Introduction

Failure of the neck-stem taper in one particular bi-modular primary hip stem due to corrosion and wear of the neck piece has been reported frequently1, and stems were recalled. A specific pattern of material loss on the CoCr neck-piece taper in the areas of highest stresses on the proximal medial male taper was observed in a retrieval study of 27 revised Rejuvenate implants revised after 3 to 38 month time in situ (Stryker, Kalamazoo, MI, USA) (Figure 1). One neck piece exhibited additionally wear marks at the distal end of the flat male neck taper indicating contact with the female taper of the stem. The purpose of this study was to understand the observed failure scenario of bottoming-out by investigating the stem taper morphologies.

Introduction:

Uncemented acetabular component fixation has been considered the most reliable fixation method in contemporary metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA). During prospective long-term follow-up of a HRA device, we have encountered a surprisingly high incidence of this complication and wish to alert surgeons and manufacturers of this problem.

Purpose. Long-term clinical and radiographic results and survival rates were compared between closed-wedge high tibial osteotomy (HTOs) and fixed-bearing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) in patients with similar demographics. Methods. Sixty HTOs and 50 UKAs completed between 1992 and 1998 were retrospectively reviewed. There were no significant differences in preoperative demographics. The mean follow-up period was 10.7 ±5.7 years for HTO and 12.0 ±7.1 years for UKA (n.s.). The Knee Society knee and function scores, WOMAC, and range of motion (ROM) were investigated. The mechanical axis and femorotibial angle were evaluated. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was performed (failure: revision to TKA), and the failure modes were investigated. Results. Most of the clinical and radiographic results were not different at the last follow-up, except ROM; ROM was 135.3 ±12.3° in HTO and 126.8 ±13.3° in UKA (p=0.005). The 5-, 10-, 15-, and 20-year survival rates were 100%, 91.0%, 63.4%, and 48.3% for closed-wedge HTO, respectively, and 90.5%, 87.1%, 70.8%, and 66.4% for UKA (n.s.). The survival rate was higher than that for UKA until 12 years postoperatively but was higher in UKAs thereafter, following a remarkable decrease in HTO. The most common failure mode was degenerative osteoarthritic progression of medial compartment in HTO and femoral component loosening in UKA. Conclusions. Long-term survival did not differ significantly between closed-wedge HTO and fixed-bearing UKA in patients with similar preoperative demographics and knee conditions. The difference in postoperative ROM and failure mode should be considered when selecting a procedure

The extracortical single-button (SB) inlay repair is one of the most preferred distal biceps tendon repair techniques. However, specific complications such as neurovascular injury and non-anatomic repairs have led to the development of techniques that utilize intracortical double-button (DB) fixation. To compare the biomechanical stability of the extracortical SB repair with the anatomical DB repair technique. Controlled laboratory study. The distal biceps tendon was transected in 18 cadaveric elbows from 9 donors. One elbow of each donor was randomly assigned to the extracortical SBor anatomical DB group. Both groups were cyclically loaded with 60N over 1000 cycles between 90° of flexion and full extension. The elbow was then fixed in 90° of flexion and the repair construct loaded to failure. Gap-formation and construct stiffness during cyclic loading, and ultimate load to failure was analysed. After 1000 cycles, the anatomical DB technique compared with the extracortical SB technique showed significantly less gap-formation (mean difference 1.2 mm; p=0.017) and significantly more construct stiffness (mean difference 31 N/mm; p=0.023). Ultimate load to failure was not significantly different comparing both groups (SB, 277 N ±92 vs. DB, 285 N ±135; p=0.859). The failure mode in the anatomical DB group was significantly different compared with the extracortical SB technique (p=0.002) and was due to fracture avulsion of the BicepsButton in 7 out of 9 specimens (vs. none in SB group). Our study shows that the intracortical DB technique produces equivalent or superior biomechanical performance to the SB technique. The DB repair technique reduces the risk of nerve injury and better restores the anatomical footprint of biceps tendon. The DB technique may offer a clinically viable alternative to the SB repair technique

The use of rotating hinge (RH) prostheses for severe primary as well as revision arthroplasty is widely established. Aim of this study was to investigate long term results of a new RH prosthesis (EnduRo®, B Braun, Germany), which uses carbon-fiber reinforced poly-ether-ether-ketone (CFR PEEK) as a new bearing material, first time used in knee arthroplasty. Fifty-six consecutive patients, who received the EnduRo® RH prosthesis were included in this prospective study: 21 patients (37.5%) received the prosthesis as a primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and 35 patients (62.5%) underwent revision total knee arthroplasties (rTKA). Clinical and radiographic examinations were performed preoperatively as well as postoperatively after 3 and 12 months and annually thereafter. Min. Follow up was 7 and mean follow up 9,3 years. Clinical examination included Knee Society Score (KSS), Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Oxford Knee Score (OKS), and range of motion (ROM). Competing risk analysis was assessed for survival with respect to indication and failure mode. KSS, WOMAC, OKS, and ROM significantly improved from the preoperative to the follow up investigations (p < 0.0001). There was no difference in clinical outcome between the primary and the revision group. The overall cumulative incidence for revision for any reason was 23.6% and the cumulative incidence for complications associated with failure of the prothesis was 5.6% at 7 years, respectively. Complications occurred more frequently in the revision group (p = 0.002). The evaluated RH prosthesis provided reliable and durable results with a minimum follow-up of 7 years. Prosthesis survival was successful considering the complexity of cases. The use of this RH system in primary patients showed high survival rates. Long-term functional and clinical results proved to be satisfying in both revision and primary cases. No adverse events were associated with the new bearing material CFR-PEEK

Metal-on-metal (MOM) hip arthroplasty has been associated with a variety of new failure modes that may be unfamiliar to surgeons who traditionally perform metal-on-polyethylene THR. These failure modes include adverse local tissue reaction to metal debris, hypersensitivity to metal debris, accelerated wear/metallosis, pseudotumours, and corrosion. A significant number of patients with metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty may present to surgeons for routine followup, concern over their implant, or frank clinical problems. A common issue with MOM hip arthroplasty that can lead to accelerated wear and failure is implant malposition. Malposition of a hard-on-hard bearing can lead to edge loading and accelerated wear at the articular surfaces, which will lead to elevation in blood metal ion levels and metallosis. Distinct from this failure mode is the possibility of metal hypersensitivity, which is believed to be an immunologically mediated reaction to normal amounts of metal debris. Because a modular MOM THR has multiple junctions and tapers that come into contact with one another, there also is the possibility of non-articular metal debris production and corrosion. This type of corrosion reaction can lead to soft tissue destruction not commonly seen with hip resurfacing. Therefore, it is important for orthopaedic surgeons to be aware of the intricacies of following a metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty and to be able to interpret test results such as metal ion levels and cross-sectional imaging. Furthermore, there is a difference in the incidence of problems depending upon the type of implant: hip resurfacing, small-diameter head metal-on-metal total hip replacement, and large diameter head MOM THR. This presentation will discuss the importance of routine monitoring and followup for patients with MOM THR, as well as the utility of measuring blood metal ion levels. The published risk stratification algorithm from the Hip Society will be reviewed

Converting unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) to total knee arthroplasty can be difficult, and specialised techniques are needed. Issues include bone loss, joint-line, sizing, and rotation. Determining the complexity of conversion preoperatively helps predict the need for augmentation, grafting, stems, or constraint. We examined insert thickness, augmentation, stem use, and effect of failure mode on complexity of UKA conversion. Fifty cases (1997–2007) were reviewed: 9 implants (18%) were modular fixed-bearing, 4 (8%) were metal-backed nonmodular fixed-bearing, 8 (16%) were resurfacing onlay, 10 (20%) were all-polyethylene step-cut, and 19 (38%) were mobile bearing designs; 5 knees (10%) failed due to infection, 5 (10%) due to wear and/or instability, 10 (20%) for pain or progression of arthritis, 8 (16%) for tibial fracture or severe subsidence, and 22 (44%) due to loosening of either one or both components. Complexity was evaluated using analysis of variance and chi-squared 2-by-k test (80% power; 95% confidence interval). Insert thickness was no different between implants (P=0.23) or failure modes (P=0.27). Stemmed component use was most frequent with nonmodular components (50%), all-polyethylene step-cut implants (44%), and modular fixed-bearing implants (33%; P=0.40). Stem use was highest in tibial fracture (86%; P=0.002). Augment use was highest among all-polyethylene step-cut implants (all-polyethylene, 56%; metal-backed, 50%; modular fixed-bearing, 33%; P=0.01). Augmentation use was highest in fracture (86%) and infection (67%), with a significant difference noted between failure modes (P=0.003). Failure of nonmodular all-polyethylene step-cut devices was more complex than resurfacing or mobile bearing. Failure mode was predictive of complexity. Reestablishing the joint-line, ligamentous balance, and durable fixation are critical to assuring a primary outcome

Converting UKA to TKA can be difficult, and specialised techniques are needed. Issues include bone loss, joint line approximation, sizing, and rotation. Determining the complexity of conversion pre-operatively helps predict the need for augmentation, grafting, stems, or constraint. In a 2009 study from our center, 50 UKA revised to TKA (1997–2007) were reviewed: 9 implants (18%) were modular fixed-bearing, 4 (8%) were metal-backed nonmodular fixed-bearing, 8 (16%) were resurfacing onlay, 10 (20%) were all-polyethylene step-cut, and 19 (38%) were mobile bearing designs; 5 knees (10%) failed due to infection, 5 (10%) due to wear and/or instability, 10 (20%) for pain or progression of arthritis, 8 (16%) for tibial fracture or severe subsidence, and 22 (44%) due to loosening of either one or both components. Insert thickness was no different between implants (P=0.23) or failure modes (P=0.27). Stemmed component use was most frequent with nonmodular components (50%), all-polyethylene step-cut implants (44%), and modular fixed-bearing implants (33%; P=0.40). Stem use was highest in tibial fracture (86%; P=0.002). Augment use was highest among all-polyethylene step-cut implants (all-polyethylene, 56%; metal-backed, 50%; modular fixed-bearing, 33%; P=0.01). Augmentation use was highest in fracture (86%) and infection (67%), with a significant difference noted between failure modes (P=0.003). Failure of nonmodular all-polyethylene step-cut devices was more complex than resurfacing or mobile bearing. Failure mode was predictive of complexity. Reestablishing the joint line, ligamentous balance, and durable fixation are critical to assuring a primary outcome. In a 2013 multicenter study of 3 institutions including ours, a total of 175 revisions of medial UKA in 168 patients (81 males, 87 females; average age of 66 years) performed from 1995 to 2009 with a minimum of 2-year clinical follow-up were reviewed. The average time from UKA to revision TKA was 71.5 months (range: 2 months to 262 months). The four most common reasons for failure of the UKA were femoral or tibial loosening (55%), progressive arthritis of the lateral or patellofemoral joints (34%), polyethylene failure (4%) and infection (3%). Mean follow-up after revision was 75 months. Nine of 175 knees (4.5%) were subsequently revised at an average of 48 months (range 6 months to 123 months.) The rate of revision was 1.23 revisions per 100 observed component years. The average Knee Society pain and function score increased to 75 and 66, respectively. In the present series, the re-revision rate after revision TKA from UKA was 4.5 % at an average of 75 months or 1.2 revisions per 100 observed component years. In a current study from our center, 174 patients (180 UKA) underwent revision procedures (1996–2017). Most prevalent indications for revision were aseptic loosening (45%) arthritic progression (17%) and tibial collapse (13%). At 4 years mean follow-up, 5 knees (2.8%) have required re-revision involving any part, which is similar to what we recently reported at 5.5 years in a group of patients who underwent primary TKA (6 of 189; 3.2%), and much lower than what we observed at 6.0 years in a recent report of patients who underwent aseptic revision TKA (35 of 278; 12.6%). Compared to published individual institution and national registry data, re-revision of a failed UKA is equivalent to revision rates of primary TKA and substantially better than re-revision rates of revision TKA. These data should be used to counsel patients undergoing revision UKA to TKA

Converting UKA to TKA can be difficult, and specialised techniques are needed. Issues include bone loss, joint line approximation, sizing, and rotation. Determining the complexity of conversion pre-operatively helps predict the need for augmentation, grafting, stems, or constraint. In a 2009 study from our center, 50 UKA revised to TKA (1997–2007) were reviewed: 9 implants (18%) were modular fixed-bearing, 4 (8%) were metal-backed nonmodular fixed-bearing, 8 (16%) were resurfacing onlay, 10 (20%) were all-polyethylene step-cut, and 19 (38%) were mobile bearing designs; 5 knees (10%) failed due to infection, 5 (10%) due to wear and/or instability, 10 (20%) for pain or progression of arthritis, 8 (16%) for tibial fracture or severe subsidence, and 22 (44%) due to loosening of either one or both components. Insert thickness was no different between implants (P=0.23) or failure modes (P=0.27). Stemmed component use was most frequent with nonmodular components (50%), all-polyethylene step-cut implants (44%), and modular fixed-bearing implants (33%; P=0.40). Stem use was highest in tibial fracture (86%; P=0.002). Augment use was highest among all-polyethylene step-cut implants (all-polyethylene, 56%; metal-backed, 50%; modular fixed-bearing, 33%; P=0.01). Augmentation use was highest in fracture (86%) and infection (67%), with a significant difference noted between failure modes (P=0.003). Failure of nonmodular all-polyethylene step-cut devices was more complex than resurfacing or mobile bearing. Failure mode was predictive of complexity. Reestablishing the joint line, ligamentous balance, and durable fixation are critical to assuring a primary outcome. In a 2013 multicenter study of 3 institutions including ours, a total of 175 revisions of medial UKA in 168 patients (81 males, 87 females; average age of 66 years) performed from 1995 to 2009 with a minimum of 2-year clinical follow-up were reviewed. The average time from UKA to revision TKA was 71.5 months (range 2 months to 262 months). The four most common reasons for failure of the UKA were femoral or tibial loosening (55%), progressive arthritis of the lateral or patellofemoral joints (34%), polyethylene failure (4%) and infection (3%). Mean follow-up after revision was 75 months. Nine of 175 knees (4.5%) were subsequently revised at an average of 48 months (range 6 months to 123 months). The rate of revision was 1.23 revisions per 100 observed component years. The average Knee Society pain and function score increased to 75 and 66, respectively. In the present series, the re-revision rate after revision TKA from UKA was 4.5% at an average of 75 months or 1.2 revisions per 100 observed component years. Compared to published individual institution and national registry data, re-revision of a failed UKA is equivalent to revision rates of primary TKA and substantially better than re-revision rates of revision TKA. These data should be used to counsel patients undergoing revision UKA to TKA

INTRODUCTION. In native knees the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) plays a major role in joint stability and kinematics. Sacrificing the ACL in contemporary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is known to cause abnormal knee motion, and reduced function. Hence, there is growing interest in the development of ACL retaining TKA implants. Accommodation of ACL insertion around the tibial eminence is a challenge with these designs. Therefore, a reproducible and practical test setup is necessary to characterize the strength of the ACL/bone construct in ACL retaining implants. Seminal work showed importance of loading the ACL along its anatomical orientation. However, prior setups designed for this purpose are complex and difficult to incorporate into a standardized test for wide adoption. The goal of this study was to develop a standardized and anatomically relevant test setup for repeatable strength assessment of ACL construct using basic force-displacement testing equipment. METHODS. Cadaver knees were positioned with the ACL oriented along the loading axis and being the only connection between femur and tibia. 15° knee flexion was selected based on highest ACL tensions reported in literature. Therefore, the fixtures were adjusted accordingly to retain 15° knee flexion when the ACL was tensioned. The test protocol included 10 cycles of preconditioning between 6N and 60N at 1mm/s, followed by continuous distraction at 1mm/s until failure (Fig. 1). Eleven cadaveric knees (4 male, 7 female; 70.9 yrs +/−13.9 yrs) were tested using this setup to characterize a baseline ACL pullout strength (peak load to failure) in native knees. RESULTS. The average ACL pullout strength was 935.6N +/−327.5N with the extremes ranging from a minimum of 346N to a maximum of 1425N. There were five failure modes observed: [1] ACL avulsion from the femur with bony attachment (one knee), [2] ACL pull-off from the femur w/o bony attachment (two knees), [3] ACL tear (three knees), [4] ACL pull-off from the tibia w/o bony attachment (one knee), [5] ACL avulsion from the tibia with bony attachment (three knees). One knee showed a combined failure mode of 2 & 4, meaning part of the ACL was pulled off the femur and part pulled off the tibia. CONCLUSION. There was a large variation in failure load between specimens. The knee with the minimum failure load had severe arthritis, osteophytes and signs of ACL deficiency. The average failure load (935.6N +/−327.5N) is in line with those published in literature for a comparable age group. This indicates that failure loads and modes obtained with more complex setups could be reproduced by using standard uniaxial load frames and simple fixtures. The failure modes in our experiment were evenly spread between mid-substance, and insertions (either femur or tibia). This test could be used as a standardized method to investigate the strength of the ACL complex following procedures such as ACL reconstruction, partial- and total knee arthroplasty. In particular, this setup provides a reliable mechanism for evaluation of the ACL-bone construct in bi-cruciate retaining (BCR) TKA, which is likely required for regulatory pathways

Converting UKA to TKA can be difficult, and specialised techniques are needed. Issues include bone loss, joint line approximation, sizing, and rotation. Determining the complexity of conversion preoperatively helps predict the need for augmentation, grafting, stems, or constraint. In a 2009 study from our center, 50 UKA revised to TKA (1997–2007) were reviewed: 9 modular fixed-bearing, 4 metal-backed nonmodular fixed-bearing, 8 resurfacing onlay, 10 all-polyethylene step-cut, and 19 mobile bearing designs; 5 knees failed due to infection, 5 due to wear and/or instability, 10 for pain or progression of arthritis, 8 for tibial fracture or severe subsidence, and 22 due to loosening of either one or both components. Insert thickness was no different between implants or failure modes. Stemmed component use was most frequent with nonmodular components (50%), all-polyethylene step-cut implants (44%), and modular fixed-bearing implants (33%; P=0.40). Stem use was highest in tibial fracture (86%; P=0.002). Augment use was highest among all-polyethylene step-cut implants (all-polyethylene, 56%; metal-backed, 50%; modular fixed-bearing, 33%; P=0.01). Augmentation use was highest in fracture (86%) and infection (67%), with a significant difference noted between failure modes (P=0.003). Failure of nonmodular all-polyethylene step-cut devices was more complex than resurfacing or mobile bearing. Reestablishing the joint line, ligamentous balance, and durable fixation are critical to assuring a primary outcome. In a 2013 multicenter study of 3 institutions including ours, a total of 175 revisions of medial UKA in 168 patients (average age: 66 years) performed from 1995 to 2009 with a minimum 2-year clinical follow-up were reviewed. The average time from UKA to revision TKA was 71.5 months (2–262). The four most common reasons for failure were femoral or tibial loosening (55%), progressive arthritis of the lateral or patellofemoral joints (34%), polyethylene failure (4%) and infection (3%). Mean follow-up after revision was 75 months. Nine of 175 knees (4.5%) were subsequently revised at an average of 48 months (6–123). The average Knee Society pain and function score increased to 75 and 66, respectively. In the present series, the re-revision rate after revision TKA from UKA was 4.5% at an average of 75 months. In a current study from our center, 184 patients (193 UKA) underwent revision procedures (1996–2015) with minimum 2-year follow-up. Mean age was 63.5 (37–84) years, body mass index was 32.3 (19–57) kg/m. 2. , and interval after UKA was 4.8 (0–35) years. Most prevalent indications for revision were aseptic loosening (42%), arthritic progression (20%) and tibial collapse (14%). At 6.1 years mean follow-up (2–20), 8 knees (4.1%) have required re-revision involving any part, which is similar to what we recently reported at 5.5 years in a group of patients who underwent primary TKA (6 of 189; 3.2%), and much lower than what we observed at 6.0 years in a recent report of patients who underwent aseptic revision TKA (35 of 278; 12.6%). In the study group, Knee Society clinical and function scores improved from 50.8 and 52.1 preoperatively to 83.4 and 67.6 at most recent evaluation, respectively. Re-revisions were for aseptic loosening (3), instability (2), arthrofibrosis (2), and infection (1). Compared to published individual institution and national registry data, re-revision rates of failed UKA are equivalent to revision rates of primary TKA and substantially better than re-revision rates of revision TKA. These data should be used to counsel patients undergoing revision UKA to TKA

Introduction. Hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) has seen a recent revival with third generation Metal-on-Metal prostheses and is now widely in use. However, safety and effectiveness of hip resurfacing are still questioned. We systematically reviewed peer-reviewed literature on hip resurfacing arthroplasty to evaluate implant survival and functional outcomes of hybrid Metal-on-Metal hip resurfacing Arthroplasty. Method. Electronic databases and reference lists were searched from 1988 to September 2009. Identified abstracts were checked for inclusion or exclusion by two independent reviewers. Data were extracted and summarized by one reviewer and verified by a second reviewer. Main study endpoint was implant survival, which we compared with the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) benchmark. We also evaluated radiological and functional outcomes, failure modes and other adverse events. Results. We identified 433 articles, of which 24 met the inclusion criteria. Data were extracted from these 24 articles, totalling 8745 resurfaced hips, providing details on five out of 11 resurfacing devices on the market. Maximum follow up was 9 years, mean follow up ranged from 0.6 to 8 years. Implant survival ranged from 88.7% to 100%. Of the 8745 hips, 276 were revised (3.2%), with fracture of the femoral neck as most frequent failure mode. With implant survival plotted against time, 10 studies showed satisfactory implant survival percentages compared to the 3 year NICE entry-benchmark. Nine of these 10 studies used the BHR implant, the other study used the Cormet 2000 implant. Discussion. None of the HRA implants used to date meet the full 10 year NICE benchmark (≥ 90% survival at 10 years follow up). If follow up is too short for the full benchmark, implants are still recommendable if they meet the NICE three year ‘entry benchmark’ (> 3 year revision rate experience, consistent with the 10-year benchmark). Compared to the 3 year NICE entry-benchmark, 10 studies showed satisfactory implant survival percentages. Nine used the BHR implant, the other study used the Cormet 2000 implant. The quality of evidence is low according to the GRADE classification. Future research has to address the most important failure mode for HRA trying to explain the large variation in the frequency of femoral neck fractures

Introduction. Dual mobility (DM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) prostheses are designed to increase stability. In the setting of primary and revision THA, DM THA are used most frequently for dysplasia and instability diagnoses, respectively. As the use of DM THA continues to increase, with 8,031 cases logged in the American Joint Replacement Registry from 2012–2018, characterizing in vivo damage and clinical failure modes are important to report. Methods. Under IRB-approved implant retrieval protocol, 43 DM THA systems from 41 patients were included. Each DM THA component was macroscopically examined for standard damage modes. Clinically-relevant data, including patient demographics and surgical elements, were collected from medical records. Fretting and corrosion damage grading is planned, according to the Goldberg et al. classification system. Results. In this 43-retrieved implant series, there were 23 female and 17 male patients (n=1, unknown), with an average body mass index of 29 (range, 19–49), and average ages at index and revision of 63 years (range, 34–80) and 64 years (range, 38–88), respectively. The average duration of implantation was 12.9 months (range, 0.1–72.0). Reasons for revision included infection (n=11, 26%), mechanical complication (n=10, 23%), intraprosthetic dislocation (n=6, 14%), periprosthetic fracture (n=5, 12%), pain (n=4, 9%), acetabular-associated loosening (n=3, 7%), unknown (n=3, 7%), hematoma (n=2, 5%), leg length discrepancy (n=1, 2%), and inflammatory reaction (n=1, 2%); some cases included multiple reasons for revision. On articular surfaces, scratching was the most commonly observed damage mode on all components, with more than 40% of acetabular cup and femoral heads showing scratching damage (Figure 1A). Abrasion, burnishing, and pitting damage were also observed in more than 10% of acetabular cup and acetabular liner components; further, approximately 20% of polyethylene acetabular liners exhibited edge deformation damage. On backside surfaces, polyethylene acetabular liners showed the greatest damage, with more than 60% of components exhibiting abrasion, scratching, or pitting damage (Figure 1B). Conclusion. This series showed various reasons for revision as well as in vivo damage of retrieved DM systems following short-to-midterm implantation. Damage was observed on both articular and backside surfaces of the five components of DM THA. Modularity of DM THA prostheses may amplify rates of in vivo damage. Future studies are needed to confirm these results and clinical significance. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

INTRODUCTION. Highly cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) inserts have shown significant improvements in decreasing wear and osteolysis in total hip arthroplasty [1]. In contrast to that, XLPE has not shown to reduce wear or aseptic loosening in total knee arthroplasty [2,3,4]. One major limitation is that current wear testing in vitro is mainly focused on abrasive-adhesive wear due to level walking test conditions and does not reflect “delamination” as an essential clinical failure mode [5,6]. The objective of our study was to use a highly demanding daily activities wear simulation to evaluate the delamination risk of polyethylene materials with and without vitamin E stabilisation. MATERIALS & METHODS. A cruciate retaining fixed bearing TKA design (Columbus® CR) with artificially aged polyethylene knee bearings (irradiation 30 & 50 kGy) blended with and without 0.1% vitamin E was used under medio-lateral load distribution and soft tissue restrain simulation. Daily patient activities measured by Bergmann et al. [7] in vivo, were applied for 5 million knee wear cycles in a combination of 40% stairs up, 40 % stairs down, 10% level walking, 8% chair raising and 2% deep squatting with up to 100° flexion [8] (Fig. 1). The specimens were evaluated for gravimetric wear and analysed for abrasive-adhesive and delamination wear modes. RESULTS. The total amount of gliding surface wear was 28.7±1.9 mg for the vitamin E stabilised polyethylene irradiated with 30 kGy and 26.5±5.7 mg with 50 kGy irradiation, compared to 355.9±119.8 mg for the standard material. The combination of artificial ageing and high demanding knee wear simulation leads to visible signs of delamination in the articulating standard polyethylene bearing areas in vitro. Delamination began after 2 million test cycles for the standard polyethylene, indicated by the transition between linear and exponential slope in Fig. 2. Delamination was not found in the Vitamin E blended gliding surfaces. CONCLUSION. To evaluate moderately or highly cross-linked polyethylenes in regard to ageing and wear behaviour in vitro, conditions are simulated to create clinical relevant failure modes given in total knee arthroplasty. With the applied test protocol it is possible to discriminate between the polyethylene bearing materials with and without Vitamin E stabilisation. To view tables/figures, please contact authors directly

Most early failures of THA are related to patient factors and technical “surgeon” factors. Most late failures of THA are related to patient factors and device factors. Occasionally unexpected device-specific failure modes cause specific early failure patterns. The most common reasons for early THA failure are infection and instability. Infection risk is strongly influenced by patient factors. Instability early after THA is usually a technical problem, but at times also is patient related. Important late failure modes of THA include loosening, wear and osteolysis, and periprosthetic fracture. Loosening and wear are at least in part device related. Late periprosthetic fracture is almost mainly patient related. Taken together these data suggest the following: . Most strongly related to patient factors: Early and late infection, periprosthetic fracture and wear and osteolysis. Most strongly related to surgeon factors: Early infection, instability, and loosening. Most strongly related to device factors: Wear, loosening, and unique mechanical implant failure modes

Young osteoarthritic male patients have been considered the ideal candidates for Metal-on-Metal (MoM) hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA), based on generally good long term results. In contrast, hip resurfacing in young female patients has become controversial. Recently, one implant manufacturer withdrew 46mm and smaller components, citing poorer than expected 10 year outcomes in females with smaller HRAs. Whether this difference is related to gender or to component size is still debated. Possible reasons for higher failure rates reported in females include higher rates of hip dysplasia, poorer bone quality and the risk of higher wear in some smaller sized implants with low cup coverage angles. We reviewed HRA revision specimens with the aim of comparing mode of failure, time to revision, femoral cement characteristics and acetabular bone attachment in specimens larger and smaller than 46mm and from male versus female patients. Methods. The study included all of the MoM HRA devices in our collection. Of the 284 hip resurfacing devices with complete clinical information, 131 were from male and 153 from female patients. Femoral sizes ranged from 36 – 58mm, median and mode 46mm; median size in females was 44 and 50mm in males. Time to failure ranged from 1 to 178 months, median 24 mos. Seven designs were represented but the majority were Conserve Plus (n=105 WMT, USA) and BHR (n=78 Smith & Nephew, USA) which differ in cementing technique. 131 femoral components were sectioned and the width of the cement mantle and the amount of cement in the head were measured. Where available, the amount of bone attached to the cup porous surface (n=91), tissue ALVAL scores (n=75) and bearing wear depth (n=138) were included in the multivariate analysis. Results. As a function of gender, there were no significant differences in time to revision, cement measurements or ALVAL scores. Wear depth was significantly higher in females (femoral 41um vs 21um; cup 50um vs 16um, p=0.05). As a function of size (46 and less = small), the <46mm group had a slightly shorter time to revision, 30 vs 38 months, p=0.04). Bone ingrowth ranged from 0 to 60% (Figure 1) and significantly less bone attachment was noted in both the smaller and larger components (p = 0.001). Other characteristics were similar in both groups. When wear-related failure modes (cup malposition, lysis, high ions) were compared, no differences between male and female or large vs small were found. The amount of cement in the femoral heads covered a wide range but femoral loosening or fracture rates were not different as a function of size or gender. Conclusion. This review of 248 revised HRAs from multiple surgeons, designs and modes of failure found no clear evidence that smaller HRA components were at higher risk of earlier failure or for any particular failure mode. The small components in this cohort were not more likely to have wear-related failures but of note, very few of these HRAs had implants with low coverage angles in the small sizes

Achieving a primary outcome with revision UKR is possible but it depends on an understanding of the main failure modes and avoiding the obvious pitfalls. The most common failure mode in the long term is lateral compartment progression at 2.5% at 28 years. The most common failure overall is misdiagnosis of a painful radiolucency leading to unnecessary revision. There are a number of potential pitfalls:. Do not revise for unexplained pain. 75% of patients will go on to fail because of continuing pain. A distinction must be made to differentiate between a physiological radiolucency (with a narrow lucency accompanied by a sclerotic margin which is normal) and a pathological radiolucency (with a poorly defined lucency without surrounding sclerotic margin which is indicative of loosening and/or infection). Femoral loosening can present with subtle findings. Flexion/extension views are helpful to diagnose this problem. Wear can be a problem with fixed bearing in the second decade and can present with subtle findings. Infection can present with contralateral compartment joint space narrowing. The approach and exposure is usually straightforward and component removal is generally easy. Tibial resection is undertaken referenced from the normal lateral condyle removing 10mm of bone. Femoral preparation is generally straightforward but care must be taken to dial in correct rotation in the absence of the posterior medial condyle which was resected in the first operation. Generally a CR or PS primary implant is used with 2–4mm extra polyethylene thickness than is used in primary case. Revision for infection and stress fracture led to difficult revisions where revision components are usually required. The results for Revision UKR approach those of a primary procedure in all cases except revision for unexplained pain, infection and a stress fracture

The histopathology of periprosthetic tissues has been important to understanding the relationship between wear debris and arthroplasty outcome. In a landmark 1977paper, Willert and Semlitsch (1) used a semiquantitative rating to show that tissue reactions largely reflected the extent of particulate debris. Notably, small amounts of debris, including metal, could be eliminated without “overstraining the tissues” but excess debris led to deleterious changes. Currently, a plethora of terms is used to describe tissues from metal-on-metal (M-M) hips and corroded modular connections. We reviewed the evaluation and reporting of local tissue reactions over time, and asked if a dose response has been found between metal and tissue features, and how the use of more standardized terms and quantitative methodologies could reduce the current confusion in terminology. Methods. The PubMed database was searchedbetween 2000 and 2015 for papers using “metal sensitivity /allergy /hypersensitivity, Adverse Local Tissue Reaction (ALTR): osteolysis, metallosis, lymphocytic infiltration, Aseptic Lymphocytic Vasculitis-Associated Lesions (ALVAL), Adverse Reaction to Metal Debris (ARMD) or pseudotumor/ pseudotumour” as well as metal-on-metal / metal-metal AND hip arthroplasty/replacement. Reports lacking soft tissue histological analysis were excluded. Results. 131 articles describing M-M tissue histology were found. In earlier studies, the terms metal sensitivity / hypersensitivity /allergy implied or stated the potential for a Type IV delayed type hypersensitivity response as a reason for revision. More recently those terms have largely been replaced by broader terms such as ALTR, ALVAL and ARMD. ALVAL and metal hypersensitivity were often used interchangeably, both as failure modes and histological findings. Several histology scoring systems have been published but were only used in a limited number of studies. Correlations of histological features with metal levels or component wear were inconclusive, typically because of a high degree of variability. Interestingly, there were very few descriptions that concluded that the observed reactions were benign / normal or anticipated i.e. regardless of the histological features, extent of debris or failure mode, the histology was interpreted as showing an adverse reaction. Discussion. There is now an expanded set of terms to describe tissues but they lack clear definitions and typically do not use quantitative histological data to describe a wide range of periprosthetic reactions to metal. Lower limits of inflammation, necrosis or re-organization that represent a “normal” reaction to surgery and/or small amounts of wear debris are not clearly defined and are rarely discussed. The widespread adoption of the term “adverse” in the present tissue lexicon implies a cause and effect relationship between metal wear and corrosion products and histological features even though this has yet to be determined. The use of quantitative histological scores rather than subjective histological descriptions is imperative to improve the understanding and reporting of the range of periprosthetic reactions. In particular, a new lexicon that allows for a level of tissue reaction that is not misinterpreted as adverse is required

Prior work in the setting of MRSA (clinical isolate), showed that enhancement of Ti6Al4V with anodized nanotubes apparently disrupts the formation and adhesion of MRSA biofilm. The greater amount of cultured MRSA using effluent released from in vitro nanotube surfaces by sonication, compared with thermal plasma sprayed (TPS), indicated probable disruption of biofilm formation and adhesion. The use of nanosilver nanotubes in vivo in a rabbit model showed that after 1 week of infection followed by 1 week of vancomycin treatment, the nanotube MRSA level was 30% that of TPS, and the nanosilver nanotube MRSA level was only 5% of TPS. The implementation of the technology will enhance the remodeled bone locking ability of rough TPS, with surface nanotubes that provide antibacterial properties and increased bone adhesion. Lap shear tests of the nanotubes were performed according to ASTM F1044. In multiple tests, circular adhesive films bonded Ti6Al4V bars containing nanotubes with plain Ti6Al4V. The assemblies were suitably arranged in a tensile tester and pulled to shear failure. There were three modes of failure; shear failure within the adhesive, failure of the adhesive from the plain titanium, and shear failure of the nanotubes from the bar. Tests determined the shear strength of the adhesive and its bonding strength to bare titanium. ImageJ software determined the area of each of the three failure modes. From this analysis, the shear strength of the nanotubes of each sample was calculated. The analyses showed the shear strength of the nanotubes to be as high as 65MPa (9,500psi) with a more typical shear strength of 55MPa (8,000 psi), and several surfaces with 45MPa (6,000 psi). The literature presents models predicting the shear stress in bonded hip stems. Assuming the TPS with nanotubes performs similar to a bonded hip stem, owing to the locking of the bone with the TPS, a typical shear stress prediction for physiological loads is approximately 10 MPa. The nanotube shear strengths were 4–6 times higher than the expected stress during use. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Dysplasia has long been identified as a high-risk group for total hip replacement(THR). The underlying causes include younger age, underlying joint deformity, and greater tissue laxity. A higher failure rate has also been identified for hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) in these patients. Many experts have advised avoiding HRA in these patients, although comparative studies are not available. We do not practice patient selection, because THR has not been proven any more reliable for these patients. Instead, we have taken the approach of studying the causes of failure and finding methods to improve the results of HRA in dysplasia patients. We have identified three primary failure modes for the young women who typically have dysplasia: failure of initial acetabular ingrowth (FAI), adverse wear related failure (AWRF), and early femoral failure (EFF: femoral neck fracture and head collapse). Improvements in technique to address all of these failure modes were in place by 2008: acetabular components with supplemental fixation for severe deformities (trispike), guidelines and intraoperative x-ray techniques to eliminate malpositioned acetabular components resulting in edge-loading, uncemented femoral fixation and a bone management protocol that has eliminated early femoral failure. Group I includes 142 cases done before 2008 and Group II includes 168 cases with minimum 2-year follow-up done after this date. Two-year failure rates improved from 5% (8/142) to 0.6% (1/168) and 5-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship improved from 93% to 99%. In Group II we have had only one failure (femoral neck fracture) in 168 dysplasia cases with 2–5 year follow-up. There have been no failures of acetabular ingrowth, no AWRF, no femoral head collapse, no failures of femoral ingrowth, no femoral loosenings, no dislocations and no nerve palsies. All acetabular components placed since 2008 meet our published RAIL (relative acetabular inclination limit) guidelines, which we have shown to be 99% reliable in avoiding high on levels and AWRF. Both groups were 70% female. With a mean bearing size 48mm (high-risk for HRA). There was also no differences in DEXA scan T score, BMI, ASA score, length of incision (4 inches) HHS, or patients participating in impact sports (UCLA activity score 9&10). In Group II the mean age was 3 years greater (52), the mean operative time was 20 minutes shorter (96 minutes), estimated blood loss was 120 ml less (140ml) and the mean hospital stay was one day shorter (2 days) probably reflective of greater experience in this single surgeon series. We have demonstrated that with sufficient surgeon experience and properly designed implants, hip resurfacing can be performed with a failure rate that is lower than most reports on THR for this disorder