The importance of registries has been brought into focus by recent UK national reports focusing on implant (Cumberlege) and surgeon (Paterson) performance. National arthroplasty registries provide real-time, real-world information about implant, hospital, and surgeon performance and allow case identification in the event of product recall or adverse surgical outcomes. They are a valuable resource for research and service improvement given the volume of data recorded and the longitunidal nature of data collection. This review discusses the current value of registry data as it relates to both clinical practice and research. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(4):356–360

Aim. In recent years, many studies on revision for infection after arthroplasty have been published. In national arthroplasty registers, revision for infection is defined as surgical debridement, with or without removal or exchange of the entire or parts of the prosthesis due to deep infection, and should be reported to the register immediately after surgery. The diagnosis of infection is made at the surgeon's discretion, based on pre- and perioperative assessment and evaluation, and is not to be corrected to the register based on peroperative bacterial cultures. Due to this lack of validation, the rate of revision for infection will only be an approximation of the true rate of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Our aim was to validate the reporting of infection after total hip arthroplasty, and to assess if revisions for infection actually represented true PJI. Methods. We investigated the reported revisions for infection and aseptic loosening after total hip arthroplasty from 12 hospitals, representing one region of the country, reported during the period 2010–2020. The electronic patient charts were investigated for information on surgical treatment, use of antibiotics, biochemistry and microbiology findings. PJI was defined as growth of at least two phenotypically identical microbes in perioperative tissue samples. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value and accuracy were calculated. Results. 145 revisions for infection and 137 revisions for aseptic loosening were reported. Of the reported infections, there were 141/145 true positives and 4/145 false positives. Of the reported aseptic loosenings, there were 126/137 true negatives and 11/137 false negatives. This gives a positive predictive value of 0.97, negative predictive value of 0.92, sensitivity of 0.93, specificity of 0.97 and accuracy of 0.95. Interpretation. We found the reporting revision for infection after total hip arthroplasty to the national register accurate. There was high correlation between reported revision for infection and PJI. Studies on revision for infection from arthroplasty registers may therefore be considered as reliable as studies of true PJI

Since the introduction of the first National Arthroplasty Register in Sweden in 1975, many other countries have tried to adopt the successful Scandinavian system. However, not all have overcome the political and practical difficulties of establishing a working register. We have surveyed the current registries to establish the key factors required for an effective database. We have received detailed information from 15 arthroplasty registers worldwide. The legal conditions under which they operate together with the methods of collection and handling of the data differ widely, but the fulfilment of certain criteria is necessary achieve a high degree of completeness of the data to ensure the provision of statistically relevant information

Data of high quality are critical for the meaningful interpretation of registry information. The National Joint Registry (NJR) was established in 2002 as the result of an unexpectedly high failure rate of a cemented total hip arthroplasty. The NJR began data collection in 2003. In this study we report on the outcomes following the establishment of a formal data quality (DQ) audit process within the NJR, within which each patient episode entry is validated against the hospital unit’s Patient Administration System and vice-versa. This process enables bidirectional validation of every NJR entry and retrospective correction of any errors in the dataset. In 2014/15 baseline average compliance was 92.6% and this increased year-on-year with repeated audit cycles to 96.0% in 2018/19, with 76.4% of units achieving > 95% compliance. Following the closure of the audit cycle, an overall compliance rate of 97.9% was achieved for the 2018/19 period. An automated system was initiated in 2018 to reduce administrative burden and to integrate the DQ process into standard workflows. Our processes and quality improvement results demonstrate that DQ may be implemented successfully at national level, while minimizing the burden on hospitals.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(9):716–725.

Aim

National Joint Replacement Registries, which are important sources for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) data, report an average PJI incidence ranging from 0.5 to 2.0%. Unfortunately, national registries including the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI), are not specifically designed to register PJI. In the Netherlands, the LROI is a nationwide population-based registry with an overall completeness of more than 95%.³ To ensure usability and reliability of PJI data from the LROI, it is important to evaluate the quality and completeness of these data. From 2013 onwards, eight hospitals in the South-East of the Netherlands, collected their PJI data in a detailed regional infection cohort (RIC), specifically designed for this purpose. This study aimed to determine the accuracy and completeness of PJI registration (hip and knee arthroplasty) in the LROI, by comparing the LROI with the RIC.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to validate the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register (DHR).

The October 2023 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Arthroscopic capsular shift surgery in patients with atraumatic shoulder joint instability: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial; Superior capsular reconstruction partially restores native glenohumeral loads in a dynamic model; Gene expression in glenoid articular cartilage varies in acute instability, chronic instability, and osteoarthritis; Intra-articular injection versus interscalene brachial plexus block for acute-phase postoperative pain management after arthroscopic shoulder surgery; Level of pain catastrophizing rehab in subacromial impingement: secondary analyses from a pragmatic randomized controlled trial (the SExSI Trial); Anterosuperior versus deltopectoral approach for primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a study of 3,902 cases from the Dutch National Arthroplasty Registry with a minimum follow-up of five years; Assessment of progression and clinical relevance of stress-shielding around press-fit radial head arthroplasty: a comparative study of two implants; A number of modifiable and non-modifiable factors increase the risk for elbow medial ulnar collateral ligament injury in baseball players: a systematic review

Aims. We aimed to assess the cumulative risk of total hip arthroplasty (THA) from in situ fixation for slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) after a follow-up of almost 50 years. Methods. In this study, 138 patients with 172 affected hips treated with in situ fixation were evaluated retrospectively. A total of 97 patients (70%) were male and the mean age was 13.6 years (SD 2.1); 35 patients (25%) had a bilateral disease. The median follow-up time was 49 years (interquartile range 43 to 55). Basic demographic, stability, and surgical details were obtained from patient records. Preoperative radiographs (slip angle; SA) were measured, and data on THA was gathered from the Finnish National Arthroplasty Register. Results. The preoperative SA was a mean of 39° (SD 19°). At follow-up, 56 of the patients had undergone THA for a hip previously fixed in situ for SCFE (41%) and 64 of all affected hips had been replaced (37%). Kaplan-Meier analysis gave a median prosthesis-free postoperative survival of 55 years (95% confidence interval (CI) 45 to 64) for the affected hips. In a multivariate analysis, female patients had a two-fold risk for THA (hazard ratio (HR) 2.42 (95% CI 1.16 to 5.07)) and a greater preoperative SA increased the risk of THA (HR 1.03 for every increment of 1° (95% CI 1.01 to 1.05)), while patient age at surgery, slip laterality, stability of slip, or diagnostic delay did not have a statistically significant effect on the risk of THA. Conclusion. SCFE treated primarily with in situ fixation may lead to THA in more than 40% of affected hips at a near 50-year follow-up. This risk is approximately 15-times the reported lifetime risk in the Finnish general population. Female sex and increasing preoperative SA significantly predicted higher risk of THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(12):1321–1326

Aims. National joint registries under-report revisions for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). We aimed to validate PJI reporting to the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Arthroplasty Registry (AOANJRR) and the factors associated with its accuracy. We then applied these data to refine estimates of the total national burden of PJI. Methods. A total of 561 Australian cases of confirmed PJI were captured by a large, prospective observational study, and matched to data available for the same patients through the AOANJRR. Results. In all, 501 (89.3%) cases of PJI recruited to the prospective observational study were successfully matched with the AOANJRR database. Of these, 376 (75.0%) were captured by the registry, while 125 (25.0%) did not have a revision or reoperation for PJI recorded. In a multivariate logistic regression analysis, early (within 30 days of implantation) PJIs were less likely to be reported (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34 to 0.93; p = 0.020), while two-stage revision procedures were more likely to be reported as a PJI to the registry (OR 5.3 (95% CI 2.37 to 14.0); p ≤ 0.001) than debridement and implant retention or other surgical procedures. Based on this data, the true estimate of the incidence of PJI in Australia is up to 3,900 cases per year. Conclusion. In Australia, infection was not recorded as the indication for revision or reoperation in one-quarter of those with confirmed PJI. This is better than in other registries, but suggests that registry-captured estimates of the total national burden of PJI are underestimated by at least one-third. Inconsistent PJI reporting is multifactorial but could be improved by developing a nested PJI registry embedded within the national arthroplasty registry. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(5):367–373

Aims. The current evidence comparing the two most common approaches for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), the deltopectoral and anterosuperior approach, is limited. This study aims to compare the rate of loosening, instability, and implant survival between the two approaches for rTSA using data from the Dutch National Arthroplasty Registry with a minimum follow-up of five years. Methods. All patients in the registry who underwent a primary rTSA between January 2014 and December 2016 using an anterosuperior or deltopectoral approach were included, with a minimum follow-up of five years. Cox and logistic regression models were used to assess the association between the approach and the implant survival, instability, and glenoid loosening, independent of confounders. Results. In total, 3,902 rTSAs were included. A deltopectoral approach was used in 54% (2,099/3,902) and an anterosuperior approach in 46% (1,803/3,902). Overall, the mean age in the cohort was 75 years (50 to 96) and the most common indication for rTSA was cuff tear arthropathy (35%; n = 1,375), followed by osteoarthritis (29%; n = 1,126), acute fracture (13%; n = 517), post-traumatic sequelae (10%; n = 398), and an irreparable cuff rupture (5%; n = 199). The two high-volume centres performed the anterosuperior approach more often compared to the medium- and low-volume centres (p < 0.001). Of the 3,902 rTSAs, 187 were revised (5%), resulting in a five-year survival of 95.4% (95% confidence interval 94.7 to 96.0; 3,137 at risk). The most common reason for revision was a periprosthetic joint infection (35%; n = 65), followed by instability (25%; n = 46) and loosening (25%; n = 46). After correcting for relevant confounders, the revision rate for glenoid loosening, instability, and the overall implant survival did not differ significantly between the two approaches (p = 0.494, p = 0.826, and p = 0.101, respectively). Conclusion. The surgical approach used for rTSA did not influence the overall implant survival or the revision rate for instability or glenoid loosening. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(9):1000–1006

We compared the rate of revision of two classes of primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty, stemmed (aTSA) and stemless (sTSA) undertaken with cemented all polyethylene glenoid components. A large national arthroplasty registry identified two cohort groups for comparison, aTSA and sTSA between 1. st. January 2011 and 31. st. December 2020. A sub-analysis from 1 January 2017 captured additional patient demographics. The cumulative percentage revision (CPR) was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age and gender. Of the 7,533 aTSA procedures, the CPR at 8 years was 5.3% and for 2,567 sTSA procedures was 4.0%. There was no difference in the risk of revision between study groups (p=0.128). There was an increased risk of revision for aTSA and sTSA undertaken with humeral head sizes <44mm (p=0.006 and p=0.002 respectively). Low mean surgeon volume (MSV) (<10 cases per annum) was a revision risk for aTSA (p=0.033) but not sTSA (p=0.926). For primary diagnosis osteoarthritis since 2017, low MSV was associated with an increased revision risk for aTSA vs sTSA in the first year (p=0.048). Conversely, low MSV was associated with a decreased revision risk for sTSA in the first 6 months (p<0.001). Predominantly aTSA was revised for loosening (28.8%) and sTSA for instability/dislocation (40.6%). Revision risk of aTSA and sTSA was associated with humeral head size and mean surgeon volume but not patient characteristics. Inexperienced shoulder arthroplasty surgeons experience lower early revision rates with sTSA in the setting of osteoarthritis. Revision of aTSA and sTSA occurred for differing reasons

The 2021 Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry report indicated that total shoulder replacement using both mid head (TMH) length humeral components and reverse arthroplasty (RTSA) had a lower revision rate than stemmed humeral components in anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) - for all prosthesis types and diagnoses. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of component variables in the various primary total arthroplasty alternatives for osteoarthritis in the shoulder. Data from a large national arthroplasty registry were analysed for the period April 2004 to December 2020. The study population included all primary aTSA, RTSA, and TMH shoulder arthroplasty procedures undertaken for osteoarthritis (OA) using either cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) or non-cross-linked polyethylene (non XLPE). Due to the previously documented and reported higher revision rate compared to other anatomical total shoulder replacement options, those using a cementless metal backed glenoid components were excluded. The rate of revision was determined by Kaplan-Meir estimates, with comparisons by Cox proportional hazard models. Reasons for revision were also assessed. For a primary diagnosis of OA, aTSA with a cemented XLPE glenoid component had the lowest revision rate with a 12-year cumulative revision rate of 4.7%, compared to aTSA with cemented non-XLPE glenoid component of 8.7%, and RTSA of 6.8%. The revision rate for TMH was lower than aTSA with cemented non-XLPE, but was similar to the other implants at the same length of follow-up. The reason for revision for cemented aTSR was most commonly component loosening, not rotator cuff deficiency. Long stem humeral components matched with XLPE in aTSA achieve a lower revision rate compared to shorter stems, long stems with conventional polyethylene, and RTSA when used to treat shoulder OA. In all these cohorts, loosening, not rotator cuff failure was the most common diagnosis for revision

Aims. The aim of this study was to describe and compare joint-specific and generic health-related quality of life outcomes of the first versus second knee in patients undergoing staged bilateral total knee arthroplasty (BTKA) for osteoarthritis. Methods. This retrospective cohort study used Australian national arthroplasty registry data from January 2013 to January 2021 to identify participants who underwent elective staged BTKA with six to 24 months between procedures. The primary outcome was Oxford Knee Score (OKS) at six months postoperatively for the first TKA compared to the second TKA, adjusted for age and sex. Secondary outcomes compared six-month EuroQol five-dimension five-level (EQ-5D-5L) domain scores, EQ-5D index scores, and the EQ visual analogue scale (EQ-VAS) between knees at six months postoperatively. Results. The cohort included 635 participants (1,270 primary procedures). Preoperative scores were worse in the first knee compared to the second for all instruments; however, comparing the first knee at six months postoperatively with the second knee at six months postoperatively, the mean between-knee difference was minimal for OKS (-0.8 points; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.4 to -0.2), EQ-VAS (3.3; 95% CI 1.9 to 4.7), and EQ-5D index (0.09 points; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.12). Outcomes for the EQ-5D-5L domains ‘mobility’, ‘usual activities’, and ‘pain/discomfort’ were better following the second TKA. Conclusion. At six months postoperatively, there were no clinically meaningful differences between the first and second TKA in either the joint-specific or overall generic health-related quality of life outcomes. However, individual domain scores assessing mobility, pain, and usual activities were notably higher after the second TKA, likely reflecting the cumulative improvement in quality of life after both knees have been replaced. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(3):202–209

Introduction. Austin Moore cervicocephalic prostheses have been a therapeutical option for femoral neck fractures in patients with a reduced general condition for many years. Since treatments other than total hip arthroplasties have also been included in National arthroplasty registers during the last decade, adequate reference data for comparative analyses have recently become available. Materials and Methods. Based on a standardised methodology, a comprehensive literature analysis of clinical literature and register reports was conducted. On the one hand, the datasets were examined with regard to validity and the occurrence of possible bias factors, on the other hand, the objective was to compile a summary of the data available. The main criterion is the indicator of Revision Rate. The definitions used with respect to revisions and the methodology of calculations are in line with the usual standards of international arthroplasty registers. Results. Publications of clinical studies since the year 2000 have been found to significantly underestimate revision rates, on average by a factor of 2.15 as compared to register data. With 2 revisions per 100 observed component years, the revision rate in registers clearly exceeds the comparative values for total hip arthroplasty. The medium-term outcome of treatment with Austin Moore implants shows statistically significantly worse values than the use of total hip endoprostheses, bipolar implants or modular cervicocephalic prostheses. This may be rated as a hint that, in particular cases, there is potential for improvement as regards the indication for cervicocephalic implants. In the datasets of a single National register of a country such as Australia, with a population of just over 21.7 million, approximately 3 times as many cases have been documented within a period of 9 years than in all clinical studies that have been published in Medline-listed journals since the year 1960. Since these data are much more homogeneous, they allow for markedly more accurate evaluations and statements of higher validity. The period of time by which sufficient data are available for a well-founded recommendation is considerably shorter in a register. Conclusion. The results of a meta-analysis of clinical literature deviate conspicuously from data from a National arthroplasty register. The medium- and long-term revision rates after treatment with Austin Moore implants are significantly higher than for treatment with total hip prostheses or modular implants. There is evidence that more stringent indications for monobloc implants could improve the outcome of surgery

This article considers some of the problems of the interpretation of information from other national arthroplasty registers when setting up a new register. In order for the most useful information to be available from registers much international co-operation is required between all those responsible for the design of registers as well as those who gather, assess and publish the data

The Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) have partnered to advance international patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) collection and reporting standards for hip and knee arthroplasty. This project is part of the OECD's Patient-Reported Indicator Survey (PaRIS) initiative, which aims to address the need for internationally comparable patient-reported outcome and experience measures in order to better monitor health system performance and drive continuous improvement. PROMs are in varying stages of implementation across OECD health systems, with differences in collection and reporting practices across existing programs. CIHI and the OECD are leading an international working group for PROMs in hip and knee replacement surgery in order to build consensus on PROMs data collection standards and develop indicators for international reporting. Working group members include patient representatives, clinicians, national arthroplasty registries, the International Society of Arthroplasty Registries (ISAR), experts in PROMs measurement, and government representatives of several OECD member countries. Activities of the working group focus on two main priorities: 1) Use existing PROMs programs to maximize pilot comparable reporting in OECD's Health at a Glance 2019 report, and 2) Advance new PROMs standards and data collection to maximize comparable reporting beyond Health at a Glance 2019. An environmental scan of PROMs in hip and knee arthroplasty found that a number of countries are collecting this data, however, there are variations in survey instruments as well as administration and reporting methods within and across countries. As part of priority 1, the working group has achieved consensus on a number of aspects around pilot reporting. The project is compiling data from existing PROMs programs in order to report results in the Health at a Glance 2019 publication. For priority 2, the most notable challenge is establishing an agreement across countries on common survey tools, as well as a minimum data set that works for all, given the disparities of existing collection across countries. Many international programs lack the flexibility to change PROMs tools or collections methods, and have concerns regarding the break in trend for PROMs data within their own countries if they were to change methods. The project is exploring the use of crosswalks and other opportunities for comparable reporting, such as the use of single-item anchor questions. To date, the working group continues to develop consensus on international standards for PROMs collection and reporting. Results of the international consensus building and work to date will be shared. PROMs incorporate the patient's perspective into the delivery of treatments and care – such as hip and knee arthroplasty – that aim to improve a patient's quality of life. Alignment of standards in PROMs collection across countries will make comparable data available for reporting, in order to inform quality improvement initiatives within health systems to provide better care for patients. CIHI and the OECD will continue to work with member countries to develop international data collection and reporting standards for PROMs, and encourage the adoption of common approaches across countries

We identified 1305 femoral impaction bone grafting revisions using the Exeter stem performed between 1989 and 2002 in 30 hospitals throughout Sweden. There were 1188 patients with a mean age of 71 years (29 to 94) followed up for between five and 18 years. The participating departments reported 70 further revisions in total, of which 57 could also be identified on the Swedish National Arthroplasty Registry. Kaplan-Meier survivorship for all causes of failure was 94.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 92 to 96) for women and 94.7% (95% CI, 92 to 96) for men at 15 years. Survivorship at 15 years for aseptic loosening was 99.1% (95% CI 98.4 to 99.5), for infection 98.6% (95% CI 97.6 to 99.2), for subsidence 99.0% (95% CI 98.2 to 99.4) and for fracture 98.7% (95% CI 97.9 to 99.2). Statistically significant predictors of failure were the year in which revision was conducted (p < 0.001). The number of previous revisions was slightly above the level of signifance (p = 0.056). Age, gender, the length of the stem and previous septic loosening were not predictors of failure (p = 0.213, p = 0.399, p = 0.337, p = 0.687, respectively). The difference in survivorship between high- and low-volume departments was only 3% at ten years. We conclude that impaction bone grafting with the Exeter stem has an excellent long-term survivorship following revision arthroplasty. The technique of impaction grafting appears to be reliable, can be learned rapidly and produces a predictably low incidence of aseptic loosening

Aim. To see what surgical strategy was used in treating infected total hip arthroplasties (THA), relative to bacterial findings, level of inflammation, length of antibiotic treatment (AB) and re-revisions. Further, to assess the results of treatment after three months and one year. Method. We used our national arthroplasty register (NAR) to identify THA revised for deep infection from 2004–2015 reported from our hospital. We identified the strategy of revision, i.e. one-stage exchange (one-stage), two-stage exchange (two-stage), debridement and implant retention (DAIR), or Girdlestone, and reported re-revisions for infection. We defined cure as no AB, no need for further surgery and joint with prosthesis (not Girdlestone). From the hospitals’ medical records we retrieved bacterial findings from the revisions, level of C-reactive protein (CRP), type of antibiotics given, duration of antibiotic therapy and clinical data regarding the patients. The information reported to the NAR was also validated. Results. We found 69 patients reported to the NAR for first revision for infection after primary THA. Most patients were treated with DAIR or two-stage. DAIR was used for infections with short period of symptoms, two-stage for longer lasting infections. In the DAIR-group, three patients needed another DAIR. Six patients were converted to two-stage exchange. Four patients had Girdlestone as strategy from primary revision due to co-morbidity. No patients treated with other strategies ended up with Girdlestone. 60 % and 90 % were cured for the infection after three and twelve months respectively. Conclusions. Infected THAs were treated according to duration of symptoms. After one year about 90 % were cured

Ceramic-on-ceramic bearings are considered in several European and Asian countries a reliable alternative to metal-on-polyethylene, ceramic-on-polyethylene, or metal-on-metal (with small diameter heads) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) management. Reduced joint wear and limited peri-prosthetic osteolytic changes are the main reasons supporting the use of ceramic. So far, the available observational data show a low rate of revision following the use of Ceramic-on-Ceramic bearings, but concern remains regarding the risk of fracture and the prevalence of squeaking noises from the joint. The objective of this study was to use a national arthroplasty registry to assess whether the choice of bearings – metal-on-polyethylene (MoP), ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP), ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC), or metal-on-metal (MoM) – is associated with differences in the risk of revision. Data from primary THAs were extracted from the New Zealand Joint Registry over a 15-year period. 97,889 hips were available for analysis. The mean age of patients was 68 years (SD +/− 11 years), and 52% were women. The median followup period in this patient population was 9 years (range, 1 to 15 years). The primary endpoint was revision for any reason. Inclusion criteria were degenerative joint disease (84,894), exclusion criteria were previous surgery, trauma, and any other diagnosis (12,566). We also excluded patients operated on with a Ceramic-on-Metal THA, because of the small recorded number (429). There were 54,409 (64.1%) MoP, 16,503 (19.4%) CoP, 9,051 (10.7%) CoC and 4,931 (5.8%) MoM hip arthroplasties. 3,555 hips were revised during the 15-year observation period. A multivariate assessment was carried out including the following risks factors available for analysis: age, gender, surgeon experience, use of cement. Analysis of bearing surface type and revision showed a statistically significant lower risk for CoC hips (265 THAs, p≤0.01) when compared with CoP (537 THAs, HR 1.07, CI 0,92–1,26), MoP (2186 THAs, HR 1.39, CI 1.19–1,62), and MoM (576 THAs, HR 2.15, CI 1.84–2.51). The 15-year follow-up Kaplan-Meier survival analysis shows a 92% revision-free rate for CoC THAs (Figure 1). In particular, CoC THAs showed the lowest rates of revision for dislocation and for deep infection, when compared with the other bearings. This registry study showed that the bearing surface is associated with the risk of revision. MoM bearing surfaces showed a high rate of revisions, while CoC THAs showed the lowest rate of revision compared to other bearing surfaces. Low wear and less osteolysis are the possible reasons for reduced risk of revision for aseptic loosening. We postulate that the healthy, fibrotic synovial-like pseudocapsule found in CoC THAs preserves the long-term stability of the joint and reduces the bio-burden for late deep infection. Future studies with larger data sets and longer follow-up should continue to investigate this query. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

We review the history and literature of hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Resurfacing and the science behind it continues to evolve. Recent results, particularly from the national arthroplasty registers, have spread disquiet among both surgeons and patients. A hip resurfacing arthroplasty is not a total hip replacement, but should perhaps be seen as a means of delaying it. The time when hip resurfacing is offered to a patient may be different from that for a total hip replacement. The same logic can apply to the timing of revision surgery. Consequently, the comparison of resurfacing with total hip replacement may be a false one. Nevertheless, the need for innovative solutions for young arthroplasty patients is clear. Total hip replacement can be usefully delayed in many of these patients by the use of hip resurfacing arthroplasty