Aims. Periprosthetic fracture and implant loosening are two of the major reasons for revision surgery of cementless implants. Optimal implant fixation with minimal bone damage is challenging in this procedure. This pilot study investigates whether vibratory implant insertion is gentler compared to consecutive single blows for
Aims. The main aims were to identify risk factors predictive of a radiolucent line (RLL) around the
Orientation of the
A variety of radiological methods of measuring
version of the
Objectives. The determination of the volumetric polyethylene wear on explanted material requires complicated equipment, which is not available in many research institutions. Our aim in this study was to present and validate a method that only requires a set of polyetheretherketone balls and a laboratory balance to determine wear. Methods. The insert to be measured was placed on a balance, and a ball of the appropriate diameter was inserted. The cavity remaining between the ball and insert caused by wear was filled with contrast medium and the weight of the contrast medium was recorded. The volume was calculated from the known density of the liquid. The precision, inter- and intraobserver reliability, were determined by four investigators on four days using nine inserts with specified wear (0.094 ml to 1.626 ml), and the intra-class correlation coefficient was calculated. The feasibility of using this method in routine clinical practice and the time required for measurement were tested on 84 explanted inserts by one investigator. Results. In order to get the mean for all investigators and determinations, the deviation between the measured and specified wear was -0.08 ml . (sd. 0.12; -0.21 to 0.11). The interobserver reliability was 0.989 ml (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.964 to 0.997) and the intraobserver reliability was 0.941 for observer 1 (95% CI 0.846 to 0.985), 0.983 for observer 2 (95% CI 0.956 to 0.995), 0.939 for observer 3 (95% CI 0.855 to 0.984), and 0.934 for observer 4 (95% CI 0.790 to 0.984). The mean time required to examine the samples was two minutes . (sd. 2; 1 to 5). Conclusion. The method presented here was shown to be sufficiently precise for many settings and is a cost-effective and quick method of determining the volumetric wear of explanted
Aims. In metal-on-metal (MoM) hip arthroplasties and resurfacings, mechanically induced corrosion can lead to elevated serum metal ions, a local inflammatory response, and formation of pseudotumours, ultimately requiring revision. The size and diametral clearance of anatomical (ADM) and modular (MDM) dual-mobility polyethylene bearings match those of Birmingham hip MoM components. If the
We analysed the results of different strategies in the revision of primary uncemented
Aims. Dislocation remains a leading cause of failure following revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). While dual-mobility (DM) bearings have been shown to mitigate this risk, options are limited when retaining or implanting an uncemented shell without modular DM options. In these circumstances, a monoblock DM cup, designed for cementing, can be cemented into an uncemented acetabular shell. The goal of this study was to describe the implant survival, complications, and radiological outcomes of this construct. Methods. We identified 64 patients (65 hips) who had a single-design cemented DM cup cemented into an uncemented acetabular shell during revision THA between 2018 and 2020 at our institution. Cups were cemented into either uncemented cups designed for liner cementing (n = 48; 74%) or retained (n = 17; 26%)
Aims. To determine if primary cemented
In metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements or resurfacings, mechanical induced corrosion can lead to a local inflammatory response, pseudo tumours and elevated serum metal ions, requiring revision surgery. The size and diametral clearance of Anatomic (ADM) and Modular (MDM) Dual Mobility bearings matches that of certain MOM components. Presenting the opportunity for revision with exchange of the metal head for ADM/MDM bearings without removal of the
Aims. Various surgical techniques have been described for total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with Crowe type III dislocated hips, who have a large acetabular bone defect. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term clinical results of patients in whom anatomical reconstruction of the acetabulum was performed using a cemented
Aims. Uncemented metal
Aims. Appropriate
Aims. Modular dual mobility (MDM)
Aims. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference
in the rate of wear between
Aims. To investigate the extent of bone development around the scaffold of custom triflange
The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register has shown that several designs of uncemented femoral stems give good or excellent survivorship. The overall findings for uncemented total hip replacement however, have been disappointing because of poor results with the use of metal-backed
Aims. Custom triflange
There remains concern with the use of constrained liners (CL) implanted at the time of acetabular cup revision in revision total hip replacement (rTHA). The aim of this study was to determine the implant survival in rTHA when a CL was implanted at the same time as acetabular cup revision. We reviewed our institutional database to identify all consecutive rTHAs where a CL was implanted simultaneously at the time acetabular cup revision from 2001 to 2021. One-hundred and seventy-four revisions (173 patients) were included in the study. Mean follow-up of 8.7 years (range two – 21.7). The most common indications for rTHA were instability (35%), second-stage periprosthetic joint infection (26.4%), and aseptic loosening (17.2%). Kaplan Meier Analysis was used to determine survival with all-cause re-revision and revision for cup aseptic loosening (fixation failure) as the endpoints. A total of 32 (18.3%) patients underwent re-revision at a mean time of 2.9 years (range 0.1 – 14.1). The most common reasons for re-revision were instability (14), periprosthetic joint infection (seven), and loosening of the femoral component (four). Three (1.7%) required re-revision due to aseptic loosening of the
Objectives. In order to address acetabular defects, porous metal revision