This large UK multicentre study evaluates clinical outcomes and identifies factors associated with local complication following PFR for non-oncological conditions. 132 patients across four UK centres underwent PFR from 01/08/2004-28/03/2023 with median follow-up of 1.9 (Q10.5-Q34.2) years. 75 (56.8%) patients were female and the mean age was 74.0 (SD 11.7) years. 103 (78%) patients had Charleston Comorbidity Index ≥3. ASA class was III or IV in 66.6%. Indications were infected revision (39, 29.5%), periprosthetic fracture (36, 27.3%), acute trauma (30, 22.7%), aseptic revision (17, 12.9%), failed trauma (nine, 6.8%) and complex primary arthroplasty (one, 0.8%). The primary outcome was the local complication rate. Secondary outcomes were systemic complications, reoperation and mortality rates. Comparisons were made with t-tests and Chi2 tests to investigate patient and surgical factors associated with local complication. Statistical significance was p<0.05. There were 37(28.0%) local complications. These were 18 (13.6%) dislocations, eight (6.1%) prosthetic joint infections, four (3.0%) haematomas, three (2.3%) superficial infections, one (0.8%) wound dehiscence, one (0.8%) sciatic nerve palsy and one (0.8%) femoral perforation. Dislocation mostly occurred in conventional articulations (12, 9.1%) followed by dual-mobility cups (three, 2.3%), constrained cups (two, 1.5%) and hemiarthroplasty (one, 0.8%). Median time to local complication was 30 (Q14-Q3 133) days. Seven (5.3%) patients developed a systemic complication. Thirty-three (25.0%) patients underwent reoperation. Thirty-day and one-year mortality rates were 3.8% and 12.1%, respectively. Longer surgical waiting times (7.9 \[SD 16.9) versus 2.6 \[SD 4.4\] days, p<0.001) and longer operating times (212.5 \[SD 71.8\] versus 189.4 \[SD 59.3\] mins, p=0.0450) were associated with local complication. Due to its high complication rate, PFR should be a salvage option when performed for non-oncological indications. Conventional articulations should be avoided. PFR should be delivered in a timely manner and ideally as dual-consultant cases to reduce operating time.
With increasing burden of revision hip arthroplasty (THA), one of the major challenges is the management of proximal femoral bone loss associated with previous multiple surgeries. Proximal femoral arthroplasty (PFA) has already been popularized for tumour surgeries. Our aim was to describe the outcome of using PFA in these demanding non-neoplastic cases. A retrospective review of 25 patients who underwent PFA for non-neoplastic indications between January 2009 and December 2015 was undertaken. Their clinical and radiological outcome, complication rates, and survival were recorded. All patients had the Stanmore Implant – Modular Endo-prosthetic Tumour System (METS).Aims
Methods
One-stage revision hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has several advantages; however, resection of the proximal femur might be necessary to achieve higher success rates. We investigated the risk factors for resection and re-revisions, and assessed complications and subsequent re-revisions. In this single-centre, case-control study, 57 patients who underwent one-stage revision arthroplasty for PJI of the hip and required resection of the proximal femur between 2009 and 2018 were identified. The control group consisted of 57 patients undergoing one-stage revision without bony resection. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify any correlation with resection and the risk factors for re-revisions. Rates of all-causes re-revision, reinfection, and instability were compared between groups.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to determine whether fixation, as opposed to revision arthroplasty, can be safely used to treat reducible Vancouver B type fractures in association with a cemented collarless polished tapered femoral stem (the Exeter). This retrospective cohort study assessed 152 operatively managed consecutive unilateral Vancouver B fractures involving Exeter stems; 130 were managed with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and 22 with revision arthroplasty. Mean follow-up was 6.5 years (SD 2.6; 3.2 to 12.1). The primary outcome measure was revision of at least one component. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was performed. Regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for revision following ORIF. Secondary outcomes included any reoperation, complications, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, and mortality.Aims
Methods
A possible solution for the management of proximal femoral bone
loss is a modular femoral endoprosthesis (EPR). Although the outcome
of EPRs in tumour surgery has been well described, the outcome of
their use in revision hip surgery has received less attention. The
aim of this study was to describe the outcome of using EPR for non-neoplastic
indications. A retrospective review of 79 patients who underwent 80 EPRs for
non-neoplastic indications was performed, including the rates of
complication and survival and the mean Oxford Hip Scores (OHS),
at a mean of five years post-operatively. The mean age at the time
of surgery was 69 years (28 to 93) and the mean number of previous operations
on the hip was 2.4 (0 to 17). The most common indications for EPR
implantation were periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (n = 40),
periprosthetic fracture (n = 12) and failed osteosynthesis of a
proximal femoral fracture or complex trauma (n = 11).Objectives
Methods
We have managed 27 patients (16 women and 11 men) with a mean age of 68.4 years (50 to 84), with failed total hip replacement and severe proximal femoral bone loss by revision using a distal fix/proximal wrap prosthesis. The mean follow-up was for 55.3 months (25 to 126). The mean number of previous operations was 2.2 (1 to 4). The mean Oxford hip score decreased from 46.2 (38 to 60) to 28.5 (17 to 42) (paired t-test, p <
0.001) and the mean Harris Hip score increased from 30.4 (3 to 57.7) to 71.7 (44 to 99.7) (paired t-test, p <
0.001). There were two dislocations, and in three patients we failed to eradicate previous infection. None required revision of the femoral stem. This technique allows instant distal fixation while promoting biological integration and restoration of bone stock. In the short term, the functional outcome is encouraging and the complication rates acceptable in this difficult group of patients.
