Instability following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an unfortunately frequent and serious problem that requires thorough evaluation and preoperative planning before surgical intervention. Prevention through optimal index surgery is of great importance, as the management of an unstable THA is challenging even for an experienced joints surgeon. However, even after well-planned surgery, a significant incidence of recurrent instability still exists. Moreover leg-length discrepancy (LLD) after THA can pose a substantial problem for the orthopaedic surgeon. Such discrepancy has been associated with complications including nerve palsy, low back pain, and abnormal gait. Consequently we may use a big femoral head or increase femoral offset (FO) in unstable THA for avoiding LLD. However we do not know the relationship between FO and STT. The objective of this study is to assess hip instability of three different FOs in same patient undergoing THA during an operation. We performed 70 patients who had undergone unilateral THA using CT based navigation system at a single institution for advanced osteoarthoritis from May 2013 to May 2014. We used postero-lateral approach in all patients. After cup and stem implantation, we assessed soft tissue tensioning in THA during operation. Trial necks were categorized into one of three groups: standard femoral offset (sFO), high femoral offset (hFO, +4mm compared to sFO) and extensive high femoral offset (ehFO, +8 mm compared to sFO). We measured distance of lift-off about each of three femoral necks using CT based navigation system and a force gauge with hip flexed at 0 degrees and 30 degrees under a traction of lower extremity. Traction force was 40% of body weight. Forty patients had leg length restored to within +/− 3mm of the contralateral side by post-operative CT analysis. We examined these patients. Traction force was 214±41.1Nm. The distances of lift-off were 8.8±4.5mm (sFO), 7.4±4.1mm (eFO), 5.1±3.9mm (ehFO) with 0 degrees hip flexion and neutral abduction(Abd) / adduction(Add) and neutral internal rotation(IR)/ external rotation(ER). The distance of lift-off were 11.5±5.9mm (sFO),10.5±5.5mm (eFO),9.1±5.9mm (ehFO) with 30 degrees hip flexion and neutral Abd / Add and neutral IR/ER. Significant difference was observed between 0 degrees hip flexion and 30 degrees hip flexion on each FO (p<0.05). On changing the distance of lift-off, hFO to ehFO (2.2±1.6mm)was more stable than sFO to hFO (1.4±1.7mm)with 0degrees hip flexion.(p<0.05). On the other hands, hFO to ehFO (1.4±1.6mm) was more stable than sFO to hFO (1.0±1.3mm) with 30 degrees hip flexion. However, we did not find significant difference (p=0.18). Hip instability was found at 30 degrees hip flexion more than at 0 degrees hip flexion. We found that changing ehFO to sFO can lead to more stability improvement of soft tissue tensioning than sFO to eFO, especially at 0 degrees hip flexion. Whereas In a few cases, the distance of lift-off did not change with increasing femoral offset by 4mm. When you need more stability in THA without LLD, We recommend increasing FO by 8mm

Abstract. Objectives. Hip instability following total hip arthroplasty in treatment of intracapsular neck of femur fractures is reported at 8–11%. Utilising the principle of a small articulation to minimize the problems of wear coupled with a large articulation, dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty prostheses stabilise the hip further than conventional fixed-bearing designs. The aim of this study is to compare the rate of dislocation and complication between standard fixed-bearing and dual-mobility prostheses for the treatment of intracapsular neck of femur fractures. Methods. A four-year retrospective review in a large district general hospital was completed. All cases of intracapsular neck of femur fractures treated with total hip arthroplasty were identified through the theatre logbooks. Patient's operative and clinical notes were retrospectively reviewed to collect data. Results. A total of 91 patients underwent total hip arthroplasty for intracapsular neck of femur fracture in the four-year period. 61.5% were dual-mobility design versus 28.5% had fixed-bearing implants. There were no statistical differences between patient group characteristics. Choice of implant was dependent on surgeon preference. There was a 0.0% dislocation rate in the dual-mobility group versus 8.6% in the fixed-bearing prosthesis group. All dislocations occurred in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty with 36.0mm fixed-bearing prosthesis via posterior surgical approach. There was no statistical difference in mortality between both groups. Conclusion. There was an increasing trend of towards the use of dual-mobility prosthesis for fractured neck of femur within this department with excellent outcomes. Dual-mobility designs provide reduced dislocation rates in total hip arthroplasty in intracapsular neck of femur fractures compared to standard fixed-bearing designs at this institution. The authors recommend that all orthopaedic staff consider the use of dual-mobility prostheses in suitable patients and ensure trainees are suitably trained in use of dual-mobility designs. Declaration of Interest. (b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project

Dual mobility (DM) bearing implants reduce the incidence of dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA) and as such they are used for the treatment of hip instability in both primary and revision cases. The aim of this study was to compare lower limb muscle activity of patients who underwent a total hip arthroplasty (THA) with a dual mobility (DM) or a common cup (CC) bearing compared to healthy controls (CON) during a sit to stand task. A total of 21 patients (12 DM, 9 CC) and 12 CON were recruited from the local Hospital. The patients who volunteered for the study were randomly assigned to either a DM or a CC cementless THA after receiving informed consent. All surgeries were performed by the same surgeon using the direct anterior approach. Participants underwent electromyography (EMG) and motion analysis while completing a sit-to-stand task. Portable wireless surface EMG probes were placed on the vastus lateralis, rectus femoris, biceps femoris, semitendinosus (ST), gluteus medius and tensor fasciae latae muscles of the affected limb in the surgical groups and the dominant limb in the CON group. Motion capture was used to record lower limb kinematics and kinetics. Muscle strength was recorded using a hand-held dynamometer during maximal voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) testing. Peak linear envelope (peakLE) and total muscle activity (iEMG) were extrapolated and normalized to the MVIC and time cycle for the sit to stand task. Using iEMG, quadriceps-hamstrings muscle co-activation index was calculated for the task. Nonparametric Kruskal Wallace ANOVA tests and Wilcoxon rank sum tests were used to identify where significant (p < 0.05) differences occurred. The DM group had greater iEMG of the ST muscle compared to the CC (p=0.045) and the CON (p=0.015) groups. The CC group had lower iEMG for hamstring muscles compared to the DM (p=0.041) group. The DM group showed lower quadriceps-hamstrings co-activation index compared to the CON group and it approached significance (p=0.054). The CC group had greater anterior pelvis tilt compared to both DM (p=0.043) and the CON (p=0.047) groups. The DM also had larger knee varus angles and less knee internal rotation compared to both groups, however this never reached significance. No significant differences in muscle strength existed between the groups. Higher ST muscle activity in the DM group is explained by the reduction in internal rotation at the knee joint as the ST muscle was more active to resist the varus forces during the sit-to-stand task. Reduced quadriceps activity in the CC group is explained by increased pelvic anterior tilt as this would shorten the moment arm and muscle length in the quadriceps, ultimately reducing quadriceps muscle activity. The reduced co-activation between quadriceps and hamstrings activity in the DM group compared to the CC and CON groups is related to better hip function and stability. Combining lower co-activation and larger range of motion for the DM group without impingement, this implant seems to offer better prevention against THA subluxation and less wear of the implant

The renewed interest in the clinically proven low wear of the metal-on-metal bearing combined with the capacity of inserting a thin walled cementless acetabular component has fostered the reintroduction of hip resurfacing. As in other forms of conservative hip surgery, i.e. pelvic osteotomies and impingement surgery, patient selection will help minimize complications and the need for early reoperation. Patient Selection and Hip Resurfacing. Although hip resurfacing was initially plagued with high failure rates, the introduction of metal on metal bearings as well as hybrid fixation has shown excellent survivorships of 97 to 99% at 4 to 5 years follow-up. However, it is important to critically look at the initial published results. In all of these series there was some form of patient selection. For example, in the Daniel and associates publications, only patients with osteoarthritis with an age less than 55 were included with 79% of patients being male. Treacy and associates stated that: “the operation was offered to men under the age of 65 years and women under the age of 60 years, with normal bone stock judged by plain radiographs and an expectation that they would return to an active lifestyle, including some sports”. However in the materials and methods, although the mean age is 52 years, the range is from 17 to 76 years including some patients with rheumatoid arthritis as well as osteonecrosis. Obviously, some form of patient selection is needed; but how one integrates them is where the Surface Arthroplasty Risk Index (SARI) is useful. With a maximum score of 6, points are assigned accordingly: femoral head cyst >1cm: 2 points; patient weight <82kg: 2 points; previous hip surgery: 1 point; UCLA Activity level >6: 1 point. A SARI score >3 represented a 4 fold increase risk in early failure or adverse radiological changes and with a survivorship of 89% at four years. The SARI index also proved to be relevant in assessing the outcome of the all cemented McMinn resurfacing implant (Corin¯, Circentester, England) at a mean follow-up of 8.7 years. Hips which had failed or with evidence of radiographic failure on the femoral side had a significantly higher SARI score than the remaining hips, 3.9 versus 1.9. Finally, one must consider the underlying diagnosis when evaluating a patient for hip resurfacing. In cases of dysplasia, acetabular deficiencies combined with the inability of inserting screws through the acetabular component may make initial implant stability unpredictable. This deformity in combination with a significant leg length discrepancy or valgus femoral neck could compromise the functional results of surface arthroplasty, and in those situations a stem type total hip replacement may provide a superior functional outcome. In respect to other diagnoses (osteonecrosis, inflammatory arthritis), initial analyses have not demonstrated any particular diagnostic group at greater risk of earlier failure. The only reservation we have is in patients with compromised renal function since metal ions generated from the metal-on-metal bearing are excreted through the urine and the lack of clearance of these ions may lead to excessive levels in the blood. Surgical Technique. Because resurfacing has not been within the training curriculum of orthopaedic surgeons for the last 2 decades, there will most likely be a learning curve in the integration of this implant within clinical practice. This data was confirmed for hip resurfacing when looking at the Canadian Academic Experience where in the first 50 cases of five arthroplasty surgeons only a 3.2% failure rate was noted of which 1.6% were due to neck fracture. Femoral neck fracture can occur because of significant varus positioning as well as osteonecrosis of the femoral head due to either disruption of the blood supply or over cement penetration. Finally, abnormal wear patterns leading to severe soft tissue reactions are being increasingly recognized and are related to either impingement or vertically placed acetabular components. Although impingement has long been recognized after total hip arthroplasty to limit range of motion and in extreme cases to hip instability, the risk after hip resurfacing may be greater since the femoral head-neck unit is preserved. Beaulé and associates have reported that 56% of hips treated by hip resurfacing have an abnormal offset ratio pre-operatively, with the two main diagnostic groups presenting deficient head-neck offset being osteonecrosis and osteoarthritis both of which have been associated with femoroacetabular impingement in the pre arthritic state. Conclusion. Although patients with a high activity level are likely to put their hip arthroplasties at risk for earlier failure, limiting a patient's activity because of fear of revision with a stem type hip arthroplasty has been shown to negatively impact the quality of life at long term follow-up. Thus hip resurfacing arthroplasty plays a significant role in the treatment of hip arthritis by permitting a return to full activities or what the patient perceives as his/her full capacities to do so, permitting them to enjoy a better quality of life without fearing a major hip revision