Aims. To assess the early subsidence rate of the femoral stem for patients who had collarless Corail total hip replacement. Methods. Consecutive data was collected retrospectively between August 2007 and December 2009 for patients who had collarless Corail total hip replacement. Radiographic assessment of the degree of subsidence, calcar resorption, stem angulation, canal fill ratio and loosening of the stem were measured. Post operative pain, dislocation and stem revision surgery were also evaluated. Results. 48 patients were identified, providing 51 hips for the study. There were 22 male and 26 female. The mean age 64.2 years (range 38-77). Post-operative radiographs were taken at day 1, 6 weeks and one year post-operatively (range 10-18 months, mean 12.7). Significant subsidence was defined as 3 or more millimetres, we identified two patients with subsidence between 3-5mm, one patient with 6mm and two patients with 10mm subsidence at one year post-operatively. In the 5 patients with subsidence post-operatively, all significant subsidence occurred within the first 6 weeks. Canal fill ratio was measured in all patients; in the non-subsided group the ratio was an average of 72% in the lower third of the stem and 84% in the middle third. In the subsided group 75% in the lower third of the stem and 81% in the middle third, which we felt was clinically insignificant. There was no dislocation or revision for septic loosening. One patient with 10mm subsidence had liner revision for dissociation but the stem was well fixed and not revised. All patients who had significant subsidence still had functioning implants with no pain, revisions for subsidence or features of loosening. Discussion. There were no radiological features predictive of subsidence in our patients. Subsidence may be due to lack of compliance in some patients with partial weight bearing and increased Body Mass Index

Summary Statement. We analysed impaction bone grafting used together with cemented or uncemented fixation in acetabular revision surgery. The overall risk for re-revision did not differ between the cemented and uncemented group. However, aseptic loosening was more common in the cemented group. Background. Several surgical techniques address bone defects in cup revision surgery. Bone impaction grafting, introduced more than thirty years ago, is a biologically and mechanically appealing method. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of bone impaction grafting when used with uncemented and cemented fixation in cup revision surgery. Uncemented cups resting on more than 50% host bone were used as controls. Patient and Methods. Cup fixation was studied in ninety hips (eighty-two patients), revised due to loosening between 1993 and 1997. There were fifty-three isolated cup and thirty-seven total revisions. Patients were followed for thirteen years using conventional radiography, radiostereometry (RSA), Harris Hip score and a pain questionnaire. Peroperatively the surgeon assessed the acetabular bone bed vitality. In hips where the cup was judged to rest on > 50% vital bone (group I, n=43), an uncemented cup was used. If the cup was resting on ≤ 50% living bone, uncemented (group IIa, n=21,) or cemented (group IIb, n=26) technique was chosen, according to the surgeon's preference. The mean age of patients at index revision was 61±12 years, 56% were females. The most common index diagnosis was primary osteoarthritis (n=45) followed by rheumatoid arthritis (n=10). Results. At thirteen years, acetabular component failure had necessitated a second revision in 6/7/8 hips in Groups I/IIa/IIb respectively. These re-revisions were performed 1–10 (mean 7.1) years after index revision. Moreover four cup / liner revisions were performed in hips with femoral loosening, not allowing further RSA measurements. These twenty-five hips were followed until re-revision. Deceased patients (n=21) and patients with deteriorating medical condition, not able to attend the follow-up (n=7), were censored in the survival statistics. Aseptic loosening was the most common reason of re-revision. However, in the uncemented groups (I/IIa), four cups were re-revised due to liner wear, osteolysis or instability. In the total study population, and up to two years, the median proximal migration was lowest in Group I followed by Group IIa and Group IIb (p≤0,006). At thirteen years the mean proximal migration was highest in Group IIb 1.29 mm (SD 1.23) followed by Group I 0.30 mm (SD 0.40) and Group IIa 0.22 mm (SD 0.22), p = 0.05. In cases subsequently re-revised because of loosening or with radiographically loose cups at the last follow-up, a higher proximal migration was observed compared to the non-revised and radiographically well-fixed group (up to seven years: p < 0.001; thirteen years: p=0.04). Discussion/Conclusion. We found an increased risk for rerevision in cases with less than 50% host bone-implant contact. These cups showed high early proximal migration, measured by RSA, indicating poor initial fixation. Rate of re-revision due to any reason did not differ between cemented and uncemented cups. The cemented group (IIb) had a higher risk of being re-revised due to aseptic loosening. Poor bone stock, use of small bone chips, inferior impaction technique, and no or restricted contact with living bone are probable reasons for failures when extensive bone grafting is needed