Objective

Failures of internal fixation after intertrochanteric fractures pose great challenge to orthopaedic surgeons. Hip arthroplasty can be a remedy for such failures, however, the selection of femoral stem length is controversial. This study aims to report our experience of managing failed internal fixation after intertrochanteric fractures with standard femoral stem arthroplasty.

The aim was to identify the acetabular center, fix the acetabular implant, and reconstruct the hip rotation center using the residual Harris fossa and acetabular notch as anatomical markers during revision hip arthroplasty. Osteolysis is commonly found in the acetabulum during hip arthroplasty revision. It causes extensive defects and malformation of the anatomical structure, making correct fixation of a hip prosthesis difficult. We studied the relations of the anatomical positions between the Harris fossa and acetabular notch and the acetabular center (Fig. 1). Vertical distance from the hip rotation center to the teardrop connection and horizontal distance from the hip rotation center to the teardrop were measured on preoperative and postoperative radiographs. Vertical distance increased from 14.22±3.39 mm preoperatively to 32.64±4.51 mm postoperatively (t=3.65, P<0.05) and the horizontal distance from 25.13±3.46 mm to 32.87±4.73 mm (t=2.72, P<0.05). Altogether, 28 patients underwent revision hip arthroplasty based on the Paprosky classification for bone loss. The anatomical hip center was identified using the residual Harris fossa and acetabular notch as anatomical markers during revision hip arthroplasty. Based on these relations, we were able to place the hip prosthesis correctly. After surgery, restoration of the anatomical hip center was accomplished based on data obtained from radiographs(Fig.2 and Fig.3)

Aims

Orthopaedic surgeries are complex, frequently performed procedures associated with significant haemorrhage and perioperative blood transfusion. Given refinements in surgical techniques and changes to transfusion practices, we aim to describe contemporary transfusion practices in orthopaedic surgery in order to inform perioperative planning and blood banking requirements.

Plots are an elegant and effective way to represent data. At their best they encourage the reader and promote comprehension. A graphical representation can give a far more intuitive feel to the pattern of results in the study than a list of numerical data, or the result of a statistical calculation.

The temptation to exaggerate differences or relationships between variables by using broken axes, overlaid axes, or inconsistent scaling between plots should be avoided.

A plot should be self-explanatory and not complicated. It should make good use of the available space. The axes should be scaled appropriately and labelled with an appropriate dimension.

Plots are recognised statistical methods of presenting data and usually require specialised statistical software to create them. The statistical analysis and methods to generate the plots are as important as the methodology of the study itself. The software, including dates and version numbers, as well as statistical tests should be appropriately referenced.

Following some of the guidance provided in this article will enhance a manuscript.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1593–1603.