In general, the amount and rate of linear wear are associated with femoral head size in the conventional UHMWPE acetabular liner. The smaller the femoral head, the higher the linear wear rate. The aim of this study is to verify the relationship between wear rate and femoral head size and the polyethylene cup thickness. We conducted a retrospective review of all patients who had undergone primary cementless total hip arthroplasty using the conventional UHMWPE (HGP2) acetabular liner between July 1992 and December 2002. 128 hips (34 hips of female, 94 hips of male) of 64 patients who had 28 mm femoral head with different polyethylene acetabular linear thickness and 102 hips (41 hips of female, 61 hips of male) of 81 patients with 22 mm femoral head were included. Patients were assessed clinically and radiographically at postop 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months and annually thereafter. Clinical assessment was performed using Harris Hip Score. Radiographic analysis included measurement of acetabular component position, polyethylene wear using a validated radiographic technique (Dorr method). Their mean age at the time of operation was 45.3 (24–81) years old and mean follow-up period was 10.8 (96–144 months) years.Purpose
Materials and Methods
To evaluate the radiological changes after metal on metal resurfacing arthroplasty. Between December 1998 and August 2004, 166 hips in 150 patients who underwent metal resurfacing arthroplasty and followed up more than 4 years. Their mean age at the time of operation was 37.3 years(range, 15–68 years) and mean period of follow-up was 6.1 years(range, 48–95 months). The cause of arthroplasty included 115 avascular necrosis, 43 osteoarthritis, 7 ankylosing spondylitis, 1 haemophilic arthropathy. All patients had anteroposterior, translateral radiographs of the hip made preoperatively and each follow-up visit, and we analyzed radiographic findings such as radiolucencies or impingement signs around implant, neck narrowing and heterotopic ossification.Purpose
Materials and Methods
The aim of this study was to prospectively assess the results of a preoperative surgical safety checklist by comparing the initial phase of implementation of the Time Out Procedure (TOP) to the results four years later. We compared the accuracy and acceptance of the TOP to determine whether surgical practice had changed. The TOP was initiated for all elective surgical procedures performed in Christchurch in 2004. An initial audit from September 2004 – April 2005 (Phase 1) was compared to one from October 2008-September 2009 (Phase 2) looking for an improvement in completion of the procedure. Variances were recorded and analysed within the categories of 1 System and process 2 Consent and limb marking 3Incorrect details and 4 Near miss. A questionnaire was also sent to all the surgeons to determine their attitude towards the TOP. Although the TOP was completed more often in Phase 2 (98%, p<0.001) there were more variances (9%, p<0.001). The commonest variance was due to the surgeon and assistant not being present at the TOP which was significantly worse than in Phase 1 (p<0.0001). The results of the surgeon questionaire showed that only 88% agreed that the TOP was valuable in preventing wrong site surgery. This surgical indifference to the TOP is difficult to explain especially when National and International agencies have stressed its role in preventing surgical error. The recent introduction of the expanded WHO Checklist should be ‘surgeon led’ to be effective.
