Aims. Revision hip arthroplasty for femoral stem loosening remains challenging due to significant bone loss and deformities requiring specialized revision stems. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes, and survival, of a consecutive series of femoral revisions performed using a primary cementless stem with tapered geometry and rectangular cross-section at medium-term follow-up. Methods. We retrospectively evaluated 113 patients (115 hips) with intraoperative Paprosky type I (n = 86) or II (n = 29) defects, who underwent femoral revision with Alloclassic Zweymüller SL stem for one-stage aseptic revision or two-stage septic revision from January 2011 to December 2020. The mean follow-up was 77.9 months (SD 33.8). Nine patients were lost to follow-up (deceased or not available), leaving 104 patients (106 hips) for the clinical and radiological analysis. Clinical assessment was performed with Harris Hip Score (HHS) and visual analogue scale (VAS) before surgery and at final follow-up. Results. There were 60 males and 53 females with a mean age at time of surgery of 71.2 years (SD 12.6). The mean HHS and VAS significantly improved at final follow-up, from 33.7 (SD 13.0) and 5.8 (SD 1.8) preoperatively to 66.4 (SD 16.8) and 2.1 (SD 1.8) postoperatively, respectively (p = 0.001 and p = 0.001). Overall, 28 patients (25%) showed non-progressive radiolucent lines at the level of proximal femur without radiological or clinical signs of loosening. One patient had a recurrence of periprosthetic joint infection after a two-stage procedure requiring re-revision surgery. One patient underwent exchange of modular components for recurrent dislocation, and another case of dislocation was treated conservatively. The survival with aseptic loosening as endpoint was 100%, while stem revision for any reason was 99.1% at up to 152 months’ follow-up. Conclusion. Alloclassic Zweymüller SL primary stem showed favourable medium-term results and survival for revision total hip arthroplasty in Paprosky type I and II defects. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2025;6(2):186–194

Aims

Hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) are often the preferred forms of treatment for patients with atraumatic avascular necrosis of the humeral head when conservative treatment fails. Little has been reported about the survival of HA and TSA for this indication. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in revision rates between HA and TSA in these patients, to determine whether one of these implants has a superior survival and may be a better choice in the treatment of this condition.

Aims

The Exeter femoral stem has a cemented, polished taper-slip design, and an excellent track record. The current range includes short-length options for various offsets, but less is known about the performance of these stems. The aim of this study was to compare the survival of short-length stems with standard-length Exeter stems.

The December 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Total hip arthroplasty after femoral neck fractures versus osteoarthritis at one-year follow-up: a comparative, retrospective study; Excellent mid-term survival of a monoblock conical prosthesis in treating atypical and complex femoral anatomy with total hip arthroplasty; Hip arthroscopy for femoroacetabular impingement improves sexual function; Fast-track hip arthroplasty does not increase complication rates; Ten-year experience with same-day discharge outpatient total hip arthroplasty: patient demographics changed, but safe outcomes were maintained.

Aims

The outcomes of patients with unexpected positive cultures (UPCs) during revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remain unknown. The objectives of this study were to establish the prevalence and infection-free implant survival in UPCs during presumed aseptic single-stage revision THA and TKA at mid-term follow-up.

Aims

Limited implant survival due to aseptic cup loosening is most commonly responsible for revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Advances in implant designs and materials have been crucial in addressing those challenges. Vitamin E-infused highly cross-linked polyethylene (VEPE) promises strong wear resistance, high oxidative stability, and superior mechanical strength. Although VEPE monoblock cups have shown good mid-term performance and excellent wear patterns, long-term results remain unclear. This study evaluated migration and wear patterns and clinical and radiological outcomes at a minimum of ten years’ follow-up.

In 2022, approximately 60% of inserted cups and stems in Sweden utilized cemented fixation. Two predominant brands, Refobacin Bone Cement R and Palacos R+G, both incorporating gentamicin, were employed in over 90% of primary cemented Total Hip Arthroplasties (THAs) between 2012 and 2022. This study investigates whether the choice between these cement types affects the risk of revision. The five most frequently used cemented cups and the three most common stems were studied. Inclusion criteria encompassed hips with non-tumour diagnoses, operated through a direct lateral or posterior incision, featuring a 28–36 mm metal or ceramic head. Outcomes were assessed for cup revisions (n=55,457 Refobacin, 37,210 Palacos), stem revisions (n=51,732 Refobacin, 30,018 Palacos), and all-cemented THAs with either brand (n=45,265 Refobacin, 26,347 Palacos). Kaplan-Meier life tables and hazard ratios (HR) utilizing Cox regression were computed, adjusting for age, sex, diagnosis, implant type, femoral head size, and material. Over a 10-year period, the cumulative percent revision with Refobacin was consistently higher than Palacos in all three analyses (cups: Refobacin 2.4 (2.3–2.5), Palacos 2.1 (2.0–2.2); stems: Refobacin 2.6 (2.5–2.7), Palacos 2.1 (2,0–2,2); all-cemented: Refobacin 3.2 (2.9–3.5), Palacos 2.9 (2.6–3.2)). Both unadjusted and adjusted HR were 13–25% lower with Palacos. In the analysis of all-cemented THAs, the adjusted HR for Palacos was 0.85 (0.76–0.95). Separating revisions into infectious and non-infectious reasons revealed a lower risk of infectious revisions with Palacos in all three analyses (all-cemented: adjusted HR infection 0.66 (0.56–0.78); non-infectious 1.10 (0.94–1.28)). Hips cemented with Refobacin may face an increased risk of infection, potentially due to a smaller release of antibiotics into surrounding tissues. Unaccounted factors like different mixing systems or unknown biases could also influence outcomes, emphasizing the need for further investigation

For over a decade, modular titanium fluted tapered (TFT) stems have demonstrated excellent clinical success for femoral revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgery. The aim of this study was to report the short-term outcomes of a novel modern monoblock TFT stem used for revision and complex primary THA with a minimum of 2 years follow-up. We identified 126 patients who received a single monoblock TFT stem - 26 patients for complex THA (failed fracture fixation) and 100 patients for revision THA. The reasons for revision THA included 40 for previous prosthetic joint infection (PJI), 42 for aseptic loosening, 9 for trunnionosis, 9 for periprosthetic fractures. The Paprosky grading for femoral bone loss at the time of surgery and the measured subsidence of femoral stems at 3 months follow-up were determined. We evaluated the number and indications for re-operations. The mean time from surgery was 3.9 years (range 2.0 to 6.9 years). A paired t-test analysis showed significant improvement from pre-operative versus post-operative clinical outcome scores (p<0.001) for HHS (38.76 +/- 15.24vs. 83.42 +/- 15.38), WOMAC (45.6 ± 19.0 vs. 69.9 ± 21.3) and SF-12 Physical component (31.7 ± 8.1 vs. 37.8 ± 11.3) and SF-12 Mental component (48.2 ± 12.2 vs. 51.6 ± 12.5). The Paprosky grading for femoral bone loss was Grade 1 (3.9%), Grade 2 (35.7%), Grade 3A (47.6%), Grade 3B (11.1%) and Grade 4 (1.6%) cases. There were 18 re-operations (14.7%) with 13 for PJI (7 treated with implant retention, 6 treated with a two-staged revision), 4 for instability and one for acetabular aseptic loosening. There were no aseptic failures of the stem. This novel modern monoblock TFT stem provided reliable femoral fixation and has increasingly supplanted the use of modular TFT stems for complex primary and revision surgery in our institution

Short-stem total hip arthroplasty (THA) may have bone sparing properties, which could be advantageous in a younger population with high risk of future revision surgery. We used data from the AOANJRR, LROI and SAR to compare survival rates of primary THA, stems used in the first-time revision procedures as well as the overall survival of first-time revisions between a cohort of short-stem and standard-stem THA. Short-stem THAs (designed as a short stem with mainly metaphyseal fixation) between 2007 and 2021 were identified (n=16,258). A propensity score matched cohort (1:2) with standard THAs in each register was identified (n=32,515). The cohorts were merged into a research dataset. Overall survival at 12 years follow-up was calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. Stem revisions (short-stem THA n=239, standard-stem THA n=352) were identified. The type of revision stem was classified as standard (<160 mm) or long (>160 mm). The survival rate of all first-time revisions in the two groups was calculated using any type of revision as outcome. The 12 year- overall survival rate (all revisions, all causes) for primary short-stem THAs was 95.3% (CI 94.5–95.9%), which was comparable to 95.2% (CI 94.7–95.7%) for standard-stem THAs. In the short-stem THA group, a standard stem (<160 mm) was more often (59%) used in the first-time revision than in the standard-stem group (47%, p=0.004). The overall survival of the first-time revisions did not differ between cases primarily operated with a short or a standard stem. In our multi-national register study, the overall survival rate of short stems was similar to that of standard stems. In short stem revisions there was a higher likelihood of using a standard-length stem for the revision compared with first-time revisions of standard stems. This finding might indicate bone-sparing properties with short-stemmed THAs

The August 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup. 360. looks at: Understanding perceived leg length discrepancy post-total hip arthroplasty: the role of pelvic obliquity; Influence of femoral stem design on revision rates in total hip arthroplasty; Outcomes of arthroscopic labral treatment of femoroacetabular impingement in adolescents; Characteristics and quality of online searches for direct anterior versus posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty; Rapid return to braking after anterior and posterior approach total hip arthroplasty; How much protection does a collar provide?; Timing matters: reducing infection risk in total hip arthroplasty with corticosteroid injection intervals; Identifying pain recovery patterns in total hip arthroplasty using PROMIS data

Different techniques have been described to address massive bone loss of the acetabulum in revision hip surgery. aMace has gained popularity as it provides customization aiming to restore hip centre and provide good initial stability in cases of large non-contained defects. It takes into account quality of host bone. Its porous defect filling scaffold provides an excellent surface for osteointegration. Our aim was to assess the short and mid-term outcomes of patients who underwent revision surgery using aMace system. Ethical approval was obtained. A retrospective study included all patients who had aMace between June 2013 and October 2022 allowing for a minimum of 12-months follow-up. Patients’ demographics, indication, bone-loss severity, reconstruction details, re-operation, complications, mortality, pain and function were assessed. 52 cases were performed by 13 surgeons with median 51 months follow-up. Median age was 72.7 years. 86.5% were female. Average BMI was 25.3. Average ASA grade was 3. 65% were classified as Paprosky IIIB and 32% were IIIA. 73% were found to have poor bone quality on CT. Main indication for aMace was massive bone loss/discontinuity secondary to aseptic loosening in 88.5%. 77% underwent single-stage revision. 53.8% had 2 or more previous revisions. 71% underwent stem revision in the same setting. 77% received a dual mobility bearing. Re-operation rate was 5.7% for instability and femoral PPF. LLD was reported in 9.6%. Permanent Sciatic nerve palsy occurred in 3.8% of the cases. 30-days mortality was 1.9%. Statistically significant post-op improvements in pain and mobility were reported (p<0.001). None of the acetabular components have been revised. Our study shows satisfactory surgical outcomes with a relatively low complication rate and significant pain and mobility improvements in the early to mid-term stages. We recommend these costly cases to be done in highly specialist centres adopting MDT approach

Aims

Periprosthetic proximal femoral fractures (PFFs) are a major complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Health status after PFF is not specifically investigated. The aim of this study is to evaluate the health status pattern over two years after sustaining a PFF.

Aims. There are limited long-term studies reporting on outcomes of the Zimmer Modular Revision (ZMR) stem, and concerns remain regarding failure. Our primary aim was to determine long-term survival free from all-cause revision and stem-related failure for this modular revision stem in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Secondary aims included evaluating radiological and functional outcomes. Methods. We retrospectively identified all patients in our institutional database who underwent revision THA using the ZMR system from January 2000 to December 2007. We included 106 patients (108 hips) with a mean follow-up of 14.5 years (2.3 to 22.3). Mean patient age was 69.2 years (37.0 to 89.4), and 51.9% were female (n = 55). Indications for index revision included aseptic loosening (73.1%), infection (16.7%), fracture (9.3%), and stem fracture (0.9%). Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine the all-cause and stem-related failure revision-free survival. At most recent follow-up, Oxford Hip Scores (OHS) were collected, and radiological stem stability was determined using the Engh classification. Results. A total of 17 hips (15.7%) underwent re-revision of any component. Indications for re-revision were stem failure (35.3%; n = 6), infection (29.4%; n = 5), instability (29.4%; n = 5), and acetabular aseptic loosening (5.9%; n = 1). The five- and 15-year all-cause survival was 89.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 86.7 to 92.7) and 83.3% (95% CI 79.6 to 87.0), respectively. There were six re-revisions (5.6%) for stem failure; five for stem fracture and one for aseptic loosening. The five- and 15-year survival free from stem-related failure was 97.2% (95% CI 95.6 to 98.8) and 94.0% (95% CI 91.6 to 96.4), respectively. At final follow-up, the mean OHS was 36.9 (8.0 to 48.0) and 95.7% (n = 66) of surviving modular revision stems were well-fixed in available radiographs. Conclusion. Femoral revision with the ZMR offers satisfactory long-term all-cause revision-free survival, good survival free of stem-related failure, and favourable clinical outcomes. Stem fracture was the most common reason for stem-related failure and occurred both early and late. This highlights the importance of both early and long-term surveillance for stem-related failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):112–117

Aims

Achieving accurate implant positioning and restoring native hip biomechanics are key surgeon-controlled technical objectives in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The primary objective of this study was to compare the reproducibility of the planned preoperative centre of hip rotation (COR) in patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted THA versus conventional THA.

Aims. Despite higher rates of revision after total hip arthroplasty (THA) being reported for uncemented stems in patients aged > 75 years, they are frequently used in this age group. Increased mortality after cemented fixation is often used as a justification, but recent data do not confirm this association. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of the design of the stem and the type of fixation on the rate of revision and immediate postoperative mortality, focusing on the age and sex of the patients. Methods. A total of 333,144 patients with primary osteoarthritis (OA) of the hip who underwent elective THA between November 2012 and September 2022, using uncemented acetabular components without reconstruction shells, from the German arthroplasty registry were included in the study. The revision rates three years postoperatively for four types of stem (uncemented, uncemented with collar, uncemented short, and cemented) were compared within four age groups: < 60 years (Young), between 61 and 70 years (Mid-I), between 71 and 80 years (Mid-II), and aged > 80 years (Old). A noninferiority analysis was performed on the most frequently used designs of stem. Results. The design of the stem was found to have no significant influence on the rate of revision for either sex in the Young group. Uncemented collared stems had a significantly lower rate of revision compared with the other types of stem for females in the Mid-I group. There was a significantly higher rate of revision for uncemented stems in females in the Mid-II group compared with all other types of stem, while in males the rate for uncemented stems was only significantly higher than the rate for cemented stems. Cemented stems had a significantly lower revision rate compared with uncemented and short stems for both sexes in the Old cohort, as did females with collared stems. The rate of immediate postoperative mortality was similar for all types of stem in the Old age group, as were the American Society of Anesthesiologists grades. Conclusion. In patients aged > 80 years, uncemented and short stems had significantly higher revision rates compared with cemented and collared stems, especially in females. The design of the stem and type of fixation have to be analyzed in more detail than only considering cemented and uncemented fixation, in order to further improve the success of THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(3 Supple A):130–136

Aims

The benefit of a dual-mobility acetabular component (DMC) for primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) is controversial. This study aimed to compare the dislocation and complication rates when using a DMC compared to single-mobility (SM) acetabular component in primary elective THA using data collected at a single centre, and compare the revision rates and survival outcomes in these two groups.

Aims. The risk of mechanical failure of modular revision hip stems is frequently mentioned in the literature, but little is currently known about the actual clinical failure rates of this type of prosthesis. The current retrospective long-term analysis examines the distal and modular failure patterns of the Prevision hip stem from 18 years of clinical use. A design improvement of the modular taper was introduced in 2008, and the data could also be used to compare the original and the current design of the modular connection. Methods. We performed an analysis of the Prevision modular hip stem using the manufacturer’s vigilance database and investigated different mechanical failure patterns of the hip stem from January 2004 to December 2022. Results. Two mechanical failure patterns were identified: fractures in the area of the distal fluted profile (distal stem fracture) and failure of the modular taper (modular fracture). A failure rate of 0.07% was observed for distal stem fracture, and modular fracture rates of 1.74% for the original and 0.013% for the current taper design. Conclusion. A low risk of mechanical failure for both fracture types was observed compared to other known complications in revision hip arthroplasty. In addition, the data show that a design change did significantly reduce the risk of a modular fracture. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):151–157

The advent of modular implants aims to minimise morbidity associated with revision of hemiarthroplasty or total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSR) by allowing retention of the humeral stem. This systematic review aimed to summarise outcomes following its use and reasons why modular humeral stems may be revised. A systematic review of Pubmed, Medline and EMBASE was performed according to PRISMA guidelines of all patients undergoing revision of a modular hemiarthroplasty or TSA to RSR. Primary implants, glenoid revisions, surgical technique and opinion based reports were excluded. Collected data included demographics, outcomes and incidence of complications. 277 patients were included, with a mean age of 69.8 years (44-91) and 119 being female. Revisions were performed an average of 30 months (6-147) after the index procedure, with the most common reason for revision being cuff failure in 57 patients. 165 patients underwent modular conversion and 112 underwent stem revision. Of those that underwent humeral stem revision, 18 had the stem too proximal, in 15 the stem was loose, 10 was due to infection and 1 stem had significant retroversion. After a mean follow up of 37.6 months (12-91), the Constant score improved from a mean of 21.8 to 48.7. Stem revision was associated with a higher complication rate (OR 3.13, 95% CI 1.82-5.39). The increased use of modular stems has reduced stem revision, however 40% of these implants still require revision due to intra-operative findings. Further large volume comparative studies between revised and maintained humeral stems post revision of modular implants can adequately inform implant innovation to further improve the stem revision rate