Background

Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a challenging scenario following complex primary THA for developmental dysplasia of hip (DDH). This study envisages the long-term outcomes of revision DDH and the role of lateral structural support in socket fixation in these young patients who may require multiple revisions in their life-time.

Introduction: Revision hip arthroplasty for aseptic loosening of femoral component is successfully treated with impaction bone grafting technique. Owing to easier technique and shorter operative time, distally fixed non-cemented long stems have gained popularity in the present era. However, use of long stems could make subsequent re-revision difficult due to further bone loss. The standard length stem has been often critiqued due to apprehension of peri-prosthetic fracture.

This study aims to determine the long-term outcomes of the impaction bone grafting of the femur for aseptic loosening in revision hip arthroplasty using standard length C-stems. 168 total hip revisions of 162 patients with impaction bone grafting and cemented standard C-stem (done with standardized technique) between 1995 and 2008 at a tertiary referral centre were included. Revisions for infection and segmental bone defects were excluded.

Mean follow-up of the 168 revision hips was 10.5 years (range 5 – 19.1 years). 14 patients (8.3%) were re-revised, reasons being, persistent deep infection (1.8%), repeated dislocations (1.2%), cup loosening (4.8%) and stem loosening (1.2%). Only 1 patient (0.6%) was re-revised due to stem loosening alone. No peri-prosthetic fractures (intra-operative or post-operative) or stem breakage were identified.

Use of standard stem length in hip revisions with impaction bone grafting does not increase the risk of peri-prosthetic fractures, instead, reconstitutes the bone stock. This questions the conventional principle of bypassing the distal cavitation of femur by 2 cortical diameters with the use of long stem. In our experience, a good proximal femur support is key to performance of standard length cemented stems in revision for aseptic loosening irrespective of grade of distal cavitation for cavitatory defects of femur when treated with impaction bone grafting.

In patients with primary hip replacement for previous infective arthritis the risk of recurrence of infection is of major concern. In addition, the safe time interval post infective arthritis for primary hip replacement is not known.

Clinical & radiological results of consecutive series of 80 primary hip replacements performed for septic / tuberculous arthritis at Wrightington hospital from 1970 to 2008. Data was collected till latest follow up. Re-infection or revision for any reason was considered as primary end point for survivorship.

Average age at primary hip replacement was 55.55 years (24 – 75). Mean follow up was 14.47 years (2–41). Twelve patients in septic hip group (n=42) needed revision out of which 6 (14%) were for infection. The survival rate for recent septic arthritis group (<10 years) was 60% at 7.5 years, whereas in old septic arthritis group (>10 years) it was 94.45% at 15.3 years, considering infection as end point. The survival rate was 60% for recent septic arthritis and 78.13% for old septic arthritis group over the same period of time considering revision for any reason as end point. In tuberculous group (n=38), the survival rate was 76.32% at 14.5 years of follow up, considering revision for any reason as end point.

Significantly high re-infection rate in patients with recent septic arthritis was noted. No recurrence of infection in patients with old septic arthritis. No reactivation of tuberculosis in tuberculous arthritis group.

This is the largest series with longest follow-up on primary total hip replacement for infective arthritis till date. Recent septic arthritis (<10Y) was a statistically high risk factor for recurrence of infection. Old septic arthritis is reasonably safe with 94.45% success rate at 15 years follow up. Old tuberculous arthritis is not a risk factor for hip replacement

Introduction

Limb Length discrepancy after total hip replacement has been reported to happen in 1–27% of cases with differences up to 70mm. Occasionally revision THR has been used to achieve limb length equalisation, especially when patients are symptomatic with hip/back pain, neurologic symptoms or instability. However, in presence of a well-functioning, pain free hip without hip symptoms, revision THR for shortening can lead to problems with decrease in offset or stability. An option in these cases would be a distal shortening osteotomy of femur.