Introduction

Appropriate prosthetic alignment is an important factor in maintaining stability and maximising the performance of the bearing after total hip replacement (THR). With a cementless component, the anteversion of the native femur has been shown to influence the anteversion of the prosthetic stem. However, the extent to which anteversion of a cementless stem can be adjusted from the native anteversion has seldom been reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the difference between native and stem anteversion with two different cementless stem designs.

Introduction. Modeling the press-fit that occurs in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) cementless implants is crucial for the prediction of micromotion using finite element analysis (FEA). Some studies investigated the effect of the press-fit magnitude and found a direct influence on the micromotion [1,2]. They assumed in their model that press-fit occurs throughout the prosthesis. However [3] found using computed tomography measurement that only 43% of the stem-bone interfaces is really in contact. The aim of this study is to investigate the press-fit effect at the stem-bone interface on the implant micromotion. Methods. Finite element analysis (FEA) was performed on a Profemur® TL implanted into a Sawbones®. The implant orientation was validated in a previous study [4]. All materials were defined as linear isotropic homogeneous. FEA was carried out for the static loading conditions defined by [5] simulating walking fastly. Frictional contact between the bone and the prosthesis was assumed all along the prosthesis with a coefficient μ set to 0, 63 for the plasma spray (Fig. 1a) and 0,39 for the polished surface (Fig. 1b) [6]. Firstly, FEA was performed without press-fit (Fig. 2a) and then press-fit was simulated with an interference of 0,05 mm [2] between stem and bone in specific areas: superior (Fig. 2b), intermediate (Fig. 2c), inferior (Fig. 2d), and cortical alone (Fig. 2e) and finally over the entire surface in contact with the bone. The press-fit effect at the stem-bone interface on the micromotion was investigated. Measurement of the micromotion was realised on different points located on the plasma spray surface by calculating the difference between the final displacement of the prosthesis and the final displacement of the bone. Results. When press-fit is applied along the entire stem-bone interface, micromotion is lower than 10 μm. In the case when no press fit is simulated, micromotion is in the range of 11 μm and 48 μm. When press-fit is included where only cortical bone is (small areas mid-way proximal and medial part), micromotion is in the range of 17 μm and 30 μm. When the press-fit is included where inferior cancellous bone is (more distal), micromotion is between 9 μm and 38 μm. When the press-fit is included in the intermediate cancellous bone (mid-way), micromotion is between 1 μm and 47 μm. Finally, when press-fit is involved in the superior cancellous bone (more proximal) alone, micromotion is in the range of 4 μm and 12 μm. The results are shown on Fig. 3. Discussion. The maximum stem-bone interface micromotions calculated in this study always remain lower than 50 μm. [7] shows that interfacial micromotion greater than 40 μm produces only partial ingrowth. This indicates that in our study, in all cases investigated the primary stability was not compromised. In general, press-fit increased the primary stability. Our results indicate that press-fit in the proximal area improves widely the primary stability of this prosthesis, especially if the implant is in direct contact with cortical and cancellous bone

Femoral stem design affects periprosthetic bone mineral density (BMD), which may impact long term survival of cementless implants in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to examine proximal femoral BMD in three morphologically different uncemented femoral stems designs to investigate whether one particular design resulted in improved preservation of BMDMethods: 119 patients were randomised to receive either a proximally coated dual taper wedge stem, a proximally coated anatomic stem or a fully coated collarless triple tapered stem. All surgeries were performed via the posterior approach with mobilization on the day of surgery. Dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scans (Lunar iDXA, GE Healthcare, Madison, WI) assessed BMD across the seven Gruen zones pre-operatively, and post-operatively at 6-weeks, 1-year, and 2-years and compared to the unoperated contralateral femur as a control. Patient reported outcome measures of pain, function and health were also included at these corresponding follow-ups. BMD increased in zones one (2.5%), two (17.1%), three (13.0%), five (10%) and six (17.9%) for all stems. Greater preservation of BMD was measured on the lateral cortex (zone 2) for both the dual taper wedge and anatomic stems (p = 0.019). The dual taper wedge stem also demonstrated preservation of BMD in the medial calcar (zone 7) whilst the anatomic and triple taper stem declined in this region, however this was not statistically significant (p = 0.059). BMD decreased on average by 2.1% inthe mid-diaphysis region, distal to the stem tip (zone 4) for all implants. All stems performed equivalently at final follow-up in all patient reported outcome measures. This study demonstrated maintenance of femoral BMD in three different cementless femoral stem designs, with all achieving excellent improvements in patient reported outcomes. There was no significant stress shielding observed, however longer follow-up is required to elucidate the impact of this finding on implant survivorship

The Accolade®TMZF is a taper-wedge cementless metaphyseal coated femoral stem widely utilized from 2002-2012. In recent years, there have been reports of early catastrophic failure of this implant. Establishing a deeper understanding of the rate and causes of revision in patients who developed aseptic failure in stems with documented concerns about high failure rates is critical. Understanding any potential patient or implant factors which are risk factors for failure is important to inform both clinicians and patients. We propose a study to establish the long-term survival of this stem and analyze patients who underwent aseptic revision to understand the causes and risk factors for failure. A retrospective review was undertaken of all patients who received a primary total hip arthroplasty with an Accolade® TMZF stem at a high-volume arthroplasty center. The causes and timing of revision surgery were documented and cross referenced with the Canadian Institute of Health Information Discharge Abstract Database to minimize loss to follow-up. Survivorship analysis was performed with use of the Kaplan-Meier curves to determine the overall and aseptic survival rates at final follow-up. Patient and implant factors commonly associated with aseptic failure were extracted and Cox proportional hazards model was used. A consecutive series of 2609 unilateral primary THA patients implanted with an Accolade®TMZF femoral hip stem were included. Mean time from primary surgery was 12.4 years (range 22 days to 19.5 years). Cumulative survival was 96.1% ± 0.2 at final follow-up. One hundred and seven patients underwent revision surgery with aseptic loosening of the femoral component was the most common cause of aseptic failure in this cohort (33/2609, 1.3%). Younger age and larger femoral head offset were independent risk factors for aseptic failure. To our knowledge, this is the largest series representing the longest follow-up of this taper-wedge cementless femoral implant. Despite early concerns, the Accolade® TMZF stem has excellent survivorship in this cohort. Trunnionosis as a recognized cause for revision surgery was rare. Younger age and larger femoral head offset were independent risk factors for aseptic failure

Polyimide (MP-1, MMATech, Haifa, Israel), is a high performance aerospace thermoplastic used for its lubricity, stability, inertness and radiation resistance. A wear resistant thin robust bearing is needed for total hip arthroplasty (THR). After independent laboratory testing, in 2006, the author used the material as a bearing in two Reflection (Smith and Nephew, USA) hip surgeries. The first, a revision for polyethylene wear, survives with no evidence of wear, noise, new osteolysis or complications related to the MP-1 bearing after 16 yrs. The second donated his asymptomatic MP-1 hip at 6.5yrs for post-mortem examination. There were no osteoclasts, cellular reaction bland in contrast to that of polyethylene. In 2013 a clinical study with ethical committee approval was started using a Biolox Delta (Ceramtec, Germany) head against a polyimide liner in 97 patients. MMATech sold all liners, irradiated: steam 52:45. Sixteen were re-machined in New Zealand. Acetabular shells were Delta PF (LIMA, Italy). The liner locked by taper. The cohort consisted of 46:51 M:F, and ages 43 to 85, mean 65. Ten received cemented stems. For contralateral surgery, a ceramic or polyethylene liner was used. Initial patients were lower demand, later, more active patients, mountain-biking and running. All patients have on-going follow up, including MP-1 liner revision cases. There has been no measurable wear, or osteolysis around the acetabular components using weight-bearing radiographs. Squeaking within the first 6 weeks was noted in 39 number of cases and subtle increase in palpable friction, (passive rotation at 50 degrees flexion), but then disappeared. There were 6 revisions, four of which were related to cementless Stemsys implants (Evolutis, Italy) fixed distally with proximal linear lucencies in Gruen zones 1 and 7, and 2 and 6. No shells were revised and MP-1 liners were routinely changed to ceramic or polyethylene. The liners showed no head contact at the apex, with highly polished contact areas. There were no deep or superficial infections, but one traumatic anterior dislocation at 7 years associated with 5 mm subsidence of a non-collared stem. The initial squeaking and increased friction was due to the engineering of the liner / shell composite as implanted, not allowing adequate clearance for fluid film lubrication and contributed to by shell distortion during impaction. The revised bearings were “equatorial” rather than polar, and with lack of wear or creep this never fully resolved. Where the clearance was better, function was normal. The “slow” utilization was due to my ongoing concern with clearances not being correct. The revision of 4 Stemsys stems, tribology issues may have contributed, but non “MP-1” / Stemsys combinations outside this study have shown the same response, thought to be due to de-bonding of the hydroxyapatite coating. With correct engineering and clearances, a 3.6 mm thick MP-1 bearing, a surface Ra<0.5, steam sterilized, shows no appreciable wear, and with confidence, can be used as a high performance THR bearing

Periprosthetic fractures around the femur during and after total hip arthroplasty (THA) remain a common mode of failure. It is important therefore to recognise those factors that place patients at increased risk for development of this complication. Prevention of this complication, always trumps treatment. Risk factors can be stratified into: 1. Patient related factors; 2. Host bone and anatomical considerations; 3. Procedural related factors; and 4. Implant related factors. Patient Factors. There are several patient related factors that place patients at risk for development of a periprosthetic fracture during and after total hip arthroplasty. Metabolic bone disease, particularly osteoporosis increases the risk of periprosthetic fracture. In addition, patients that smoke, have long term steroid use or disuse, osteopenia due to inactivity should be identified. A metabolic bone work up and evaluation of bone mineralization with a bone densitometry test can be helpful in identifying and implementing treatment prior to THA. Pre-operative Host Bone and Anatomic Considerations. In addition to metabolic bone disease the “shape of the bone” should be taken into consideration as well. Dorr has described three different types of bone morphology (Dorr A, B, C), each with unique characteristics of size and shape. It is important to recognise that not one single cementless implant may fit all bone types. The importance of templating a THA prior to surgery cannot be overstated. Stem morphology must be appropriately matched to patient anatomy. Today, several types of cementless stem designs exist with differing shape and areas of fixation. It is important to understand via pre-operative templating which stem works best in what situation. Procedural Related Factors. There has been a resurgence in interest in the varying surgical approaches to THA. While the validity and benefits of each surgical approach remains a point of debate, each approach carries with it its own set of risks. Several studies have demonstrated increased risk of periprosthetic fractures during THA with the use of the direct anterior approach. Risk factors for increased risk of periprosthetic fracture may include obesity, bone quality and stem design. Implant Related Factors. As mentioned there are several varying cementless implant shapes and sizes that can be utilised. There is no question that cementless fixation remains the most common mode of fixation in THA. However, one must not forget the role of cemented fixation in THA. Published results on long term fixation with cemented stems are comparable if not exceeding those of press fit fixation. In addition, the literature is clear that cemented fixation in the elderly hip fracture patient population is associated with a lower risk of periprosthetic fracture and lower risk of revision. The indication and principles of cemented stem fixation in THA should not be forgotten

Introduction. Following in-depth analysis of the market leading brand combinations in which we identified implant influences on risk of revision, we compared revision in patients implanted with different categories of hip replacement in order to find implant with the lowest revision risk, once known flawed options were removed. Methods. All patients with osteoarthritis who underwent a hip replacement (2003–2010) using an Exeter-Contemporary (cemented), Corail-Pinnacle (cementless), Exeter-Trident (Hybrid) or a Birmingham Hip resurfacing (BHR) were initially included within the analysis. Operations involving factors that were significant predictors of revision were excluded. Cox proportional hazard models were then used to assess the relative risk of revision for a category of implant (compared with cemented), after adjustment for patient covariates. Results. In males, overall 5-year revision was 1.4%. Implant category did not significantly influence revision risk (p=0.615) in < 60 after adjustment. In the 60–75 year group, resurfacing implants were a significant influence for revision (Hazard ratio (HR)=2.63, p< 0.001), and with a trend in cementless (HR=1.63, p=0.057). In males >75 years, cementless implants significantly influenced revision risk (HR=3.48, p=0.002). In females, overall 5-year revision was 1.0%. After adjustment, in < 60 group implant category did not significantly influence revision (p=0.199), although there was a trend towards higher revision in resurfacing implants (HR=3.53, p=0.065). In over 60 year olds, cementless implants were a significant influence for revision risk (60–75 years: HR=1.80, p=0.010, >75 years: HR=2.26, p=0.010. In the older group, there was also a trend towards higher revision with hybrid implants (HR=3.25, p=0.053). Discussion. In summary, after implant optimisation of the market leaders and patient risk adjustment we found that cementless implants had a higher revision compared with cemented in males over 75 and females over 60 years old. In males under 60 years, there were no significant differences in revision risk between implant types

Two big problems exist with the all polyethylene cemented tibial component; the polyethylene and the cement. The polyethylene is too weak and flexible to bear high tibial load, so it deforms and loosens. The interface stresses are too high when two flexible structures are poorly bonded and heavily loaded. Modularity between the polyethylene tibial component and the metal-backed tray was introduced in the mid-80's for versatility and to facilitate screw fixation for cementless implants. These designs allow exchange of various polyethylene thicknesses, and aids the addition of stems and wedges. Other advantages include the reduction of inventory, and the potential for isolated tibial polyethylene exchanges as a simpler revision procedure. Several studies have documented the high failure rate of isolated polyethylene exchange procedures, because technical problems related to the original components are left uncorrected. However, revision for wear is the simplest revision ever!. Since the late 1980's the phenomena of polyethylene wear and osteolysis have been observed much more frequently when compared with earlier eras. The reasons for this increased prevalence of synovitis, progressive osteolysis, and severe polyethylene wear remain unclear. There is some association with the widespread use of both cementless and cemented modular tibial designs. Improved polyethylene attachment is the answer even if a screw, a wire, or a pin is needed. Do not abandon the modular tibia

The objective of this study was to evaluate the short term clinical and radiological results of a new short stem hip implant. In 29 consecutive patients suffering from osteoarthritis with 33 affected hip joints, the clinical and radiological results of 33 cementless hip arthroplasties using a cementless implanted short stem prosthesis type Aida and a cementless cup type Ecofit were evaluated prospectively between October 2009 and June 2015 in two hospitals. The median age of patients at time of surgery was 55 years (range, 30–71 years), 23 male and 10 female patients were included in the study. The median clinical follow up was 24 months (range, 1.5–51 months), and the median radiological follow up was 12 months (range, 1–51 months). Two patients were lost to follow up and two patients had only one immediate postoperative x- ray. The Harris Hip Score improved from a median preoperative value of 53 to a median postoperative value of 93 at follow up. Radiological analysis showed that 19 stems (58%) showed stable bony ingrowth, five cases (15%) showed stable fibrous ingrowth. Four cases need further follow up for proper evaluation of stem fixation. The short term survival of this new short stem is very promising, and achieving the goals of standard hip arthroplasty

Introduction. The ability to manufacture implants at the point-of-care has become a desire for clinicians wanting to provide efficient patient-specific treatment. While some hospitals have adopted extrusion-based 3D printing (fused filament fabrication; FFF) for creating non-implantable instruments with low-temperature plastics, recent innovations have allowed for the printing of high-temperature polymers such as polyetheretherketone (PEEK). Due to its low modulus of elasticity, high yield strength, and radiolucency, PEEK is an attractive biomaterial for implantable devices. Though concerns exist regarding PEEK for orthopaedic implants due to its bioinertness, the creation of porous networks has shown promising results for bone ingrowth. In this study, we endeavor to manufacture porous PEEK constructs via clinically-used FFF. We assess the effect of porous geometry on cell response and hypothesize that porous PEEK will exhibit greater preosteoblast viability and activity compared to solid PEEK. The work represents an innovative approach to advancing point-of-care 3D printing, cementless fixation for total joint arthroplasty, and additional applications typically reserved for porous metal. Methods. Three porous constructs – a rectilinear pattern and two triply period minimal surface (TPMSs) - were designed to mimic the morphology of trabecular bone. The structures, along with solid PEEK samples for use as a control, were manufactured via FFF using PEEK. The samples were mCT scanned to determine the resulting pore size and porosity. The PEEK constructs were then seeded with pre-osteoblast cells for 7 and 14 days. Cell proliferation and alkaline phosphatase activity (ALP) were evaluated at each time point, and the samples were imaged via SEM. Results. mCT imaging showed the pores in the PEEK constructs to be open and interconnected. The average pore size was 535 ± 92 µm for the rectilinear, 484 ± 237 µm for the diamond, and 669 ± 216 µm for the gyroid. Porosity was 71% for the rectilinear, 76% for the diamond, and 68% for the gyroid. The average error between the theoretical and actual values was −37.3 µm for pore size and −2.3 % for porosity. Normalized ALP activity of the three porous PEEK samples at 7 days were found to be significantly greater than the solid sample (p < 0.05 rectilinear, p < 0.005 gyroid, p < 0.001 diamond). At 14 days, the same relationships were observed (p < 0.001 for all three designs). No difference between the three geometries was found. SEM imaging revealed cells with flat, elongated morphology attached to the surface of the PEEK. The 14-day samples appeared to have proliferated well and spread along the PEEK pores. Extensions of filopodia and lamellipodia were observed along with large blankets of cells covering the PEEK surface. Discussion. We demonstrated the ability of FFF printed porous PEEK surfaces to promote cellular processes necessary for bone-implant fixation. While all porous structures showed promising results, more investigation into their material characteristics and osteogenic potential are necessary to determine which geometry may be suitable for orthopaedic use. Our work offers an innovative approach to advancing point-of-care 3D printing, cementless implant fixation, and additional applications typically reserved for porous metal

Introduction. A total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the standard of care treatment for end-stage osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. Over the last decade, we have observed a change in TKA patient population to include younger patients. This cohort tends to be more active and thus places more stress on the implanted prothesis. Bone cement has historically been used to establish fixation between the implant and host bone, resulting in two interfaces where loosening may occur. Uncemented fixation methods provide a promising alternative to cemented fixation. While vulnerable during the early post-operative period, cementless implants may be better suited to long-term stability in younger patient cohorts. It is currently unknown whether the surgical technique used to implant the cementless prostheses impacts the longevity of the implant. Two different surgical techniques are commonly used by surgeons and may result in different load distribution across the joint, which will affect bone ingrowth. The overall objective of the study is to assess implant migration and in vivo kinematics following cementless TKA. Methods. Thirty-nine patients undergoing a primary unilateral TKA as a result of OA were recruited prior to surgery and randomized to a surgical technique based on surgeon referral. In the gap balancing surgical technique (GB) soft tissues releases are made to restore neutral limb alignment followed by bone cuts (resection) to balance the joint space in flexion and extension. In the measured resection surgical technique (MR) bone cuts are first made based on anatomical landmarks and soft tissue releases are subsequently conducted with implant components in-situ. Patients returned 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 24 weeks, and 52 weeks following surgery for radiographic evaluation. Kinematics were assessed 52 weeks post-operatively. Results. No significant difference was observed between groups in maximum total point motion (MTPM) at any time point during the first post-operative year. MTPM of both the tibial and femoral component did not significantly change between the six month and one year follow up visits for both the GB (6 mths=0.67 ±0.34mm, 1 yr=0.65 ±0.52, p=0.71) and MR (6 mths= 0.79 ±0.53mm, 1 yr= 0.82 ±0.43mm, p=0.56) cohorts. MTPM for both components over the follow up period is displayed in Figure 1. No significant difference was observed in contact location or pattern on the medial condyle during deep flexion (Figure 2A). A significant difference (p=0.01) was observed, however, between surgical techniques in the lateral contact location at full extension (Figure 2B). No significant difference was observed in the magnitude of AP excursion for both the medial and lateral condyles within and between groups. Conclusion. Surgical technique did not impact the MTPM of an uncemented TKA design during the first post-operative year. By the six month post-operative period tibial and femoral MTPM plateaus indicating that osseointegration between the host bone and implanted components has occurred. Kinematic evaluation indicates contact locations anterior to the midline of the sagittal plane, paradoxical anterior translation, and a lateral pivot point, regardless of surgical technique

Introduction. Long term data on the survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has demonstrated excellent outcomes; however, with younger, more active patients, surgeons have a renewed interest in improved biologic fixation obtained from highly porous, cementless implants. Early designs of cementless total knees systems were fraught with high rates of failure for aseptic loosening, particularly on the tibial component. Prior studies have assessed the bone ingrowth extent for tibial tray designs reporting near 30% extent of bone ingrowth . (1,2). While these analyses were performed on implants that demonstrated unacceptably high rates of clinical failure, a paucity of data exists on the extent on bone ingrowth in contemporary implant designs with newer methods for manufacturing the porous surfaces. We sought to evaluate the extent of attached bone on retrieved cementless tibial trays to determine if patient demographics, device factors, or radiographic results correlate to the extent of bone ingrowth in these contemporary designs. Methods. Using our IRB approved retrieval database, 17 porous tibial trays were identified and separated into groups based on manufacturer: Zimmer Natural Knee (1), Zimmer NexGen (10), Stryker Triathlon (4) and Biomet Vanguard Regenerex (2). Differences in manufacturing methods for porous material designs were recorded. Patient demographics and reason for revision are described in Table 1. Radiographs were used to measure tibiofemoral alignment and the tibial mechanical axis alignment. Components were assessed using visual light microscopy and Photoshop to map bone ingrowth extent across the porous surface. ImageJ was used to threshold and calculate values for bone, scratched metal, and available surface for bone ingrowth (Fig. 1). Percent extent was determined as the bone ingrowth compared to the surface area excluding any scratched regions from explantation. Statistics were performed among tray designs as well as between the lateral and medial pegs, if designs had pegs available for bony ingrowth. Results. Mean bone ingrowth extent was 51.4% for the tibial tray for the entire cohort. Bone ingrowth extent was statistically greater in the Zimmer NexGen design (63.8%; p=.027) compared to the other three designs (Table 2). Four sets of pegs were excluded from analysis due to lack of porous coatings or pegs having been removed at revision surgery. Across all designs, the medial peg had 45.2% ingrowth and the lateral peg had 66.1% ingrowth. The medial peg for the NexGen design had significantly less bone ingrowth compared to the lateral peg (58.7% vs. 75.4%; p=0.044). No significant differences were found in tibiofemoral alignment or tibial mechanical axis alignment between the implant groups. No significant differences were found among implants revised for aseptic loosening versus any other reason for revision (54% vs 30%; p=.18). Discussion. Our results demonstrate high rates of bone ingrowth extent in contemporary designs, further supporting porous design rationales and a role for additive manufacturing to form enhanced porosity. We plan on exploring staining techniques to confirm our visual inspection. Contemporary designs have shown successful rates for improved longevity for cementless total knee systems. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Introduction. Acute infection following Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) is a serious complication. It is commonly treated by irrigation and debridement (I&D) with component retention (exchange only the mobile parts of the joint - head and liner). However, the reported re-infection rate with the use of this approach remains high. We are reporting our experience in using single - stage revision arthroplasty in treating acute infection of THA. We hypothesized that the infection control rate after immediate early revision for acute infection of cementless implants is better than has been reported for I&D with exchange of mobile parts. Methods. From our infection arthroplasty database, we reviewed the outcome of 19 patients who had an acute infection (within 6 weeks) of cementless THA. Our management strategy includes I&D and single-stage (direct-exchange) revision arthroplasty followed by 6 weeks course of culture specific oral antibiotics. Results. Patients' average age was 64 year (39–85), M:F = 11:8. There were 13 primary and 6 revision cementless THAs. Average time from the index operation to the development of clinical symptoms of infection was 18 days (4–41). 14 patients (73.7%) were successfully treated with single stage revision strategy with no evidence of re-infection at 64.3 (32–89) months of follow up. 5 patients (26.3%) developed re-infection requiring two stage-revision surgery. Discussion. Our results showed that single stage revision strategy has a better outcome in treating acute infection after THR than the outcomes reported for I&D with component retention. When faced with acute infection of a cementless implant, early implant exchange prior to ingrowth should be considered

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a major complication affecting >1% of all total knee arthroplasties, with compromise in patient function and high rates of morbidity and mortality. There are also major socioeconomic implications. Diagnosis is based on a combination of clinical features, laboratory tests (including serum and articular samples) and diagnostic imaging. Once confirmed, prompt management is required to prevent propagation of the infection and further local damage. Non-operative measures include patient resuscitation, systemic antibiotics, and wound management, but operative intervention is usually required. Definitive surgical management requires open irrigation and debridement of the operative site, with or without exchange arthroplasty in either a single or two-stage approach. In all options, the patient's fitness, comorbidities and willingness for further surgery should be considered, and full intended benefits and complications openly discussed. Late infection almost invariably leads to implant removal but early infections and acute haematogenous infections can be managed with implant retention – the challenge is to retain the original implant, having eradicated infection and restored full function. Debridement with component retention: Open debridement is indicated for acute postoperative infections or acute haematogenous infections with previously well-functioning joints. To proceed with this management option the following criteria must be met: short duration of symptoms - ideally less than 2–3 weeks but up to 6; well-fixed and well-positioned prostheses; healthy surrounding soft tissues. Open debridement is therefore not an appropriate course of management if symptoms have been prolonged – greater than 6 weeks, if there is a poor soft tissue envelope and scarring, or if a revision arthroplasty would be more appropriate due to loosening or malposition of the implant. It is well documented in the literature that there is an inverse relationship between the duration of symptoms and the success of a debridement. It is thought that as the duration of symptoms increases, other factors such as patient comorbidities, soft tissue status and organism virulence play an increasingly important role in determining the outcome. There is a caveat. Based on our learning in the hip, when we see an acute infection where periprosthetic implants are used, it is much easier to use this time-limited opportunity to remove the implants and the associated biofilm and do a single-stage revision instead of just doing a debridement and a change of insert. This will clearly be experience and prosthesis-dependent but if the cementless implant is easy to remove, then it should be explanted. One critical aspect of this procedure is to use one set of instruments and drapes for the debridement and to then implant the new mobile parts and close using fresh drapes and clean instruments. Units that have gained expertise in single-stage revision will find this easier to do. After a debridement, irrigation, and change of insert, patients continue on intravenous antibiotics until appropriate cultures are available. Our multidisciplinary team and infectious disease experts then take over and will dictate antibiotic therapy thereafter. This is typically continued for a minimum of three months. Patients are monitored clinically, serologically, and particularly in relation to nutritional markers and general wellbeing. Antibiotics are stopped when the patients reach a stable level and are well in themselves. All patients are advised to re-present if they have an increase in pain or they feel unwell

As the number of patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty rises, the number of patients who require surgery for a failed total hip arthroplasty is also increasing. It is estimated that 183,000 total hip replacements were performed in the United States in the year 2000 and that 31,000 of these (17%) were revision procedures. Reconstruction of the failed femoral component in revision total hip arthroplasty can be challenging from both a technical perspective and in preoperative planning. With multiple reconstructive options available, it is helpful to have a classification system which guides the surgeon in selecting the appropriate method of reconstruction. A classification of femoral deficiency has been developed and an algorithmic approach to femoral reconstruction is presented. An extensively coated, diaphyseal filling component reliably achieves successful fixation in the majority of revision femurs. The surgical technique is straightforward and we continue to use this type of device in the majority of our revision total hip arthroplasties. However, in the severely damaged femur (Type IIIB and Type IV), other reconstructive options may provide improved results. Based on our results, the following reconstructive algorithm is recommended for femoral reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty. Type I: In a Type I femur, there is minimal loss of cancellous bone with an intact diaphysis. Cemented or cementless fixation can be utilised. If cemented fixation is selected, great care must be taken in removing the neo-cortex often encountered to allow for appropriate cement intrusion into the remaining cancellous bone. Type II: In a Type II femur, there is extensive loss of the metaphyseal cancellous bone and thus, fixation with cement is unreliable. In this cohort of patients, successful fixation was achieved using a diaphyseal fitting, extensively porous coated implant. However, as the metaphysis is supportive, a cementless implant that achieves primary fixation in the metaphysis can be utilised. Type IIIA: In a Type IIIA femur, the metaphysis is non-supportive and an extensively coated stem of adequate length is utilised to ensure that more than 4cm of scratch fit is obtained in the diaphysis. Type IIIB: Based on the poor results obtained with a cylindrical, extensively porous coated implant (with 4 of 8 reconstructions failing), our present preference is a modular, cementless, tapered stem with flutes for obtaining rotational stability. Type IV: The isthmus is completely non-supportive and the femoral canal is widened. Cementless fixation cannot be reliably used in our experience, as it is difficult to obtain adequate initial implant stability that is required for osseointegration. Reconstruction can be performed with impaction grafting if the cortical tube of the proximal femur is intact. However, this technique can be technically difficult to perform, time consuming and costly given the amount of bone graft that is often required. Although implant subsidence and peri-prosthetic fractures have been associated with this technique, it can provide an excellent solution for the difficult revision femur where cementless fixation cannot be utilised. Alternatively, an allograft-prosthesis composite can be utilised for younger patients in an attempt to reconstitute bone stock and a proximal femoral replacing endoprosthesis used for more elderly patients

Introduction. Cementless Total Knee Replacement (TKR) was introduced to improve the longevity of implant; but has yet to be widely adopted because of reports of higher earlier failures in some series. The cementless TKR design has evolved recently and we have been using cementless component – both femoral and tibial on our patients. The long follow-up for fully TKR has been scarce in the literature. The purpose of this study isto investigate the minimum of ten years clinical and radiographic result of cementless titanium component and cementless tantalum component in primary TKR. Material & method. From 2008 to 2010 317 TKR underwent primary total knee with cementless femoral component titanium based (Zimmer Nexgen) and cementless tantalum component monoblock tibial component, The surgery was performed mainly on younger patients - average age was 48 yrs old ranging from 26 yrs old to 62 yrs old. All surgeries were performed by single surgeon. All patients were followed clinically and radiographically for a minimum of 8 yrs. Mean 7.8 years and range from 7 to 9 years. The underlying diagnosis for majority of the cases were degenerative arthritis in 97 of the cases and rheumatoid arthritis on the 3%. Result. We have revised 6 cases − 3 cases were for sepsis. They were revised in 2 stages. And we also revised 5 cases for loosening of femoral component. The tibial component revision for aseptic loosening or osteolysis for an end point for survivorship was a 100% for the tibia monoblock design. There was no radiographic evidence of tibial component loosening or subsidence, or migration at the time of the latest follow-up for tibia monoblock. On the femoral part we documented 16 cases other than those 4 revision for osteolysis, where limited osteolysis happened in some area of the tibial component but it did not affect stability and those has been followed up for a longer term. There was interesting phenomena in some of those cases where bone growth happened around the anterior cortex where it sealed the component entirely. Knee society scores improved from 51 pre-operatively to 94 pre-operatively on the last clinical visit. We had 32 cases where the patientswere able to regain their full mobility flexion of over 150 degrees. Conclusion. Our data clearly shows that the cementless TKR has excellent result as compared to the cemented with a good survival ship at 10 years. The tantalum tibial component shows an excellent survivorship. The femoral component also present reasonably good result but we still faced a few cases of loosening. The functional outcome for the implant with the surgery was satisfactory. With this result we strongly recommend using the cementless implant in young patients. We believe that cementless tibial is totally safe at this point as well as the femoral cementless prosthesis. However, we expect some improvement with the outcome with the femoral component when using the tantalum

Success in knee revision begins in the office. The initial evaluations determine the implant design and pre-operative diagnosis. The physical examination identifies the presence of instability, stiffness, extensor mechanism malfunction and previous incisions all of which influence the planned procedure. Prior to surgery arrangements are made to have all manner of revision implants, removal tools, and allograft material available. Removal of implants must be done with a focus on preserving bone stock and the extensor mechanism. Initial exposure involves release of the gutters, lateral subluxation of the patella and removal of the polyethylene insert. These maneuvers combined with a quadriceps snip provide exposure for implant removal in 80–90% of cases. More extensive exposure options include quadriceps turndown, tibial tubercle osteotomy, medial epicondylar osteotomy and a femoral peel. Tools needed for implant removal include thin osteotomes, offset osteotomes, thin saws and a high-speed bur. After polyethylene removal the femur followed by the tibia are removed. In many cases the existing well-fixed patellar component can remain. The implant cement or implant bone interface is approached for cemented and cementless implants, respectively. Tools are always directed parallel to the fixation surface. Offset osteotomes are helpful gaining access to the femoral notch when femoral pegs prevent access from the sides. Central keels or peripheral pegs can complicate tibial removal. Working completely around the keel from medial and lateral disrupts the peripheral tibial interface leaving just the central posterior metaphysis. Stacked osteotomes or a slap hammer can be used to lift the baseplate from the tibia

Introduction. Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implants use an interference fit to achieve fixation, which depends on the difference between the inner dimensions of the implant and outer dimensions of the bone. However, the most optimal interference fit is still unclear. A higher interference fit could lead to a superior fixation, but it could also cause bone abrasion and permanent deformation during implantation. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the effect of increasing the interference fit from 350 µm to 700 µm on the primary stability of cementless tibial implants by measuring micromotions and gaps at the bone-implant interface when subjected to two loading conditions. Methods. Two cementless e.motion® tibial components (Total Knee System, B. Braun) with different interference fit and surface coating were implanted in six pairs of relatively young human cadaver tibias (47–60 years). The Orthoload peak loads of gait (1960N) and squat (1935N) were applied to the specimens with a custom made load applicator (Figure 1A). The micromotions (shear displacement) and opening/closing gaps (normal displacement) were measured with Digital Image Correlation (DIC) in 6 different regions of interest (ROIs - Figure 1B). Two General Linear Mixed Models (GLMMs) were created with micromotions and interfacial gaps as dependent variables, bone quality, loading conditions, ROIs, and interference fit implants as independent variables, and the cadaver specimens as subject variables. Results. No significant difference was found for the micromotions between the two interference fit implants (gait p=0.755, squat p=0.232), nor for interfacial gaps (gait p=0.474, squat p=0.269). In contrast, significant differences were found for the ROIs in the two dependent variables (p < 0.001). The micromotions in the anterior ROIs (AM and AL) showed fewer micromotions for the low interference fit implant (Figure 2). More closing gaps (negative values) were seen for all ROIs (Figure 3), except in AM ROI during squat, which showed opening gaps (positive values). The posterior ROIs (PM and PL) showed more closing than seen in the anterior ROIs (AM and AL) for both loading configurations. Discussion. The results presented here demonstrate that increasing the interference fit from 350 µm to 700 µm does not affect the micromotions at the implant-bone interface of tibial TKA. While micromotions values were all below the threshold for bone ingrowth (40 µm), closing gaps were quite substantial (∼−150 µm). Since cementless e.motion® TKA components with an interference fit of 350 µm had shown a survival rate of 96.2% after 8.3 years postoperatively, interfacial gaps can be expected to be within a threshold value that can guarantee good primary stability. Moreover, increasing the interference fit to 700 µm can be considered a good range for an interference fit. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Introduction. Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs are clinically successful and allow for long term biological fixation. Utilizing morselized bone to promote biological fixation is a strategy in cementless implantation. However, it is unknown how bone debris influences the initial placement of the tray. Recent findings show that unseated tibia trays without good contact with the tibial resection experience increased motion. This current study focuses on the effect of technique and instrument design on the initial implantation of a cementless porous tibia. Specifically, can technique or instrument design influence generation of bone debris, and thereby change the forces required to fully seat a cementless tray with pegs?. Methods. This bench top test measured the force-displacement curve during controlled insertion of a modern cementless tibia plate with two fixation pegs. A total of nine pairs of stripped human cadaver tibias were prepared according to the surgical technique. However, the holes for the fixation pegs were drilled intentionally shallow to isolate changes in insertion force due to the hole preparation. A first generation instrument set (Instrument 1.0) and new instrument set design (Instrument 2.0), including a new drill bit designed to remove debris from the peg hole, were used. The tibias prepared with Instrument 1.0 were either cleaned to remove bone debris from the holes or not cleaned. The tibias prepared with the Instrument 2.0 instruments were not cleaned, resulting in three groups: Instrument 1.0 (n=7), Instrument 1.0 Cleaned (n=5), and Instrument 2.0 (n=6). Following tibia resection and preparation of holes for the fixation pegs, the tibias were cut and potted in bone cement ensuring the osteotomy was horizontal. The tibial tray was mounted in a load frame (Enduratec) and the trays were inserted at a constant rate (0.169mm/sec) while recording the force. The test was concluded when the pegs were clearly past the bottom of the intentionally shallow holes. Results. The force-displacement curves from this method were dependent on the instrument used and cleaning of the holes. Instrument 2.0 specimens were inserted about 2 mm past the maximum peg depth before experiencing a significant increased resistance. The Instrument 1.0 Cleaned holes saw an increase in force slightly past the maximum peg depth, while the Instrument 1.0 group saw increase in force around 1 mm before reaching the maximum peg depth. The average insertion force required to reach maximum peg depth was significantly higher (p<0.05) for the Instrument 1.0 group (790.7 N, sd=185.9) than both the Instrument 1.0 Cleaned (429.7 N, sd=116.8) and the Instrument 2.0 group (580.4 N, sd=89.3). The insertion forces at a ‘mid-tunnel’ location, before the increase in resistance, were not affected by drill design as the drill diameters were the same, resulting in the same press fit. Conclusions. Bone debris in fixation feature holes increases the force to fully seat a cementless tibia plate. This suggests there is a cost to leaving morselized bone in place. Removing bone debris through instrument design or surgical technique can ensure that a tibial plate is fully seated at time of implantation, maximizing initial fixation

The extended proximal femoral osteotomy has been used primarily in conjunction with cementless fixation, but has been described for use with cemented stems as well. The extended proximal femoral osteotomy is indicated for the removal of well-fixed cemented and cementless implants, as well as removal of cement in patients with a loose femoral component in a well-fixed cement mantle. Although the osteotomy is not required for many femoral revisions, it is an absolute indication in patients with femoral component loosening and subsequent varus remodeling of the proximal femur. The osteotomy diminishes the risk of an inadvertent fracture of the often compromised greater trochanter especially upon removal of a failed femoral component from its subsided or migrated position. The osteotomy enhances the exposure of the acetabulum which may be difficult in the revision setting due to multiple surgeries, severe migration of the acetabular component or the heterotopic ossification. The extended proximal femoral osteotomy can also be used in the primary setting when a proximal femoral deformity interferes with straight reaming of the femoral canal, such as in patients with various dysplasias, previous corrective osteotomies or malunions