting for patient-specific factors. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(4):269–276

The February 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Trial of vancomycin and cefazolin as surgical prophylaxis in arthroplasty; Is preoperative posterior femoral neck tilt a risk factor for fixation failure? Cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fractures of the hip; Periprosthetic fractures in larger hydroxyapatite-coated stems: are collared stems a better alternative for total hip arthroplasty?; Postoperative periprosthetic fracture following hip arthroplasty with a polished taper slip versus composite beam stem; Is oral tranexamic acid as good as intravenous?; Stem design and the risk of early periprosthetic femur fractures following THA in elderly patients; Does powered femoral broaching compromise patient safety in total hip arthroplasty?

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in geriatric and/or multimorbid patients is an enormous challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Revision procedures have also been demonstrated to expose patients to higher infection risks. Prior patient stratification according to presumed infection risks, followed by a more potent local antibiotic prophylaxis protocol with selective use of DALBC, is an interesting strategy to decrease the burden of PJI in high risk patients. The PubMed & EMBASE databases were screened for publications pertaining to the utilization of DALBC in cement for infection prophylaxis & prosthesis fixation. 6 preclinical & 7 clinical studies were identified which met the inclusion criteria and were stratified by level of clinical evidence. Only those studies were considered which compared the PJI outcome in the DALBC vs the SALBC group. (1). DALBC have been shown to exert a much stronger and longer lasting inhibition of biofilm formation on many PJI relevant bacteria (gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens) than single gentamicin-only containing cements. (2). DALBC use (COPAL G+C) in the intervention arm of 7 clinical studies has led to a significant reduction of PJI cases in a) cemented hemiarthroplasty procedures (3 studies, evidence level I and III), in b) cemented septic revision surgeries (2 studies, evidence level III), in c) cemented aseptic knee revisions (1 study, evidence level III) and in d) cemented primary arthroplasties in multi-morbid patients (1 study, evidence level III-IV). These benefits were not associated with more systemic side effects or a higher prevalence of broad antimicrobial resistancies. Use of DALBC is likely to be more effective in preventing PJI in high risk patients. The preliminar findings so far may encourage clinicians to consolidate this hypothesis on a wider clinical range

Aims. The aim of this study was to report the three-year follow-up for a series of 400 patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip, who were randomized to be treated with either a cemented polished tapered hemiarthroplasty or an uncemented hydroxyapatite-coated hemiarthroplasty. Methods. The mean age of the patients was 85 years (58 to 102) and 273 (68%) were female. Follow-up was undertaken by a nurse who was blinded to the hemiarthroplasty that was used, at intervals for up to three years from surgery. The short-term follow-up of these patients at a mean of one year has previously been reported. Results. A total of 210 patients (52.5%) died within three years of surgery. One patient was lost to follow-up. Recovery of mobility was initially significantly better in those treated with a cemented hemiarthroplasty, although by three years after surgery this difference became statistically insignificant. The mortality was significantly lower in those treated with a cemented hemiarthroplasty (p = 0.029). There was no significant difference in pain scores, or in the incidence of implant-related complications or revision surgery, between the two groups. Conclusion. These results further support the use of a cemented hemiarthroplasty for the routine management of elderly patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(11):1196–1200

Aims

To compare the cost-effectiveness of high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement versus single-antibiotic cement for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults.

Aims

Several different designs of hemiarthroplasty are used to treat intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur, with large variations in costs. No clinical benefit of modular over monoblock designs has been reported in the literature. Long-term data are lacking. The aim of this study was to report the ten-year implant survival of commonly used designs of hemiarthroplasty.

Aims

Cementing in arthroplasty for hip fracture is associated with improved postoperative function, but may have an increased risk of early mortality compared to uncemented fixation. Quantifying this mortality risk is important in providing safe patient care. This study investigated the association between cement use in arthroplasty and mortality at 30 days and one year in patients aged 50 years and over with hip fracture.

The December 2022 Trauma Roundup. 360. looks at: Anterior approach for acetabular fractures using anatomical plates; Masquelet–Ilizarov for the management of bone loss post debridement of infected tibial nonunion; Total hip arthroplasty – better results after low-energy displaced femoral neck fracture in young patients; Unreamed intramedullary nailing versus external fixation for the treatment of open tibial shaft fractures in Uganda: a randomized clinical trial; The Open-Fracture Patient Evaluation Nationwide (OPEN) study: the management of open fracture care in the UK; Cost-utility analysis of cemented hemiarthroplasty versus hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented hemiarthroplasty; Unstable ankle fractures: fibular nail fixation compared to open reduction and internal fixation; Long-term outcomes of randomized clinical trials: wrist and calcaneus; ‘HeFT’y follow-up of the UK Heel Fracture Trial

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Aims

Biofilm-related infection is a major complication that occurs in orthopaedic surgery. Various treatments are available but efficacy to eradicate infections varies significantly. A systematic review was performed to evaluate therapeutic interventions combating biofilm-related infections on in vivo animal models.

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of cemented hemiarthroplasty (HA) versus hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented HA for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. Methods. A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted based on data collected from the World Hip Trauma Evaluation 5 (WHiTE 5) multicentre randomized controlled trial in the UK. Resource use was measured over 12 months post-randomization using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the NHS and personal social service perspective. Methodological uncertainty was addressed using sensitivity analysis, while decision uncertainty was represented graphically using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results. The base-case analysis showed that cemented implants were cost-saving (mean cost difference -£961 (95% confidence interval (CI) -£2,292 to £370)) and increased QALYs (mean QALY difference 0.010 (95% CI 0.002 to 0.017)) when compared to uncemented implants. The probability of the cemented implant being cost-effective approximated between 95% and 97% at alternative cost-effectiveness thresholds held by decision-makers, and its net monetary benefit was positive. The findings remained robust against all the pre-planned sensitivity analyses. Conclusion. This study shows that cemented HA is cost-effective compared with hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented HA in older adults with displaced intracapsular hip fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):922–928

Aims

The aim of this study was to assess the association of mortality and reoperation when comparing cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty (HA) in hip fracture patients aged over 65 years.

Aims

Deep surgical site infection (SSI) remains an unsolved problem after hip fracture. Debridement, antibiotic, and implant retention (DAIR) has become a mainstream treatment in elective periprosthetic joint infection; however, evidence for DAIR after infected hip hemiarthroplaty is limited.

Aims. The aim of this study was to radiologically evaluate the quality of cement mantle and alignment achieved with a polished tapered cemented femoral stem inserted through the anterior approach and compared with the posterior approach. Methods. A comparative retrospective study of 115 consecutive hybrid total hip arthroplasties or cemented hemiarthroplasties in 110 patients, performed through anterior (n = 58) or posterior approach (n = 57) using a collarless polished taper-slip femoral stem, was conducted. Cement mantle quality and thickness were assessed in both planes. Radiological outcomes were compared between groups. Results. No significant differences were identified between groups in Barrack grade on the anteroposterior (AP) (p = 0.640) or lateral views (p = 0.306), or for alignment on the AP (p = 0.603) or lateral views (p = 0.254). An adequate cement mantle (Barrack A or B) was achieved in 77.6% (anterior group, n = 45) and in 86% (posterior group, n = 49), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed factors associated with unsatisfactory cement mantle (Barrack C or D) included higher BMI, left side, and Dorr Type C morphology. A mean cement mantle thickness of ≥ 2 mm was achieved in all Gruen zones for both approaches. The mean cement mantle was thicker in zone 7 (p < 0.001) and thinner in zone 9 for the anterior approach (p = 0.032). Incidence of cement mantle defects between groups was similar (6.9% (n = 4) vs 8.8% (n = 5), respectively; p = 0.489). Conclusion. An adequate cement mantle and good alignment can be achieved using a collarless polished tapered femoral component inserted through the anterior approach. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):46–52