Aims. The aim of this study was to report the initial results of the Exeter V40 stem, which became available in 2000. Patients and Methods. A total of 540 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) were performed in our unit using this stem between December 2000 and May 2002. Our routine protocol is to review patients postoperatively and at one, five, and ten years following surgery. Results. A total of 145 patients (26.9%) died before ten years and of the remaining 395 stems, 374 (94.7%) remain in situ. A total of 21 well-fixed stems (5.3%) were revised. Ten were exchanged using a cement-in-cement technique to facilitate acetabular revision. Three were revised for infection, one for instability, one for fracture of the stem, and six following a periprosthetic fracture. An additional 16 acetabular components (4.1%) were revised; five for aseptic loosening and 11 for instability. There were no revisions for aseptic loosening of the stem, and no evidence of aseptic loosening in any hip. The fate of every stem is known and all patients remain under review. Survivorship, with revision of the stem for aseptic loosening as the endpoint, was 100%. At 13.5 years, the Kaplan–Meier survival rate for all-cause revision of the stem was 96.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 94.8 to 98.8) and all-cause revision (including acetabular revision, infection, and instability) was 91.2% (95% CI 88.3 to 94.1). Conclusion. No stem was revised for aseptic loosening in this series. The contemporary Exeter V40 stem continues to perform well, and survival has remained comparable with that of the Exeter Universal stem. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1002–9

Aims. The Exeter V40 cemented polished tapered stem system has demonstrated excellent long-term outcomes. This paper presents a systematic review of the existing literature and reports on a large case series comparing implant fractures between the Exeter V40 series; 125 mm and conventional length stem systems. Methods. A systematic literature search was performed adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria. In parallel, we performed a retrospective single centre study of Exeter V40 femoral stem prosthetic fractures between April 2003 and June 2020. Results. There are 25 reported cases of such prosthetic fractures confined to small case series and case reports within the literature. We report an additional 19 cases to the literature (mean age 66.3 years (SD 11.7); 12 (63%) females; BMI 32.9 kg/m. 2. (SD 5.9)). The mean time from index procedure to fracture was 7.8 years (SD 3.6; 2.5 to 16.3). Exeter V40 stem fracture incidence was 0.15% and 1.21% for primary and revision arthroplasty, respectively. Incidence was significantly higher in revision arthroplasty (p < 0.001) and 125 mm length stems compared to ≥ 150 mm length stems (1.25% vs 0.13%, respectively; p < 0.001). When comparing different stem length cohorts, 125 mm short-stems were associated with stem-body fractures (92% vs 29%; p = 0.0095), earlier time to fracture (6.2 years vs 11.0 years; p = 0.0018), younger patient age at time of fracture (62.7 years vs 72.6 years; p = 0.037), and female sex (75% vs 43%; p = 0.326). Conclusion. This complication remains rare, although we report a significantly higher incidence at up to 17 years follow-up than in the literature. Short 125 mm length Exeter V40 stems undoubtedly have a role in restoring anatomy and biomechanics in smaller femoral geometries, although the surgeon has to appreciate the higher risk of stem fracture and the associated predisposing factors which may necessitate particular attention to surgical technique and planning. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(6):443–456

Aims. The Exeter V40 femoral stem is the most implanted stem in the National Joint Registry (NJR) for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). In 2004, the 44/00/125 stem was released for use in ‘cement-in-cement’ revision cases. It has, however, been used ‘off-label’ as a primary stem when patient anatomy requires a smaller stem with a 44 mm offset. We aimed to investigate survival of this implant in comparison to others in the range when used in primary THAs recorded in the NJR. Methods. We analyzed 328,737 primary THAs using the Exeter V40 stem, comprising 34.3% of the 958,869 from the start of the NJR to December 2018. Our exposure was the stem, and the outcome was all-cause construct revision. We stratified analyses into four groups: constructs using the 44/00/125 stem, those using the 44/0/150 stem, those including a 35.5/125 stem, and constructs using any other Exeter V40 stem. Results. In all 328,737 THAs using an Exeter V40 stem, the revision estimate was 2.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.7 to 2.8). The 44/00/125 stem was implanted in 2,158 primary THAs, and the ten-year revision estimate was 4.9% (95% CI 3.6 to 6.8). Controlling for age, sex, year of operation, indication, and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade demonstrated an increased overall hazard of revision for constructs using the 44/00/125 stem compared to constructs using other Exeter V40 femoral stems (hazard ratio 1.8 (95% CI 1.4 to 2.3)). Conclusion. Although the revision estimate is within the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence ten-year benchmark, survivorship of constructs using the 44/00/125 stem appears to be lower than the rest of the range. Adjusted analyses will not take into account ‘confounding by indication’, e.g. patients with complex anatomy who may have a higher risk of revision. Surgeons and patients should be reassured but be aware of the observed increased revision estimate, and only use this stem when other implants are not suitable. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(5):504–510

Aims. The Exeter V40 cemented femoral stem was first introduced in 2000. The largest single-centre analysis of this implant to date was published in 2018 by Westerman et al. Excellent results were reported at a minimum of ten years for the first 540 cases performed at the designer centre in the Exeter NHS Trust, with stem survivorship of 96.8%. The aim of this current study is to report long-term outcomes and survivorship for the Exeter V40 stem in a non-designer centre. Methods. All patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty using the Exeter V40 femoral stem between 1 January 2005 and 31 January 2010 were eligible for inclusion. Data were collected prospectively, with routine follow-up at six to 12 months, two years, five years, and ten years. Functional outcomes were assessed using Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores. Outcome measures included data on all components in situ beyond ten years, death occurring within ten years with components in situ, and all-cause revision surgery. Results. A total of 829 stems in 745 patients were included in the dataset; 155 patients (20.8%) died within ten years, and of the remaining 664 stems, 648 stems (97.6%) remained in situ beyond ten years. For the 21 patients (2.5%) undergoing revision surgery, 16 femoral stems (1.9%) were revised and 18 acetabular components (2.2%) were revised. Indications for revision in order of decreasing frequency were infection (n = 6), pain (n = 6), aseptic component loosening (n = 3), periprosthetic fracture (n = 3), recurrent dislocation (n = 2), and noise production (ceramic-on-ceramic squeak) (n = 1). One patient was revised for aseptic stem loosening. The mean preoperative WOMAC score was 61 (SD 15.9) with a mean postoperative score of 20.4 (SD 19.3) (n = 732; 88.3%). Conclusion. The Exeter V40 cemented femoral stem demonstrates excellent functional outcomes and survival when used in a high volume non-designer centre. Outcomes are comparable to those of its serially validated predecessor, the Exeter Universal stem. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2020;1-12:743–748

The Exeter V40 femoral stem is the most implanted stem in the NJR for primary THA. In 2004, the 44/00/125 stem was released for use in “cement-in-cement” revision cases. It has however been used ‘off-label’ as a primary stem when, for example, patient anatomy requires a smaller stem with a 44mm offset. We aimed to investigate survival of this stem in comparison to others in the range when used in primary THAs recorded in the NJR. Analyses were performed using a dataset based on that used for the 2020 NJR annual report. Our exposure was the stem; the outcome was all-cause construct revision. Crude analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier and adjusted using Cox models. The 44/00/125 stem was directly compared to other stems in the Exeter range. We analysed 330,732 primary THAs using the Exeter V40 stem comprising 34.5% of the 958,869 THAs with complete information from the start of the NJR to 31 December 2018. The 44/00/125 stem was implanted in 2,158 primary THAs with 67.5% in female patients and a mean age of 67.8. The 10-year revision estimate for the 44/00/125 stem was 4.9% (95%CI 3.6, 6.8) and in constructs using an Exeter V40 stem was 2.8% (95%CI 2.7, 2.8). Controlling for age, sex and ASA demonstrated an increased overall hazard of revision for constructs using the 44/00/125 stem compared to constructs using other Exeter V40 femoral stems (HR 1.8 (95%CI 1.4, 2.3)). Although the revision estimate is within the NICE 10-year benchmark, survivorship of constructs using the 44/00/125 stem appears to be lower than the rest of the Exeter V40 range. Attempts to control for age, sex and ASA will not take into account confounding by indication i.e. patients with more complex anatomy who may have a higher risk of revision. Surgeons and patients should be reassured by this but should be aware of the observed increased revision estimate and use the stem according to its indications

Introduction. The Exeter Hip femoral component remains largely unchanged from the original design, introduced in 1970. It is a highly polished, modular, double tapered stem and has undergone various minor modifications to surface, modularity and most recently the taper; changed to the current V40. TM. design in 2000. The effect of any design modification cannot easily be foreseen and greater emphasis is now placed on ensuring appropriate monitoring for such implants. Methods. We present the results of the first 540 V40. TM. Exeter THAs performed in our Centre between December 2000 and May 2002. All patients were reviewed prospectively at 1, 5 and 10 years following surgery. Results. Ten years after surgery there are no revisions for aseptic loosening and no evidence of aseptic loosening in any hip. The fate of every implant is known and all patients remain under review. One hundred and forty-five patients (26.9%) died before 10 years and of the remaining 395 stems, 374 (94.7%) remain in situ, 11 were revised (2.7%). Three were revised for infection, one for recurrent dislocation and one implant failed at the neck of the prosthesis. Ten were exchanged using cement-in-cement techniques to aid acetabular revision. There were ten periprosthetic fractures: six requiring stem revision, two underwent ORIF and two had already healed by the time the patients presented for follow-up. There was no radiographic evidence of failure preceding the periprosthetic fractures. All radiographs and pain scores were analysed as part of long-term follow-up, and are discussed. Discussion. There were no revisions for aseptic loosening. Previous studies from this centre reviewing the Original and Universal series have demonstrated the stem to provide a predictable and reproducible long term outcome with 100% survival well beyond10 years for aseptic loosening. Conclusion. The polished V40. TM. Exeter stem continues to perform well and survival has remained comparable to the Universal series

Aims. Several different designs of hemiarthroplasty are used to treat intracapsular fractures of the proximal femur, with large variations in costs. No clinical benefit of modular over monoblock designs has been reported in the literature. Long-term data are lacking. The aim of this study was to report the ten-year implant survival of commonly used designs of hemiarthroplasty. Methods. Patients recorded by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) between 1 September 1999 and 31 December 2020 who underwent hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of a hip fracture with the following implants were included: a cemented monoblock Exeter Trauma Stem (ETS), cemented Exeter V40 with a bipolar head, a monoblock Thompsons prosthesis (Cobalt/Chromium or Titanium), and an Exeter V40 with a Unitrax head. Overall and age-defined cumulative revision rates were compared over the ten years following surgery. Results. A total of 41,949 hemiarthroplasties were included. Exeter V40 with a Unitrax head was the most commonly used (n = 20,707, 49.4%). The overall rate of revision was small. A total of 28,201 patients (67.2%) were aged > 80 years. There were no significant differences in revision rates across all designs of hemiarthroplasty in patients of this age at any time. The revision rates for all designs were < 3.5%, three years postoperatively. At subsequent times the ETS and Exeter V40 with a bipolar head performed well in all age groups. The unadjusted ten-year mortality rate for the whole cohort was 82.2%. Conclusion. There was no difference in implant survival between all the designs of hemiarthroplasty in the first three years following surgery, supporting the selection of a cost-effective design of hemiarthroplasty for most patients with an intracapsular fracture of the hip, as determined by local availability and costs. Beyond this, the ETS and Exeter bipolar designs performed well in all age groups. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(8):864–871

There is little evidence on the cost effectiveness of different brands of hip prostheses. We compared lifetime cost effectiveness of frequently used brands within types of prosthesis including cemented (Exeter V40 Contemporary, Exeter V40 Duration and Exeter V40 Elite Plus Ogee), cementless (Corail Pinnacle, Accolade Trident, and Taperloc Exceed) and hybrid (Exeter V40 Trilogy, Exeter V40 Trident, and CPT Trilogy). We used data from three linked English national databases to estimate the lifetime risk of revision, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost. . For women with osteoarthritis aged 70 years, the Exeter V40 Elite Plus Ogee had the lowest risk of revision (5.9% revision risk, 9.0 QALYs) and the CPT Trilogy had the highest QALYs (10.9% revision risk, 9.3 QALYs). Compared with the Corail Pinnacle (9.3% revision risk, 9.22 QALYs), the most commonly used brand, and assuming a willingness-to-pay of £20 000 per QALY gain, the CPT Trilogy is most cost effective, with an incremental net monetary benefit of £876. Differences in cost effectiveness between the hybrid CPT Trilogy and Exeter V40 Trident and the cementless Corail Pinnacle and Taperloc Exceed were small, and a cautious interpretation is required, given the limitations of the available information. However, it is unlikely that cemented brands are among the most cost effective. Similar patterns of results were observed for men and other ages. The gain in quality of life after total hip arthroplasty, rather than the risk of revision, was the main driver of cost effectiveness. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:762–70

The Exeter. ™. V40 cemented polished tapered stem system has demonstrated excellent long-term outcomes. This paper presents a systematic review of the existing literature and reports on a large case series comparing implant fractures between the Exeter V40 series; 125 mm and conventional length stem systems. A systematic literature search was performed adhering to PRISMA criteria. In parallel we performed a retrospective single centre study of Exeter. ™. V40 femoral stem prosthetic fractures between April 2003– June 2020. There are 25 reported cases of such prosthetic fractures confined to small case series and case reports within the literature. We report an additional 19 cases to the literature (mean age 66.3 ± 11.7 years; 12 female [63%]; body mass index 32.9 ± 5.9 kg/m. 2. ). The mean time from index procedure to fracture was 7.8 years (2.5–16.3, ±3.6). Exeter V40 stem fracture incidence was 0.27%. Incidence was significantly higher in 125 mm length stems compared to ≥150 mm length stems (1.26% vs 0.13%, respectively, p <0.001) and revision arthroplasty (1.209% vs 0.149%, p <0.001). When comparing different stem length cohorts, 125-mm short-stem were associated with stem body fractures (92% vs 29%, p = 0.0095), earlier time to fracture (6.2 vs 11.0 years, p = 0.0018), younger patient age at time of fracture (62.7 vs 72.6 years old, p = 0.037) and female sex (75% vs 43%, p = 0.33). This case series in conjunction with the systematic review provides evidence stem morphology plays a role in femoral implant fracture. This complication remains rare, although we report a significantly higher incidence at up to 17 years follow-up than in the literature. As femoral geometries remain the same, increasing BMIs in THR patients should raise concern. Short 125 mm length Exeter V40 stems undoubtedly have a role in restoring anatomy and biomechanics in smaller femoral geometries, although the surgeon has to appreciate the higher risk of stem fracture and the associated predisposing factors which may necessitate meticulous surgical technique and planning

Background. Periprosthetic femoral fractures following total hip arthroplasty are relatively uncommon but are associated with significant morbidity. With an increasing number of total hip arthroplasties being carried out in an aging population we need to ensure correct implants are chosen for our patients. A recent review of NJR data suggested a significantly higher revision risk for the Zimmer CPT stems due to periprosthetic fractures when compared to the Stryker Exeter stems. Objectives. Our aim was to compare the biomechanics of periprosthetic fractures around the CPT and Exeter V40 stems in a composite saw bone model to identify if a difference in fracture risk exists between the two stems. We also compared the engineering design of the two implants in order to analyse the possible effect this may have on fracture risk. Study Design & Methods. Fourteen composite femurs were divided into two groups and cemented using Palacos R cement with either the CPT or Exeter V40 stem by a single surgeon. The implanted femurs were then mounted onto an Instron machine and were axially loaded and torqued to fracture with an axial compressive force of 2000N over 10 seconds followed by a rotation of 40 degrees applied over 1 second. A power calculation from a previous composite saw bone model study suggested that a minimum of 6 implanted femurs would be required in each group. Results. The implanted femurs invariably sustained fracture patterns similar to the Vancouver B2 periprosthetic fracture which are commonly seen in clinical practice. Implanted femurs with CPT stems suffered periprosthetic fractures with less rotation when compared to those femurs with the Exeter V40 stem (20.10 versus 33.60, p<0.01). We also found that CPT implanted femurs were fracturing at significantly lower torque values when compared to the Exeter V40 implanted femurs (124Nm Versus 174Nm, p<0.01). The energy release rate (G111) for CPT stems was 21.8Nm compared to 61.2Nm for Exeter V40 stems. The higher energy release with Exeter stems led to more comminuted fractures in Exeter implanted femurs when compared to the CPT femurs, which fractured earlier, but with simpler fracture patterns. Finite element method (FEM) simulation analysis showed that fractures initiated between the prosthesis and cement at the proximal end of the femur. Two dimensional sections at the same height showed a difference in bone-cement-implant geometrics at the critical point of failure suggesting that a design cause may be the reason for the higher risk of periprosthetic fractures in CPT implanted femurs. Conclusions. Our observations may explain the higher revision risk secondary to periprosthetic fractures that has been observed with the CPT stem when compared to the Exeter V40 stem

Aims. Periprosthetic fracture (PF) after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an uncommon but potentially devastating complication. This study aims to investigate the influence of cemented stem designs on the risk of needing a revision for a PF. Patients and Methods. We analysed data on 257 202 primary THAs with cemented stems and 390 linked first revisions for PF recorded in the National Joint Registry (NJR) of England, Wales and Northern Ireland to determine if a cemented femoral stem brand was associated with the risk of having revision for a PF after primary THA. All cemented femoral stem brands with more than 10 000 primary operations recorded in the NJR were identified. The four most commonly used cemented femoral stems were the Exeter V40 (n = 146 409), CPT (n = 24 300), C-Stem (n = 15 113) and Charnley (n = 20 182). We compared the revision risk ratios due to PF amongst the stems using a Poisson regression model adjusting for patient factors. Compared with the Exeter V40, the age, gender and ASA grade adjusted revision rate ratio was 3.89 for the cemented CPT stem (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.07 to 4.93), 0.89 for the C-Stem (95% CI 0.57 to 1.41) and 0.41 for the Charnley stem (95% CI 0.24 to 0.70). Conclusions. The limitations of the study include incomplete data capture, analysis of only PF requiring revision and that observation does not imply causality. Nevertheless, this study demonstrates that the choice of a cemented stem may influence the risk of revision for PF. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1347–54

Aims. The objective of this study was to compare the two-year migration and clinical outcomes of a new cementless hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated titanium acetabular shell with its previous version, which shared the same geometrical design but a different manufacturing process for applying the titanium surface. Methods. Overall, 87 patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) were randomized to either a Trident II HA or Trident HA shell, each cementless with clusterholes and HA-coating. All components were used in combination with a cemented Exeter V40 femoral stem. Implant migration was measured using radiostereometric analysis (RSA), with radiographs taken within two days of surgery (baseline), and at three, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Proximal acetabular component migration was the primary outcome measure. Clinical scores and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected at each follow-up. Results. Mean proximal migrations at three, 12, and 24 months were 0.08 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.03 to 0.14), 0.11 mm (95% CI 0.06 to 0.16), and 0.14 mm (95% CI 0.09 to 0.20), respectively, in the Trident II HA group, versus 0.11 mm (95% CI 0.06 to 0.16), 0.12 mm (95% CI 0.07 to 0.17), and 0.14 mm (95% CI 0.09 to 0.19) in the Trident HA group (p = 0.875). No significant differences in translations or rotations between the two designs were found in any other direction. Clinical scores and PROMs were comparable between groups, except for an initially greater postoperative improvement in Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Symptoms score in the Trident HA group (p = 0.033). Conclusion. The Trident II clusterhole HA shell has comparable migration with its predecessor, the Trident hemispherical HA cluster shell, suggesting a similar risk of long-term aseptic loosening. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):136–143

Aims. There are limited published data detailing the volumetric material loss from tapers of conventional metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) total hip arthroplasties (THAs). Our aim was to address this by comparing the taper wear rates measured in an explanted cohort of the widely used Exeter THA with those measured in a group of metal-on-metal (MoM) THAs. Patients and Methods. We examined an existing retrieval database to identify all Exeter V40 and Universal MoP THAs. Volumetric wear analysis of the taper surfaces was conducted using previously validated methodology. These values were compared with those obtained from a series of MoM THAs using non-parametric statistical methodology. A number of patient and device variables were accounted for using multiple regression modelling. Results. A total of 95 Exeter MoP and 249 MoM THAs were examined. The median volumetric loss from the MoM cohort was over four times larger than that from the MoP cohort (1.01 mm. 3. vs 0.23 mm. 3. , p < 0.001), despite a significantly shorter median period in vivo for the MoM group (48 months vs 90 months, p < 0.001). Multiple regression modelling indicated that the dominant variables leading to greater female taper material loss were bearing diameter (p < 0.001), larger female taper angles (p < 0.001), and male titanium stem tapers (p < 0.001). Conclusion. Consistent with the long-term clinical success of the device, the volumetric material loss from Exeter femoral head tapers was, in general, small compared with that from larger-diameter MoM head tapers. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1310–9

Introduction/Aims. The Exeter Stem can be used with metal femoral head that are made of either cobalt chrome, or stainless steel. The aim of this study was to compare the rates of revision of these two metal femoral head types when used with this femoral component. Method. Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) Data from September 1999 until December 2015 for all primary THRs using an Exeter or an Exeter v40 stem with the diagnosis of osteoarthritis were analysed. Only bearing couples that used a metal head with polyethylene were included. The cumulative percent revision (CPR) calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates were compared for the two metal head types. CPR were further analysed by age, polyethylene type and head size. Reasons for revision and types of revision were assessed. Results. There were 51666 THR that used Exeter or Exeter v40 stems of which 12554 had femoral heads made of cobalt chrome and 39112 had heads made of stainless steel. There was no difference in the rate of revision overall when head types were compared. There was also no difference in CPR between the two head types with age. Hips that used cobalt chrome heads had a higher CPR than stainless steel heads when these were used against non-crosslinked polyethylene. When heads with a diameter of 32mm or greater were compared, those made of cobalt chrome had a higher rate of revision than stainless steel HR 1.38 (1.15, 1.66) P<0.001). Conclusion. There was no difference comparing cobalt chrome or stainless-steel heads, except where non-crosslinked polyethylene was used, or where the heads size was 32mm or greater. In these comparisons, heads made from cobalt chrome had a higher rate of revision

In this RCT the primary aim was to assess whether a short (125mm) Exeter V40 stem offered an equivalent hip specific function compared to the standard (150mm) stem when used for cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA). Secondary aims were to evaluate health-related quality of life (HRQoL), patient satisfaction, stem height and alignment, radiographic loosening, and complications between the two stems. A prospective multicentre double-blind randomised control trial was conducted. During a 15-month period, 220 patients undergoing THA were randomised to either a standard (n=110) or short (n=110) stem Exeter. There were no significant (p≥0.065) differences in preoperative variables between the groups. Functional outcomes and radiographic assessment were undertaken at 1- and 2-years. There were no differences (p=0.428) in hip specific function according to the Oxford hip score at 1-year (primary endpoint) or at 2-years (p=0.767) between the groups. The short stem group had greater varus angulation (0.9 degrees, p=0.003) when compared to the standard group and were more likely (odds ratio 2.42, p=0.002) to have varus stem alignment beyond one standard deviation from the mean. There were no significant (p≥0.083) differences in the Forgotten joint scores, EuroQol-5-Dimension, EuroQol-VAS, Short form 12, patient satisfaction, complications, stem height or radiolucent zones at 1 or 2-years between the groups. The Exeter short stem offers equivalent hip specific function, HRQoL, patient satisfaction, and limb length when compared to the standard stem at 2-years post-operation. However, the short stem was associated with a greater rate of varus malalignment which may influence future implant survival

Modular femoral stems offer surgeons great flexibility in biomechanical configuration during total hip replacement (THR) however introduce a taper-trunnion articulation known to be a source of additional wear debris through crevice, fretting and galvanic corrosion with mixed material combinations. This study aimed to investigate the influence of the trunnion bearing surface combination on the revision rate following primary total hip replacement (THR). All patients who underwent THR using an Exeter V40 cemented stainless steel stem and monobloc cemented polyethylene acetabular component (uncemented cups excluded to standardise the acetabular bearing surface and fixation) between January 2003 and December 2019 were extracted from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man. The primary exposure was the head substrate used corresponding to the trunnion bearing. Time-to-event was determined by duration of implantation from primary surgery to revision with cases censored at death or end of available follow-up. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify predictors of all cause revision, adjusted for age, sex, American Association of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade, body mass index, surgical indication (osteoarthritis or other), and femoral head size. 229,870 THR were identified (66% female, mean age 73.4 years (SD 9.1) with the majority (91%) performed for osteoarthritis of which 4,598 were revised. Mean time from primary to revision or censoring was 6.8 years (SD 4.0). Multivariable modelling showed CoCr/SS trunnions were associated with a significantly higher risk of revision (hazard ratio (HR) 1.31 (95%CI 1.15 to 1.48, p<0.0001) as compared to SS/SS (reference). Both Alumina/SS (HR 0.74 (0.65 to 0.84), p<0.0001) and Zirconia/SS (HR 0.61 (0.49 to 0.74), p<0.0001) were associated with a significantly lower risk of revision. Ceramic heads on an Exeter stem were associated with significantly improved survivorship compared to metal heads in primary THR. CoCr/SS trunnion articulations had the poorest survivorship which may be contributed to by trunnionosis

Objectives. Previous studies have evidenced cement-in-cement techniques as reliable in revision arthroplasty. Commonly, the original cement mantle is reshaped, aiding accurate placement of the new stem. Ultrasonic devices selectively remove cement, preserve host bone, and have lower cortical perforation rates than other techniques. As far as the authors are aware, the impact of ultrasonic devices on final cement-in-cement bonds has not been investigated. This study assessed the impact of cement removal using the Orthosonics System for Cemented Arthroplasty Revision (OSCAR; Orthosonics) on final cement-in-cement bonds. Methods. A total of 24 specimens were manufactured by pouring cement (Simplex P Bone Cement; Stryker) into stainless steel moulds, with a central rod polished to Stryker Exeter V40 specifications. After cement curing, the rods were removed and eight specimens were allocated to each of three internal surface preparation groups: 1) burr; 2) OSCAR; and 3) no treatment. Internal holes were recemented, and each specimen was cut into 5 mm discs. Shear testing of discs was completed by a technician blinded to the original grouping, recording ultimate shear strengths. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was completed, inspecting surfaces of shear-tested specimens. Results. The mean shear strength for OSCAR-prepared specimens (33.6 MPa) was significantly lower than for the control (46.3 MPa) and burr (45.8 MPa) groups (p < 0.001; one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s post hoc analysis). There was no significant difference in shear strengths between control and burr groups (p = 0.57). Scanning electron microscopy of OSCAR specimens revealed evidence of porosity undiscovered in previous studies. Conclusion. Results show that the cement removal technique impacts on final cement-in-cement bonds. This in vitro study demonstrates significantly weaker bonds when using OSCAR prior to recementation into an old cement mantle compared with cement prepared with a burr or no treatment. This infers that care must be taken in surgical decision-making regarding cement removal techniques used during cement-in-cement revision arthroplasty, suggesting that the risks and benefits of ultrasonic cement removal need consideration. Cite this article: A. Liddle, M. Webb, N. Clement, S. Green, J. Liddle, M. German, J. Holland. Ultrasonic cement removal in cement-in-cement revision total hip arthroplasty: What is the effect on the final cement-in-cement bond? Bone Joint Res 2019;8:246–252. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.86.BJR-2018-0313.R1

This study compared the pullout forces of the initial implantation and the “cement-in-cement” revision technique for short and standard-length (125 mm vs. 150 mm) Exeter. ®. V40 femoral stems used in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The idea that the pullout force for a double taper slip stem is relative to the force applied to the femur and that “cement-in-cement” revision provides the same reproduction of force. A total sample size of 15 femoral stems were tested (Short, n = 6 and Standard, n = 9). 3D printed fixtures for repeatable sample preparation were used to minimize variance during testing. To promote stem subsidence and to simulate an in vivo environment, the samples were placed in an incubator at 37°C at 100% humidity and experienced a constant compressive loading of 1335 N for 14 days. The samples underwent a displacement-controlled pullout test. After the initial pullout test, “cement-in-cement” revision will be performed and tested similar to the initial implantation to observe the efficacy of the revision technique. To compare the pullout forces between the two groups, a Kruskal-Wallis test using a significance level of 0.05 was conducted. The mean maximum pullout force for the short and standard-length femoral stems were 3939 ± 1178 N and 5078 ± 1168 N, respectively. The Kruskal-Wallis test determined no statistically significant difference between the two groups for the initial implantation (p = 0.13). The “cement-in-cement” revision pullout force will be conducted in future testing. This study demonstrated the potential use of short stem designs for THA as it provides similar levels of fixation as the standard-length femoral stem. The potential benefits for using a short stem design would be providing similar load transfer to the proximal femur, preserving proximal metaphyseal femoral bone in primary replacement, and reducing the invasiveness during revision

Numerous studies have evidenced cement-in-cement techniques as reliable in revision arthroplasty. The original cement mantle is commonly reshaped to aid accurate placement of the new stem. Ultrasonic devices selectively remove cement, preserve host bone and have lower cortical perforation rates than other techniques. As far as the authors are aware, their impact on final cement-cement bonds has not been investigated. This study assessed the impact of cement removal using OSCAR (Orthosonics System for Cemented Arthroplasty Revision, ORTHOSONICS) on final cement-cement bonds. Twenty-four specimens were manufactured by pouring cement (Simplex P Bone Cement, Stryker) into stainless-steel moulds with a central rod polished to Stryker Exeter V40 specifications. After cement curing, rods were removed and eight specimens allocated to each of three internal surface preparation groups: 1) burr; 2) OSCAR; or 3) no treatment. Internal holes were re-cemented, then each specimen was cut into 5mm discs. Shear testing of discs was completed by a technician blinded to original grouping (Instron 5567, UK), recording ultimate shear strengths. The mean shear strength for OSCAR-prepared specimens (17 MPa, 99% CI 14.9 to 18.6, SD=4.0) was significantly lower than that measured for the control (23 MPa, 99% CI 22.5 to 23.7, SD=1.4) and burr (23 MPa, 99% CI 22.1 to 23.7, SD=1.9) groups (P<0.001, one-way ANOVA with Tukey's post-hoc analysis). There was no significant difference between control and burr groups (P>0.05). Results show that cement removal technique impacts on final cement-cement bonds. This in vitro study shows a significantly weaker bond when using OSCAR prior to re-cementation into an old cement mantle, compared to cement prepared with a burr or no treatment. These results have implications for surgical practice and decision-making about specific cement removal techniques used during cement-in-cement revision arthroplasty, suggesting that the risks and benefits of ultrasonic cement removal need careful consideration

In recent years the majority of X-ray departments have moved to a digital format of recording and archiving radiographs. These digital images (as with previous ‘films’) have a built in magnification factor (variable with each patient), which, may cause errors in templating for joint replacement surgery. Placing a marker of known size at the same level as the joint in question allows calculation of the magnification. This may help to restore hip offset in total hip replacement. To establish the magnification factor for digital radiographs taken in our unit. To assess the usefulness of marker images in accurate preoperative templating. Preoperative marker radiographs were identified retrospectively. The apparent size of the marker was measured on digital image. This value was used to calculate the magnification of the image. The scaled X-ray was up loaded to a digital templating software programme. This software uses a ‘scaling tool’ to calculate the magnification of the image. The hip joint templating tool was the used to calculate the offset of the proximal femur, this was performed with the calculated magnification and also an assumed magnification of 120%. The recommended offset of Exeter V40 stem was noted for both values. Images were identified for 40 patients with markers. The average magnification was 122% for both PACS and Orthoview with a range 113% – 129% and a standard deviation of 4%. The median value for magnification was 120%. The average change in offset between calculated and estimated magnification was 1.275mm with a maximum change of 3mm. In two cases this difference resulted in a change in the recommended offset (5%). The use of marker radiographs is widely described. In this small series the magnification is the same as previously reported in other studies. The difference in offset between calculated and estimated magnification was relatively small and caused a change in the recommended offset in only two patients. Variation in the use of the templating tool in our software can produce a much greater change in offset. Marker radiographs will only be useful as part of a standardised method of pre-operative templating