Aim

Aim of this monocentric, prospective study was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, clinical and radiographical results at 24-month follow-up (N = 6 patients) undergoing hip revision surgery with severe acetabular bone defects (Paprosky 2C-3A-3B) using a combination of a novel phase-pure betatricalciumphosphate - collagen 3D matrix with allograft bone chips.

Introduction. Osteolysis causing proximal femoral deficiency is a major problem in revision hip arthroplasty. Various methods including impaction bone grafting and bone allografts have been used to address this issue. We have analysed bone reformation using extended trochanteric osteotomy and distally fixed proximal hydroxyapatite-coated modular revision hip system (Stryker Restoration System) in 100 consecutive revisions by a single surgeon. Method. Consecutive patients undergoing revision of femoral stem using posterior approach, extended trochanteric osteotomy and modular hip revision system were included in the study. Exclusion criteria were infection and loss of follow up. Paprosky grading system was used to assess bone loss. Standardized pre-op radiographs and follow-up radiographs at 6 weeks, 6 months and yearly post surgery were used for analysis. Minimum follow-up of 18 months (1.5–3.5 years). Bone reformation is quantified as definite reformation, some evidence of reformation and no bone reformation. Extended trochanteric osteotomy union rates and subsidence rates were also observed. Result. Average age of patients was 71 years with 54% females and 46% males. The majority of femurs had significant bone loss (Paprosky type III 84%, Type II 16%). Bone reformation was evident in all patients and early bone reformation was observed in most patients in this study. The extended trochanteric osteotomy union rate was 100%. Subsidence was observed in 6 patients out of which 4 were non progressive (3patients 5–10mm and 1patient less than 5mm) and 2 were progressive and significant (more than 10 mm) with 1 patient requiring re-revision. Discussion. All patients in the study demonstrated reconstitution of the proximal femoral deficiency. Stability of the reconstruction, and viability of the osteotomy flap are key for a successful outcome. We believe this technique is reliable, reproducible and good option for the treatment of proximal femoral deficiency in revision total hip surgery. Await long term outcome

This study utilised NJR primary hip data from the 6^th Annual Report to determine the rate and indication for revision between cemented, uncemented, hybrid and resurfacing prosthetic groups. Regression analysis was performed to identify the influence of gender and ASA grade on these revision rates. Validity of the data was interrogated by exploring for episodes of misclassification.

Revision total hip replacement may be technically challenging, with component selection being one of the challenges. Modular titanium femoral components have some advantages, and our aim was to assess the medium term outcome of the use of such a component [Revitan or PFM]

We reviewed 323 patients undergoing revision with one of these femoral stems. We applied the Oxford Hip Score, the Charnley Class, and the Devane Patient Activity Level to each patient.

The average follow up time was 6.58 years. The mean Oxford score was 35.74.39.8% of the patients were Charnley Class B. 52.4% of patients had an activity score indicating a moderate level of activity ie they could participate in gardening, swimming and other leisure pursuits.

The overall outcome was good with this prosthesis. The Oxford scores were comparable with the national mean for revision THR on the NZ National Joint Register.

Aim. The duration of systemic antibiotic therapy following first-stage surgery is contentious. Our Institution's philosophy is to perform an aggressive debridement, use high concentration targeted antibiotics through cement beads and systemic prophylactic antibiotics alone. In the presence of significant soft tissue infection or microbiological diagnostic uncertainty; systemic antibiotics may be prescribed for 5 days whilst awaiting tissue culture results. The aim of this study was to assess the success of our philosophy in the management of PJI of the hip using our two-stage protocol. Method. A retrospective review of our Institution's prospectively-collected database was performed to identify those patients who were planned to undergo a two-stage hip revision procedure for PJI. All patients had a confirmed diagnosis of PJI as per the major criteria of MSIS 2013, a minimum 5-years follow up and were assessed at the time of review using the MSIS working group outcome-reporting tool (2018). They were then grouped into “successful” or “unsuccessful” (suppressive antibiotics, further revision for infection, death within 1 year). Results. 299 intended two-stage hip revisions in 289 patients (6 repeat ipsilateral two-stage, 4 bilateral two-stage) met our inclusion criteria. 258 (86%) patients proceeded to 2. nd. stage surgery. Median follow up was 10.7 years. 91% success rate was observed for those patients who underwent reimplantation; dropping to 86% when including the patients who did not proceed to second stage surgery. The median duration of post-operative systemic antibiotics following first stage surgery was 5 days (IQR 5–9). No significant difference in outcome was observed in patients who received either; < / = 48 hours (86%; n=70) compared to > 48 hours antibiotics (86%; n=229; p=0.96) or </= 5 days of antibiotics (88%; n=202) compared to > 5 days antibiotics (82%; p=0.38). A significant majority had gram-positive (88%) infection with 30% being polymicrobial. Greater success rates were observed for gram-positive PJI (87%); than for gram-negative PJI (84%) and mixed Gram infection (72%; p=0.098). Conclusion. Aggressive surgical debridement with high concentration, targeted local antibiotic delivery at time of first stage hip surgery, without prolonged systemic antibiotics, provides a high rate of success, responsible antibiotic stewardship and reduced hospital costs

Aim. Aim was to compare revision rates when using single versus dual antibiotic loaded cement (ABLC) in hip fracture arthroplasty and aseptic revision hip or knee arthroplasty using data from the Dutch national joint registry (LROI). Methods. All primary cemented (hemi-)arthroplasties for acute hip fractures and cemented aseptic hip or knee revision arthroplasties, were incorporated in 3 datasets. All registered implants between 2007 and 2018 were included (minimum 2 years follow-up). Primary end-point was subsequent revision rates for infection and for any reason in the single and dual ABLC groups. Cumulative crude incidence of revision was calculated using competing risk analysis. Results. A total of 22,308 hip fracture arthroplasties, 2,529 hip revision and 7,124 knee revision arthroplasties were registered and analyzed in the study period. The majority of hip fracture patients (97.1%) was treated with single ABLC. For hip and knee revision arthroplasties dual ABLC was used in 33.8% and 25.7%. The revision rate for infection in the fracture arthroplasty group was not different between groups (0.5% versus 0.8%, p=0.27). The re-revision rate following hip or knee revision based on single versus dual ABLC was not different between groups (3.2% versus 2.8%, p=0.82 for hip revision and 1.8% versus 2.5%, p=0.36 for knee revision). In addition, the re-revision rate for any reason was not different in all three datasets. The crude cumulative revision and re-revision rates for any reason based on single ABLC versus dual ABLC showed no differences in all three datasets. The crude cumulative 7-year re-revision rate for any reason following revision THA with Gentamicin ABLC use was 11.8%, with Gentamicin + Clindamycin ABLC use 13.1% and with Erythromycin + Colistin ABLC use 14.8% (ns). The crude cumulative 9-year re-revision rate for any reason following revision TKA with Gentamicin ABLC use was 17.7% and with Gentamicin + Clindamycin ABLC use 16.5% (ns). Conclusions. In conclusion, we could not show a difference in revision rate for hip fracture arthroplasty or re-revision rates for revision hip- or knee arthroplasty with the use of dual ABLC compared to single ABLC bone cement, with 7and 9 year follow up. The low percentage of dual ABLC in hip fracture arthroplasties in our registry do not enable us to make a reliable estimation of the added value in this patient category. The results of this study do not confirm the potential benefit of dual ABLC use in revision cases

This study aimed to examine the changing trends in the reasons for total hip replacement (THR) revision surgery, in one country over a twenty-one year period, in order to assess whether changes in arthroplasty practices have impacted revision patterns and whether an awareness of these changes can be used to guide clinical practice and reduce future revision rates. The reason for revision THR performed between January 1999 and December 2019 was extracted from the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR). The results were then grouped into seven 3-year periods to allow for clearer visualization of trends. The reasons were compared across the seven time periods and trends in prosthesis use, patient age, gender, BMI and ASA grade were also reviewed. We compared the reasons for early revision, within one year, with the overall revision rates. There were 20,740 revision THR registered of which 7665 were revisions of hips with the index procedure registered during the 21 year period. There has been a statistically significant increase in both femoral fracture (4.1 – 14.9%, p<0.001) and pain (8.1 – 14.9%, p<0.001) as a reason for hip revision. While dislocation has significantly decreased from 57.6% to 17.1% (p<0.001). Deep infection decreased over the first 15 years but has subsequently seen further increases over the last 6 years. Conversely both femoral and acetabular loosening increased over the first 12 years but have subsequently decreased over the last 9 years. The rate of early revisions rose from 0.86% to 1.30% of all revision procedures, with a significant rise in revision for deep infection (13-33% of all causes, p<0.001) and femoral fracture (4-18%, p<0.001), whereas revision for dislocation decreased (59-30%, p<0.001). Adjusting for age and gender femoral fracture and deep infection rates remained significant for both (p<0.05). Adjusting for age, gender and ASA was only significant for infection. The most troubling finding was the increased rate of deep infection in revision THR, with no obvious linked pattern, whereas, the reduction in revision for dislocation, aseptic femoral and acetabular loosening can be linked to the changing patterns of the use of larger femoral heads and improved bearing surfaces

Aim. Currently, despite a thorough diagnostic work up, around ten percent of the presumed aseptic revisions turn out to have unexpected positive cultures during the revision procedure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the negative predictive value (ruling out) of the automated multiplex PCR Unyvero i60 implant and tissue infection (ITI) cartridge (U-ITI) system for the detection of microorganisms in synovial fluid obtained intraoperatively. Methods. A prospective study was conducted with 200 patients undergoing a one-stage knee or hip revision. In all patients six intraoperative tissue cultures were taken and a sample of synovial fluid which was analyzed as a culture and with the multiplex PCR U-ITI system. The primary outcome measure was the negative predictive value (NPV) of the multiplex PCR U-ITI system compared to the intraoperative tissue cultures to reliable rule out an infection. Results. The NPV of the multiplex PCR U-ITI system of synovial fluid compared to tissue cultures in knee and hip revisions was 96.8% and 92.5%, respectively. In addition, cultures require several days for growth whereas the automated mPCR U-ITI system provides results within five hours. Conclusions. The multiplex PCR U-ITI system is a quick additional test to conventional cultures in presumed aseptic knee and hip revisions for reliable ruling out of an underlying infective cause. With this simple test antibiotic overtreatment as well as undertreatment after one-stage revision arthroplasty can be avoided which can directly result in a reduction in length of hospital stay, hospital costs and possible antibiotic resistance development

Aim. Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) represents the second most frequent complication of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) with up to 20% of low-grade PJI treated as aseptic failure. Sensitive diagnostic criteria have been provided by EBJIS. However, to date there is no single test to reliably diagnose all PJIs. Studies of Mazzucco et al. and Fu et al. suggest that synovial fluid (SF) viscosity could be considered as an important marker for PJI. The primary aim of our study was to determine if SF viscosity is a more reliable diagnostic criterion of PJI than the SF cell count with differential (CCD), and the combined diagnostic value of SF viscosity and CCD. Method. We prospectively analysed the viscosity of SF samples obtained during TJA of hip and knee revisions. We sampled 2.5–5mL of SF for viscosity and CCD. Intraoperatively, 1mL of the sample was analysed for the CCD. The remaining SF was centrifuged for 4min at 7000rpm. The viscosity of the supernatant was determined on Ostwald viscometer as the time required to pass the viscometer at 20°C. During each surgery at least 5 microbiological and multiple histopathological samples were harvested, and explant sonication was performed. The diagnosis was based on EBJIS definition. The viscosity threshold for detecting PJI was set at 65 seconds. Results. Between December 2020 and January 2023, we analysed 65 knee and 47 hip TJA revision procedures. There were 55 septic and 57 aseptic diagnoses. As a diagnostic marker of PJI, SF viscosity achieved 100% sensitivity and 82.5% specificity, with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.832 (95% CI 0.739, 0.925). The specificity and sensitivity of SF CCD were 98.2% and 78.2%, respectively, with AUC of 0.921 (95% CI 0.869, 0.974). Of the 10 cases incorrectly diagnosed as aseptic based on SF viscosity, 2 were acute traumas and 8 metalloses. The SF CCD in all these cases was <0.5. Of the 12 cases incorrectly diagnosed as aseptic based on SF CCD, 6 cases were culture negative, 4 C. acnes and 2 S. epidemidis isolates in microbiology. Taken together, SF viscosity and CCD achieved a combined AUC of 0.953 (95% CI 0.919, 0.987). Conclusions. Our study is the first to report that SF viscosity is more sensitive but slightly less specific for PJI than SF CCD. The study demonstrates diagnostic value of combining SF viscosity with CCD in decision making in TJA revision surgery

Aim. Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) presents the second most common complication of total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Accumulating evidence suggests that up to 20% of aseptic failures are low-grade PJI. However, there is still no single test to reliably diagnose all PJI. In his thesis, Mazzucco emphasized the viscosity differences between normal, osteoarthritic, and rheumatic synovial fluid. Similarly, a recent study by Fu et al. reported significantly lower viscosity in patients with PJI compared to the aseptic failure cohort. The primary aim of our study was to determine whether synovial fluid viscosity is a more reliable diagnostic criterion for PJI compared to the synovial fluid cell count with differential and serum C-reactive protein (CRP) levels. Method. We prospectively analyzed the viscosity of synovial fluid samples obtained during TJA of hip and knee joint revision procedures. We sampled 2.5–5 mL of synovial fluid for viscosity measurement. The samples were centrifuged (4 min at 7000 rpm) and the resulting supernatant was immediately transferred into the Ostwald viscometer. Viscosity was derived from the time required for a given volume of synovial fluid to pass the viscometer at 20 °C. The synovial fluid samples were also analysed for their cell count with differential and serum CRP was measured. The definite diagnosis of PJI was established on basis of EBJIS criteria. For the viscosity, the threshold for detecting PJI was set at 65 seconds. Results. Between December 2020 and March 2021, we analyzed 12 knee and 11 hip TJA revision samples. These included 14 septic and 9 aseptic synovial fluid samples. The average viscometer time in the PJI group was 31s (range 20–48s) compared to 247s (range 68–616s) in the group of aseptic revision procedures. The specificity and sensitivity of our viscosity measurements were 100%. The sensitivity and specificity of cell count was 100% and 85.7%, for the synovial fluid differential they were 100% and 85.7%, and for the CRP they were 88.9% and 71.4%, respectively. Conclusions. Our study is the first to report a significant difference in synovial fluid viscosity between the PJI and the aseptic cohort. It points towards the diagnostic superiority of viscosity measurements over conventional synovial fluid cell count, synovial fluid differential, and serum CRP levels. Albeit currently limited by small sample size, the study remains ongoing

Aims

Our primary aim was to establish the proportion of female orthopaedic consultants who perform arthroplasty via cases submitted to the National Joint Registry (NJR), which covers England, Wales, Northern Ireland, the Isle of Man, and Guernsey. Secondary aims included comparing time since specialist registration, private practice participation, and number of hospitals worked in between male and female surgeons.

Aim. Despite a preoperative workup with no evidence to suspect a prosthetic joint infection (PJI) before revision surgery, routinely obtained intraoperative cultures still can be unexpectedly positive. The purpose of this study was (1) to assess the incidence of unexpected positive intraoperative cultures in presumed aseptic knee and hip revisions and (2) to determine whether a difference exists between the infection-free implant survival rate of patients with and without unexpected positive intraoperative cultures. Method. We selected patients who underwent a one-stage revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) for different reasons. Three or more separate intraoperative cultures were obtained during each procedure. A negative result was defined as less than two positive cultures with the same microorganism. An unsuspected PJI was defined as having two or more positive cultures with the same microorganism. Patients’ medical records were reviewed to collect demographics, preoperative laboratory results, culture results, and the occurrence of infection during follow-up. Results. A total of 340 and 339 patients with a presumed aseptic knee and hip revision, respectively, were analyzed. The incidence of unsuspected PJIs was 7.9% and 12.1% in the knees and hips, respectively. Of these unsuspected PJIs, the infection-free prosthetic survival rate at 2 year follow-up was 88% (95%CI 59–97) and 92% (95%CI 73–98) in knees and hips, respectively. In the knee group, the infection-free prosthetic survival rate of patients with an unsuspected PJI was significantly lower compared to that of patients with negative intraoperative culture results (88% (95%CI 59–97) versus 97% (95%CI 93–99) with p=0.01). In the hip group, there was no such a difference (92% (95%CI 73–98) versus 93% (95%CI 88–96) with p=0.41). Conclusions. We found incidences of unsuspected PJI and infection-free prosthetic survival rates that are comparable with previous studies. During follow-up after one-stage revision TKA, a higher incidence of infection was observed in patients with an unsuspected PJI. This difference was not observed in the hip revisions

The choice of stem length in total hip revision with impaction bone grafting of femur is essentially based upon the grade of cavitation of femur and surgeon's preference. The standard length stem has been often critiqued for the apprehension of peri-prosthetic fracture. Our study highlights the importance of proximal bone stock rather than distal cavitation in determining the length of femoral stem. 168 total hip revisions of 162 patients with impaction bone grafting and cemented standard C-stem (done with standardized technique) between 1995 and 2008 at a tertiary referral centre were included. Revisions for infection and segmental bone defects were excluded. Serial radiographs were retrospectively analysed by two people independently, using Endoklinik classification, Gruen zones and more and outcomes were analysed. Mean follow-up of the 168 revision hips was 10.5 years (range 5 – 19.1 years). 14 patients (8.3%) were re-revised, reasons being, persistent deep infection (1.8%), repeated dislocations (1.2%), cup loosening (4.8%) and stem loosening (1.2%). Only 1 patient (0.6%) was re-revised due to stem loosening alone. No peri-prosthetic fractures or stem breakage were identified. Use of standard stem length in hip revisions with impaction bone grafting doesn't increase the risk of peri-prosthetic fractures even during long term follow up period. This questions the principle of bypassing the distal cavitation of femur by 2 cortical diameters with the use of long stem. In our experience, a good proximal femur support aids in the performance of standard length cemented stems in revision for aseptic loosening irrespective of grade of distal cavitation for cavitory defects of femur treated with impaction bone grafting

Introduction. Primary stability is an important factor for long-term implant survival in total hip arthroplasty. In revision surgery, implant fixation becomes especially challenging due the acetabular bone defects, which are often present. Previous studies on primary stability of revision components often applied simplified geometrical defect shapes in a variety of sizes and locations. The objectives of this study were to (1) develop a realistic defect model in terms of defect volume and shape based on a clinically existing acetabular bone defect, (2) develop a surrogate acetabular test model, and (3) exemplarily apply the developed approach by testing the primary stability of a pressfit-cup with and without bone graft substitute (BGS). Materials & Methods. Based on clinical computed tomography data and a method previously published [1], volume and shape information of a representative defect, chosen in consultation with four senior hip revision surgeons, was derived. Volume and shape of the representative defect was approximated by nine reaming procedures with hemispherical acetabular reamers, resulting in a simplified defect with comparable volume (18.9 ml original vs. 18.8 ml simplified) and shape. From this simplified defect (Defect D), three additional defect models (Defect A, B, C) were derived by excluding certain reaming procedures, resulting in four defect models to step-wise test different acetabular revision components. A surrogate acetabular model made of 20 PCF polyurethane foam with the main support structures was developed [2]. For the exemplary test, three series for Defect A were defined: Native (acetabulum without defect), Empty (defect acetabulum without filling), Filled (defect acetabulum with BGS filling). All series were treated with a pressfit-cup and subjected to dynamic axial load in direction of maximum resultant force during level walking. Minimum load was 300 N and maximum load was increased step-wise from 600 N to 3000 N. Total relative motion between cup and foam, consisting of inducible displacement and migration, was assessed with the optical measurement system gom Aramis (gom GmbH, Braunschweig, DE). Results. Total relative motion increased with increasing load, with a maximum of 0.63 mm for Native, 0.86 mm for Filled, and 1.9 mm for Empty. At load stage 1800 N, total relative motion in Empty was 11.0-fold increased in comparison to Native, but could be reduced to a 3.3-fold increase in Filled. Discussion. The objective of this study was to develop a simplified, yet realistic and modular defect model which could be used to step-wise test different treatment strategies. Applicability of the developed test setup was shown by assessing primary stability of a pressfit-cup in a native, empty, and filled situation. The presented method could potentially be used as a modular test setup to compare different acetabular revision components in a standardized way. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Although the incidence of total hip dislocation has decreased, it still remains a major problem particularly if recurrent. The actual incidence is around 1–2% but it has been documented as the leading cause for hip revision in the United States. In patients with recurrent hip dislocation, technical issues of leg length inequality, incorrect offset, and poor implant position should be addressed surgically and the abnormality corrected. In patients with recurrent hip dislocation, the articulation is preferably converted to a more stable articulation, with constrained sockets and dual mobility being the choices. In my experience, dual mobility articulations remain an excellent option for recurrent hip dislocation and its use is increasing significantly. It provides improved hip stability and data have demonstrated good success with recurrent hip dislocation. However, with use of the modular variety of dual mobility which is needed for acetabular cup fixation with screw augmentation, dissimilar metals are placed in contact (titanium socket and cobalt chrome liner insert) which potentially can pose a fretting or corrosion problem in longer term outcomes. Constrained sockets of the tripolar configuration provide another option which is useful in those patients with severe abductor dysfunction or insufficiency. Constrained sockets can also be cemented into the existing shell in cases where there is a well-fixed cup and cup removal may lead to significant bone loss and a need for complex acetabular reconstruction. It is important to remember that there are two types of constrained sockets, tripolar and focal constraint. Results with the tripolar constrained socket have been significantly better than the focal constraint variety which adds a polyethylene rim piece to the liner. In a mid-term follow up (2–9 years) of 116 constrained tripolar sockets, recurrent dislocation was only 3.3%. In papers reporting on focal constrained sockets, recurrent dislocation was in the 9–29% range. There continues to be a role for constrained sockets and selection of implant type has made a difference in ultimate outcome

Aim. The incidence of prosthetic joint infections can be severe to monitor, as they are rare events. Recent publications from National registries points toward a significant underestimation of reported infections. The aim of this project was to develop a complication register that could report the “true” and momentaneous incidence of prosthetic infections after total knee and hip arthroplasty. Method. All patients operated with total hip arthroplasty (THA) or total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at our hospital were included in a local quality registry. All complications were reported at follow-up at 2 and 3 months for total knee and hip arthroplasties respectively, and at 1-year follow up. Both primary and revision surgeries were included. In order to monitor complications of special interest, such as deep postoperative infections, key variables were presented in a g-chart. This chart shows the number of uncomplicated surgeries between each complication (such as infection) in a bar diagram. This diagram is easily read as high bars indicate a low incidence of complications and low bars indicate a high incidence. The diagram is updated and distributed for information every month. Results. From September 2010 till December 2015 we included 2093 primary total hip arthroplasties and 272 hip revisions. The overall incidence for prosthetic infection after primary THA within 1 year after surgery was 1.8% and for hip revisions 3.4%. The momentaneous incidence in December 2015 was 3% for both primary and revision THA together. In the same period 1555 total knee arthroplasties and 155 knee revisions were included. The overall incidence of prosthetic infection after primary TKA within 1 year after surgery was 1.2% and for knee revisions 2.2%. The momentaneous incidence in December 2015 was 2.5% for primary and revision TKA together. Conclusions. Reporting the number of uncomplicated surgeries between every unwanted event or complication, such as postoperative infections, is a good method for describing rare events. This method will reveal changes in the trend at an earlier stage and can be an important tool in the work on preventing postoperative infections. A local quality register can be important in order to report a “true” incidence of postoperative infections, as the risk of underestimation is lower than in a national registry

Although the introduction of ultraporous metals in the forms of acetabular components and augments has substantially improved the orthopaedic surgeon's ability to reconstruct severely compromised acetabuli, there remain some revision THAs that are beyond the scope of cups, augments, and cages. In situations involving catastrophic bone loss, allograft-prosthetic composites or custom acetabular components may be considered. Custom components offer the potential advantages of immediate, rigid fixation with a superior fit individualised to each patient. These custom triflange components require a preoperative CT scan with three-dimensional (3-D) reconstruction using rapid prototyping technology, which has evolved substantially during the past decade. The surgeon can fine-tune exact component positioning, determine location and length of screws, modify the fixation surface with, for example, the addition of hydroxyapatite, and dictate which screws will be locked to enhance fixation. The general indications for using custom triflange components include: (1) failed prior salvage reconstruction with cage or porous metal construct augments, (2) large contained defects with possible discontinuity, (3) known pelvic discontinuity, and (4) complex multiply surgically treated hips with insufficient bone stock to reconstruct using other means. We previously reported on our center's experience with 23 patients (24 hips) treated with custom triflange components with minimum 2-year follow-up. This method of reconstruction was used in a cohort of patients with Paprosky Type 3B acetabular defects, which represented 3% (30 of 955) of the acetabular revisions we performed during the study period of 2003 to 2012. At a mean follow-up of 4.8 years (range, 2.3 – 9 years) there were four subsequent surgical interventions: two failures secondary to sepsis, and one stem revision and one open reduction internal fixation for periprosthetic femoral fracture. There were two minor complications managed nonoperatively, but all of the components were noted to be well-fixed with no obvious migration or loosening observed on the most recent radiographs. Harris hip scores improved from a mean of 42 (SD ±16) before surgery to 65 (SD ±18) at latest follow-up (p < 0.001). More recently, we participated in a multi-center study of 95 patients treated with reconstruction using custom triflange components who had a mean follow-up of 3.5 years. Pelvic defects included Paprosky Type 2C, 3A, 3B and pelvic discontinuity. Concomitant femoral revision was performed in 21 hips. Implants used a mean of 12 screws with 3 locking screws. Twenty of 95 patients (21%) experienced at least one complication, including 6% dislocation, 6% infection, and 2% femoral-related issues. Implants were ultimately removed in 11% of hips. One hip was revised for possible component loosening. Survivorship with aseptic loosening as the endpoint was 99%. Custom acetabular triflange components represent yet another tool in the reconstructive surgeon's armamentarium. These devices can be helpful in situations of catastrophic bone loss, achieving reliable fixation. Clinical results are inferior to both primary THA and more routine revision THA. Patients and surgeons should be aware of the increased complications associated with these complex hip revisions

Although the incidence of total hip dislocation has decreased, it still remains a major problem particularly if recurrent. The actual incidence is around 1–2% but it has been documented as the leading cause for hip revision in the United States. In patients with recurrent hip dislocation, technical issues of leg length inequality, incorrect offset, and poor implant position should be addressed surgically and the abnormality corrected. In patients with recurrent hip dislocation, the articulation is preferably converted to a more stable articulation, with constrained sockets and dual mobility being the choices. In my experience, dual mobility articulations remain an excellent option for recurrent hip dislocation and its use is increasing significantly. It provides improved hip stability and data have demonstrated good success with recurrent hip dislocation. However, with use of the modular variety of dual mobility which is needed for acetabular cup fixation with screw augmentation, dissimilar metals are placed in contact (titanium socket and cobalt chrome liner insert) which potentially can pose a fretting or corrosion problem in longer term outcomes. Constrained sockets of the tripolar configuration provide another option which is useful in those patients with severe abductor dysfunction or insufficiency. Constrained sockets can also be cemented into the existing shell in cases where there is a well-fixed cup and cup removal may lead to significant bone loss and need for complex acetabular reconstruction. It is important to remember that there are two types of constrained sockets, tripolar and focal constraint. Results with the tripolar constrained socket have been significantly better than the focal constraint variety which adds a polyethylene rim piece to the liner. In a mid-term follow up (2–9 years) of 116 constrained tripolar sockets, recurrent dislocation was only 3.3%. In papers reporting on focal constrained sockets, recurrent dislocation was in the 9–29% range. There continues to be a role for constrained sockets and selection of implant type has made a difference in ultimate outcome

To wake up in the morning facing a complex total hip revision can be unpleasant. Modern designs have greatly facilitated dealing with the most difficult revision situations both on the acetabular and femoral side. The surgeon faces blood loss, dislocation, infection, and a litany of other potential complications. Our advances in total hip revision have been outstanding but can pose very complex issues. Total knee revision on the other hand is easier. The surgeon needs to ask a series of questions pre-operatively and intra-operatively. Pre-operatively, one must know the mechanism of failure. You also need to know “what is missing” in terms of skin, soft tissue, extensor mechanism, bone and ligaments. Intra-operatively, the surgeon must know the difference between the flexion and extension gap, the position of the joint line, the extent of the bone loss and whether it is load bearing or non-load bearing, the ligamentous stability and the intramedullary shaft. Most modern knee revision designs allow the surgeon to create a paradigm to deal with all of these potential problems. There, of course, are complex problems of malalignment, periprosthetic fracture and other deformities that add a level of complexity but most of these can be dealt with using standard revision designs without requiring custom prostheses

Aims. Elective orthopaedic services have had to adapt to significant system-wide pressures since the emergence of COVID-19 in December 2019. Length of stay is often recognized as a key marker of quality of care in patients undergoing arthroplasty. Expeditious discharge is key in establishing early rehabilitation and in reducing infection risk, both procedure-related and from COVID-19. The primary aim was to determine the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic length of stay following hip and knee arthroplasty at a high-volume, elective orthopaedic centre. Methods. A retrospective cohort study was performed. Patients undergoing primary or revision hip or knee arthroplasty over a six-month period, from 1 July to 31 December 2020, were compared to the same period in 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic. Demographic data, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, wait to surgery, COVID-19 status, and length of hospital stay were recorded. Results. A total of 1,311 patients underwent hip or knee arthroplasty in the six-month period following recommencement of elective services in 2020 compared to 1,527 patients the year before. Waiting time to surgery increased in post-COVID-19 group (137 days vs 78; p < 0.001). Length of stay also significantly increased (0.49 days; p < 0.001) despite no difference in age or ASA grade. There were no cases of postoperative COVID-19 infection. Conclusion. Time to surgery and length of hospital stay were significantly higher following recommencement of elective orthopaedic services in the latter part of 2020 in comparison to a similar patient cohort from the year before. Longer waiting times may have contributed to the clinical and radiological deterioration of arthritis and general musculoskeletal conditioning, which may in turn have affected immediate postoperative rehabilitation and mobilization, as well as increasing hospital stay. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(8):655–660