Objectives. Few studies have assessed outcomes following non-metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty (non-MoMHA) revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD). We assessed outcomes following non-MoMHA revision surgery performed for ARMD, and identified predictors of re-revision. Methods. We performed a retrospective observational study using data from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. All non-MoMHAs undergoing revision surgery for ARMD between 2008 and 2014 were included (185 hips in 185 patients). Outcome measures following ARMD revision were intra-operative complications, mortality and re-revision surgery. Predictors of re-revision were identified using Cox regression. Results. Intra-operative complications occurred in 6.0% (n = 11) of the 185 cases. The cumulative four-year patient survival rate was 98.2% (95% CI 92.9 to 99.5). Re-revision surgery was performed in 13.5% (n = 25) of hips at a mean time of 1.2 years (0.1 to 3.1 years) following ARMD revision. Infection (32%; n = 8), dislocation/subluxation (24%; n = 6), and aseptic loosening (24%; n = 6) were the most common re-revision indications. The cumulative four-year implant survival rate was 83.8% (95% CI 76.7 to 88.9). Multivariable analysis identified three predictors of re-revision: multiple revision indications (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.78; 95% CI 1.03 to 7.49; p = 0.043); selective component revisions (HR = 5.76; 95% CI 1.28 to 25.9; p = 0.022); and ceramic-on-polyethylene revision bearings (HR = 3.08; 95% CI 1.01 to 9.36; p = 0.047). Conclusions. Non-MoMHAs revised for ARMD have a high short-term risk of re-revision, with important predictors of future re-revision including selective component revision, multiple revision indications, and ceramic-on-polyethylene revision bearings. Our findings may help counsel patients about the risks of ARMD revision, and guide reconstructive decisions. Future studies attempting to validate the predictors identified should also assess the effects of implant design (metallurgy and modularity), given that this was an important study limitation potentially influencing the reported prognostic factors. Cite this article: G. S. Matharu, A. Judge, D. W. Murray, H. G. Pandit. Outcomes following revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris in non-metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty patients: Analysis of 185 revisions from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. Bone Joint Res 2017;6:405–413. DOI: 10.1302/2046-3758.67.BJR-2017-0017.R2

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with revision surgery for the surgical management of Unified Classification System (UCS) type B periprosthetic femoral fractures around cemented polished taper-slip femoral components following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods. Data were collected for patients admitted to five UK centres. The primary outcome measure was the two-year reoperation rate. Secondary outcomes were time to surgery, transfusion requirements, critical care requirements, length of stay, two-year local complication rates, six-month systemic complication rates, and mortality rates. Comparisons were made by the form of treatment (ORIF vs revision) and UCS type (B1 vs B2/B3). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed with two-year reoperation for any reason as the endpoint. Results. A total of 317 periprosthetic fractures (in 317 patients) with a median follow-up of 3.6 years (interquartile range (IQR) 2.0 to 5.4) were included. The fractures were type B1 in 133 (42.0%), B2 in 170 (53.6%), and B3 in 14 patients (4.4%). ORIF was performed in 167 (52.7%) and revision in 150 patients (47.3%). The two-year reoperation rate (15.3% vs 7.2%; p = 0.021), time to surgery (4.0 days (IQR 2.0 to 7.0) vs 2.0 days (IQR 1.0 to 4.0); p < 0.001), transfusion requirements (55 patients (36.7%) vs 42 patients (25.1%); p = 0.026), critical care requirements (36 patients (24.0%) vs seven patients (4.2%); p < 0.001) and two-year local complication rates (26.7% vs 9.0%; p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the revision group. The two-year rate of survival was significantly higher for ORIF (91.9% (standard error (SE) 0.023%) vs 83.9% (SE 0.031%); p = 0.032) compared with revision. For B1 fractures, the two-year reoperation rate was significantly higher for revision compared with ORIF (29.4% vs 6.0%; p = 0.002) but this was similar for B2 and B3 fractures (9.8% vs 13.5%; p = 0.341). The most common indication for reoperation after revision was dislocation (12 patients; 8.0%). Conclusion. Revision surgery has higher reoperation rates, longer surgical waiting times, higher transfusion requirements, and higher critical care requirements than ORIF in the management of periprosthetic fractures around polished taper-slip femoral components after THA. ORIF is a safe option providing anatomical reconstruction is achievable. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(2):124–134

Aims. The aim of this study was to determine both the incidence of, and the reoperation rate for, postoperative periprosthetic femoral fracture (POPFF) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) with either a collared cementless (CC) femoral component or a cemented polished taper-slip (PTS) femoral component. Methods. We performed a retrospective review of a consecutive series of 11,018 THAs over a ten-year period. All POPFFs were identified using regional radiograph archiving and electronic care systems. Results. A total of 11,018 THAs were implanted: 4,952 CC femoral components and 6,066 cemented PTS femoral components. Between groups, age, sex, and BMI did not differ. Overall, 91 patients (0.8%) sustained a POPFF. For all patients with a POPFF, 16.5% (15/91) were managed conservatively, 67.0% (61/91) underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), and 16.5% (15/91) underwent revision. The CC group had a lower POPFF rate compared to the PTS group (0.7% (36/4,952) vs 0.9% (55/6,066); p = 0.345). Fewer POPFFs in the CC group required surgery (0.4% (22/4,952) vs 0.9% (54/6,066); p = 0.005). Fewer POPFFs required surgery in males with a CC than males with a PTS (0.3% (7/2,121) vs 1.3% (36/2,674); p < 0.001). Conclusion. Male patients with a PTS femoral component were five times more likely to have a reoperation for POPFF. Female patients had the same incidence of reoperation with either component type. Of those having a reoperation, 80.3% (61/76) had an ORIF, which could greatly mask the size of this problem in many registries. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(2):144–150

Primary total hip replacement (THR) is a successful and common operation which orthopaedic trainees must demonstrate competence in prior to completion of training. This study aimed to determine the impact of operating surgeon grade and level of supervision on the incidence of 1-year patient mortality and all-cause revision following elective primary THR in a large UK training centre. National Joint Registry (NJR) data for all elective primary THR performed in a single University Teaching Hospital from 2005–2020 were used, with analysis performed on the 15-year dataset divided into 5-year temporal periods (B1 2005–2010, B2 2010–2015, B3 2015–2020). Outcome measures were mortality and revision surgery at one year, in relation to lead surgeon grade, and level of supervision for trainee-led operations. 9999 eligible primary THR were undertaken, of which 5526 (55.3%) were consultant led (CL), and 4473 (44.7%) trainees led (TL). Of TL, 2404 (53.7%) were non-consultant supervised (TU), and 2069 (46.3%) consultant supervised (TS). The incidence of 1-year patient mortality was 2.05% (n=205), and all-cause revision was 1.11% (n=111). There was no difference in 1-year mortality between TL (n=82, 1.8%) and CL (n=123, 2.2%) operations (p=0.20, OR 0.78, CI 0.55–1.10). The incidence of 1-year revision was not different for TL (n=56, 1.3%) and CL (n=55, 1.0%) operations (p=0.15, OR 1.37, CI 0.89–2.09). Overall, there was no temporal change for either outcome measure between TL or CL operations. A significant increase in revision within 1-year was observed in B3 between TU (n=17, 2.7%) compared to CL (n=17, 1.0%) operations (p=0.005, OR 2.81, CI 1.35–5.87). We found no difference in 1-year mortality or 1-year all-cause revision rate between trainee-led primary THR and consultant-led operations over the entire fifteen-year period. However, unsupervised trainee led THR in the most recent 5-year block (2015–2020) has a significantly increased risk of early revision, mainly due to instability and prosthetic joint infection. This suggests that modern surgical training is having a detrimental effect on THR patient outcomes. More research is needed to understand the reasons if this trend is to be reversed

Hip dysplasia is a common cause of hip pain in young adults. Pelvic osteotomy (PO) techniques are the gold standard for treating symptomatic patients, albeit technically demanding. This study aimed to (1) evaluate the 90-day complication rate, and (2) investigate the reasons, frequency and timing of reoperations following primary PO procedures. We retrospectively analysed the National Hospital Episode Statistics database, examining all patients aged over 14 who underwent PO in NHS England hospitals from 2010 to 2023. We identified index procedures and reoperations using relevant OPCS-4 codes. We analysed patient demographics, 90-day complications, and readmission rates for ipsilateral metalwork removal, revision PO, hip arthroscopy (HA), and THR conversion, and calculated the mean time to reoperations. This study included 1,348 PO cases (mean age: 28.7±9.1 years, 89.5% female). The mean hospital stay was 5.4±3.9 days, with a 90-day readmission rate of 0.52% at a mean of 51.0±17.2 days. The most common causes were infection (0.22%) and reoperation (0.15%). The 90-day rate of pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis was 0.074%. One patient died within 90 days. Overall, 810 patients (60.1%) were readmitted for a subsequent hip procedure at a mean of 2.12±1.90 years following their primary PO. Metalwork removal was required in 616 patients (45.7%) at a mean of 1.70±1.19 years. Readmission rates for revision PO, HA, and THR, were 4.23% (mean time: 2.89±0.82 years), 4.15% (mean time: 2.91±2.28 years) and 6.01% (mean time: 5.24±3.08 years) respectively. This study highlights a low 90-day complication rate following primary PO, but a high reoperation rate, mainly for metalwork removal. We provide the most up-to-date report of revision PO, HA and THR conversion rates in England. These findings provide valuable insight that can facilitate informed decision-making, expectation-setting, and post-operative planning, also establishing a benchmark for future quality improvement

Hip arthroscopy (HA) is an effective treatment for various hip conditions but has a steep learning curve and its effect on long-term joint preservation is unclear. This study uses population-level data to assess (1) the 90-day complication rate, and (2) the frequency and timing of revision HA, total hip replacement (THR), and pelvic osteotomy (PO) following primary HA. We performed a retrospective analysis of the National Hospital Episode Statistics database, examining all patients who underwent primary HA in NHS hospitals in England from 2010 to 2023 using relevant OPCS-4 codes. We evaluated patient demographics, 90-day complications, and reoperation rates for revision HA, THR, and PO. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed to calculate frequencies and average time to reoperations. We included 22,401 HA procedures in the study. The mean LOS was 0.82±2.04 days. The 90-day readmission rate was 0.17% at a mean of 54.4±8.1 days. The most common reasons for readmission were reoperation (0.071%), followed by infection (0.031%), pulmonary embolism (0.027%), pain (0.022%), bleeding (0.018%), and deep vein thrombosis (0.004%). One patient died within 90 days. Overall, 4942 patients (22.1%) required further surgery at a mean of 2.71±2.27 years. The rates of revision HA, conversion to THR, and PO were 6.94%, 14.6%, and 0.50% at a mean of 2.39±1.79, 2.87±2.46, and 2.26±1.80 years respectively. Female patients had higher rates of reoperation than males for conversion to THR (9.99% vs 4.63%), revision HA (4.92% vs 2.02%), and subsequent PO (0.43% vs. 0.06%) (p<0.001). This study demonstrates a low short-term complication rate after primary HA, supporting existing literature. However, a large proportion of patients required further surgery, especially females. These findings highlight the need for careful patient selection and counselling before HA to optimise outcomes, as well as further research on factors influencing longer-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness

Introduction. Total Hip Arthroplasty has been shown to have excellent long term outcomes, yet early reoperation remains a risk. The current study assesses the incidence, causes, and cost associated with early revision following elective primary THA in the US Medicare population. Methods. The study used the Limited Data Set (LDS) from the Centers for Medicate and Medicaid Services (CMS) to identify all primary THA (DRG 469/470) performed in the US (excluding Maryland) during 2016. All cases were followed for one year after the original date of operation to create a database of readmissions after surgery. These data allowed for the determination of the 1-year incidence and type of reoperation, the timing of reoperation, the admitting diagnosis, hospital utilization, and total cost. Results. There were 164,050 THA performed on Medicare patients in the US in 2016. After surgery, there were 24,728 associated readmissions during the 1-year follow-up, or a readmission rate of 15.1%. There were 5,646 readmissions with a procedure performed on the hip; this represents 23% of the total 1-year readmissions after surgery, or a reoperation rate of 3.4%. Admission for reoperation was the most common reason for readmission following elective primary THA. When looking at reoperations, fracture was the most common (41.69%). 45% of reoperations occur within the first 30 days, 74% of reoperations occur within the first 90 days, and 26% of reoperations occur between days 90 and 360. For reoperations, a primary diagnosis of infection was associated with the highest average total cost ($104,024). Conclusions. Revision after THA is both a frequent occurance and expensive one. Fractures are the most common diagnoses that lead to revision, followed by dislocation. Increased focus to reduce complications such as fracture and dislocation would have the most beneficial impact on the patient, as well as on the healthcare system. For any tables or figures, please contact the authors directly

Aims. Femoral cement-in-cement revision is a well described technique to reduce morbidity and complications in hip revision surgery. Traditional techniques for septic revision of hip arthroplasty necessitate removal of all bone cement from the femur. In our two centres, we have been using a cement-in-cement technique, leaving the distal femoral bone cement in selected patients for septic hip revision surgery, both for single and the first of two-stage revision procedures. A prerequisite for adoption of this technique is that the surgeon considers the cement mantle to be intimately fixed to bone without an intervening membrane between cement and host bone. We aim to report our experience for this technique. Methods. We have analyzed patients undergoing this cement-in-cement technique for femoral revision in infection, and present a consecutive series of 89 patients. Follow-up was undertaken at a mean of 56.5 months (24.0 to 134.7) for the surviving cases. Results. Seven patients (7.9%) required further revision for infection. Ten patients died of causes unrelated to their infection before their two-year review (mean 5.9 months; 0.9 to 18.6). One patient was lost to follow-up at five months after surgery, and two patients died of causes unrelated to their hip shortly after their two-year review was due without attending. Of the remaining patients, 69 remained infection-free at final review. Radiological review confirms the mechanical success of the procedure as previously described in aseptic revision, and postoperative Oxford Hip Scores suggest satisfactory functional outcomes. Conclusion. In conclusion, we found that retaining a well-fixed femoral cement mantle in the presence of infection and undertaking a cement-in-cement revision was successful in 82 of the patients (92.1%) in our series of 89, both in terms of eradication of infection and component fixation. These results are comparable to other more invasive techniques and offer significant potential benefits to the patient. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(2):212–220

Objectives. The Kaplan-Meier estimation is widely used in orthopedics to calculate the probability of revision surgery. Using data from a long-term follow-up study, we aimed to assess the amount of bias introduced by the Kaplan-Meier estimator in a competing risk setting. Methods. We describe both the Kaplan-Meier estimator and the competing risk model, and explain why the competing risk model is a more appropriate approach to estimate the probability of revision surgery when patients die in a hip revision surgery cohort. In our study, a total of 62 acetabular revisions were performed. After a mean of 25 years, no patients were lost to follow-up, 13 patients had undergone revision surgery and 33 patients died of causes unrelated to their hip. Results. The Kaplan-Meier estimator overestimates the probability of revision surgery in our example by 3%, 11%, 28%, 32% and 60% at five, ten, 15, 20 and 25 years, respectively. As the cumulative incidence of the competing event increases over time, as does the amount of bias. Conclusions. Ignoring competing risks leads to biased estimations of the probability of revision surgery. In order to guide choosing the appropriate statistical analysis in future clinical studies, we propose a flowchart

The purpose was to determine the lifetime risk of re-operation due to specific complications related to dual mobility using re-operation as a competing risk, excluding loosening, periprosthetic fracture, and infection.

1503 mono-block dual mobility total hip arthroplasty (DM-THAs). Defining the re-operation when anesthesia (for dislocation) and revision when the implant changed. Surgery (801 for primary, 702 for revision with 201 for recurrent dislocation and 501 for loosening) performed between 1990 and 2020 in average 81-year-old (range 50–102) patients, with 522 living patients at 10 years follow-up.

During the first month, outer dislocation (60 cases; 4%) was the cause re-operation (1% among primary and 6 % among revisions). Twenty-four intra-prosthetic dislocations (IPD) were an iatrogenic consequence of a failed closed reduction (reduction maneuver dissociating the inner head) with 1.6% revision.

Between 1 month and 1 year, 22 new outer dislocations, while 25 of the 60 “first month” dislocations had recurrent dislocation. Fifteen other IPDs as iatrogenic consequences were observed. At one year, the cumulative revision was 3% (49 of 82 dislocations).

Between 1- 10-year FU, 132 other dislocations, and 45 other revisions for dislocations were observed. Corrosion was another cause of revision (37 cases): between the cobalt-chromium shell and the femoral neck (23 hips), or 14 crevice corrosion between the trunnion and the metal head (trunnion damage).

In summary, at 10-year: dislocation first cause of re-operation (214 anesthesia, 14%), while among 131 revisions (8.9 %) the 55 iatrogenic intra-prosthetic dislocations were the first revision cause before 39 recurrent dislocations and 37 corrosions.

The 522 patients followed ten years or more had a 15% risk revision due to DM specific complications during their lifetime and 10% more risk associated with loosening (6%), periprosthetic fracture (2%) and infection (2%).

Aims. The aim of this large registry-based study was to compare mid-term survival rates of cemented femoral stems of different designs used in hemiarthroplasty for a fracture of the femoral neck. Patients and Methods. From the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register (NHFR), 20 532 primary cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasties, which were undertaken in patients aged > 70 years with a femoral neck fracture between 2005 and 2016, were included. Polished tapered stems (n = 12 065) (Exeter and CPT), straight stems (n = 5545) (Charnley, Charnley Modular, and Spectron EF), and anatomical stems (n = 2922) (Lubinus SP2) were included. The survival of the implant with any reoperation as the endpoint was calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method and hazard ratios (HRs), and the different indications for reoperation were calculated using Cox regression analysis. Results. The one-year survival was 96.0% (95% confidence interval (CI) 95.6 to 96.4) for the Exeter stem, 97.0% (95% CI 96.4 to 97.6) for the Lubinus SP2 stem, 97.6% (95% CI 97.0 to 98.2) for the Charnley stem, 98.1% (95% CI 97.3 to 98.9) for the Spectron EF stem, and 96.4% (95% CI 95.6 to 97.2) for the Charnley Modular stem, respectively. The hazard ratio for reoperation after one year was lower for Lubinus SP2 (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.97), Charnley (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.86), and Spectron EF stems (HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.67) compared with the Exeter stem. Reoperation for periprosthetic fracture occurred almost exclusively after the use of polished tapered stems. Conclusion. We were able to confirm that implant survival after cemented hemiarthroplasty for a hip fracture is high. Differences in rates of reoperation seem to favour anatomical and straight stems compared with polished tapered stems, which had a higher risk of periprosthetic fracture

Aims

Custom triflange acetabular components (CTACs) play an important role in reconstructive orthopaedic surgery, particularly in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) and pelvic tumour resection procedures. Accurate CTAC positioning is essential to successful surgical outcomes. While prior studies have explored CTAC positioning in rTHA, research focusing on tumour cases and implant flange positioning precision remains limited. Additionally, the impact of intraoperative navigation on positioning accuracy warrants further investigation. This study assesses CTAC positioning accuracy in tumour resection and rTHA cases, focusing on the differences between preoperative planning and postoperative implant positions.

Introduction. We investigated predictors of poor outcomes following metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty (MoMHA) revision surgery performed for adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD), to help inform the revision threshold and type of reconstruction. Patients and Methods. A retrospective cohort study was performed involving 346 MoMHAs revised for histologically confirmed ARMD at two specialist centres (245=hip resurfacing, 101=total hip arthroplasty). Numerous preoperative (blood metal ions and imaging) and intraoperative (findings, and components removed/implanted) factors were used to predict poor outcomes. Poor outcomes were postoperative complications (including re-revisions), 90-day mortality, and poor Oxford Hip Scores (<27/48). Multivariable logistic regression models for predicting poor outcomes were developed using stepwise selection methods. Results. Cumulative implant survival rate seven-years after ARMD revision was 87.0% (95% CI=81.0%-91.2%). Poor outcomes occurred in 39% (n=135). Shorter time (under four-years) from primary to revision surgery (odds ratio (OR)=2.12, CI=1.00–4.46) was the only preoperative predictor of poor outcomes. Pre-revision metal ions and imaging did not influence outcomes. Single-component revisions increased the risk of poor outcomes (acetabular or femoral vs. all component revisions; OR=2.99, CI=1.50–5.97). Intraoperative factors reducing the risk of poor outcomes included the posterior approach (OR=0.22, CI=0.10–0.49), revision head sizes ≥36mm (vs. <36mm: OR=0.37, CI=0.18–0.77), ceramic-on-polyethylene (OR vs. ceramic-on-ceramic=0.30, CI=0.14–0.66) and metal-on-polyethylene revision bearings (OR vs. ceramic-on-ceramic=0.37, CI=0.17–0.83). Discussion. This large cohort study demonstrated 39% of patients experience poor outcomes following MoMHA revision for ARMD. This information will help surgeons when counselling patient's pre-revision about the expected prognosis. No threshold exists for recommending ARMD revision, therefore surgeons must make decisions on an individual case basis. However, surgeons can make intraoperative decisions that influence outcomes following ARMD revision. Conclusion. We recommend optimal outcomes following ARMD revision may be achieved if surgeons use the posterior approach, revise all MoMHA components, and use ≥36mm ceramic-on-polyethylene or metal-on-polyethylene articulations

Aims

The aim of our study was to investigate the effect of asymmetric crosslinked polyethylene liner use on the risk of revision of cementless and hybrid total hip arthroplasties (THAs).

Aims. To determine the outcomes following revision surgery of metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties (MoMHA) performed for adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD), and to identify factors predictive of re-revision. Patients and Methods. We performed a retrospective observational study using National Joint Registry (NJR) data on 2535 MoMHAs undergoing revision surgery for ARMD between 2008 and 2014. The outcomes studied following revision were intra-operative complications, mortality and re-revision surgery. Predictors of re-revision were identified using competing-risk regression modelling. Results. Intra-operative complications occurred in 40 revisions (1.6%). The cumulative five-year patient survival rate was 95.9% (95% confidence intervals (CI) 92.3 to 97.8). Re-revision surgery was performed in 192 hips (7.6%). The cumulative five-year implant survival rate was 89.5% (95% CI 87.3 to 91.3). Predictors of re-revision were high body mass index at revision (subhazard ratio (SHR) 1.06 per kg/m. 2 . increase, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.09), modular component only revisions (head and liner with or without taper adapter; SHR 2.01, 95% CI 1.19 to 3.38), ceramic-on-ceramic revision bearings (SHR 1.86, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.80), and acetabular bone grafting (SHR 2.10, 95% CI 1.43 to 3.07). These four factors remained predictive of re-revision when the missing data were imputed. Conclusion. The short-term risk of re-revision following MoMHA revision surgery performed for ARMD was comparable with that reported in the NJR following all-cause non-MoMHA revision surgery. However, the factors predictive of re-revision included those which could be modified by the surgeon, suggesting that rates of failure following ARMD revision may be reduced further. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1020–7

Revision surgery of the hip was performed on 114 hips using an extensively porous-coated femoral component. Of these, 95 hips (94 patients) had a mean follow-up of 10.2 years (5 to 17). No cortical struts were used and the cortical index and the femoral cortical width were measured at different levels. There were two revisions for aseptic loosening. Survivorship at 12 years for all causes of failure was 96.9% (95% confidence interval 93.5 to 100) in the best-case scenario. Fibrous or unstable fixation was associated with major bone defects. The cortical index (p = 0.045) and the lateral cortical thickness (p = 0.008) decreased at the proximal level over time while the medial cortex increased (p = 0.001) at the proximal and distal levels. An increase in the proximal medial cortex was found in patients with an extended transtrochanteric osteotomy (p = 0.026) and in those with components shorter than 25 cm (p = 0.008). The use of the extensively porous-coated femoral component can provide a solution for difficult cases in revision surgery. Radiological bony ingrowth is common. Although without clinical relevance at the end of follow-up, the thickness of the medial femoral cortex often increased while that of the lateral cortex decreased. In cases in which a shorter component was used and in those undertaken using an extended trochanteric osteotomy, there was a greater increase in thickness of the femoral cortex over time

Outcomes following metal-on-metal hip replacement (MoMHR) revision surgery for adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD) have been poor, and inferior compared with non-ARMD revisions. Subsequently, surgeons and worldwide authorities widely recommended early revision for ARMD, with a lower surgical threshold adopted. However, the impact of early surgery for ARMD is unknown. We compared the rates of adverse outcomes following MoMHR revision surgery in matched ARMD and non-ARMD patients. We performed a retrospective observational study using data from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. All MoMHR patients subsequently undergoing revision surgery for any indication between August 2008 and August 2014 were eligible. ARMD and non-ARMD revisions were matched one-to-one for multiple potential confounding factors using propensity scores. Adverse outcomes following revision surgery (intra-operative complications, mortality, re-revision surgery) were compared between matched groups using regression analysis. In 2,576 matched MoMHR revisions (ARMD=1,288 and non-ARMD=1,288), intra-operative complications were similar between ARMD (2.4%) and non-ARMD (2.5%) revisions (odds ratio=0.97, 95% CI=0.59–1.60; p=0.899). All-cause mortality rates were lower following ARMD revision compared with non-ARMD revision (hazard ratio (HR)=0.43, 95% CI=0.22–0.86; p=0.018). All-cause re-revision rates were lower following ARMD revision compared with non-ARMD revision (HR=0.52, 95% CI=0.36–0.75; p<0.001). Compared with ARMD revision (5-years=94.3%), MoMHR revisions for infection (5-years=81.2%) and dislocation/subluxation (5-years=81.9%) had the lowest implant survival rates. Contrary to previous observations, MoMHRs revised for ARMD have approximately half the risk of re-revision and death compared to non-ARMD revisions. We suspect worldwide regulatory authorities have positively influenced outcomes following ARMD revision by widely recommending that surgeons exercise a lower revision threshold. Our findings suggest the threshold for ARMD revision surgery need not be lowered further. The high risk of failure following MoMHR revision for infection and dislocation is concerning

Recent studies have reported on non-metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty (non-MoMHA) patients requiring revision surgery for adverse reactions to metal debris (ARMD). Although the outcomes following revision surgery for ARMD in MoMHA patients are known to generally be poor, little evidence exists regarding outcomes following non-MoMHA revision surgery performed for ARMD. We determined the outcomes following non-MoMHA revision surgery performed for ARMD, and identified predictors of re-revision. We performed a retrospective observational study using data from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. All primary non-MoMHA patients who subsequently underwent revision surgery for ARMD between 2008–2014 were included (n=185). Outcome measures following ARMD revision were intraoperative complications, mortality, and re-revision surgery. Predictors of re-revision surgery were identified using Cox regression analysis. Intra-operative complications occurred in 6.0% (n=11) of ARMD revisions. The cumulative 4-year patient survival rate was 98.2% (95% CI=92.9–99.5%). Re-revision surgery was performed in 13.5% (n=25) of hips at a mean time of 1.2 years (range 0.1–3.1 years) following ARMD revision. Infection (32%), dislocation/subluxation (24%), and aseptic loosening (24%) were the commonest re-revision indications. The cumulative 4-year implant survival rate was 83.8% (95% CI=76.7%-88.9%). Significant predictors of re-revision were: multiple revision indications (Hazard Ratio (HR)=2.78; 95% CI=1.03–7.49; p=0.043), incomplete revision procedures (including modular component exchange only) (HR=5.76; 95% CI=1.28–25.9; p=0.022), and ceramic-on-polyethylene revision bearings (HR=3.08; 95% CI=1.01–9.36; p=0.047). Non-MoMHA patients undergoing ARMD revision have a high short-term risk of re-revision. Infection, dislocation/subluxation, and aseptic loosening were the commonest re-revision indications. Furthermore, important and potentially modifiable predictors of future re-revision were identified. Although the poor prognostic factors identified require validation in future studies, our findings may be used to counsel patients about the risks associated with ARMD revision surgery, and guide decisions about the reconstructive procedure

The mechanical performance of the cement-in-cement interface in revision surgery has not been fully investigated. The quantitative effect posed by interstitial fluids and roughening of the primary mantle remains unclear. We have analysed the strength of the bilaminar cement-bone interface after exposure of the surface of the primary mantle to roughening and fluid interference. The end surfaces of cylindrical blocks of cement were machined smooth (Ra = 200 nm) or rough (Ra = 5 μm) and exposed to either different volumes of water and carboxymethylcellulose (a bone-marrow equivalent) or left dry. Secondary blocks were cast against the modelled surface. Monoblocks of cement were used as a control group. The porosity of the samples was investigated using micro-CT. Samples were exposed to a single shearing force to failure. The mean failure load of the monoblock control was 5.63 kN (95% confidence interval (CI) 5.17 to 6.08) with an estimated shear strength of 36 MPa. When small volumes of any fluid or large volumes were used, the respective values fell between 4.66 kN and 4.84 kN with no significant difference irrespective of roughening (p > 0.05). Large volumes of carboxymethylcellulose significantly weakened the interface. Roughening in this group significantly increased the strength with failure loads of 2.80 kN (95% CI 2.37 to 3.21) compared with 0.86 kN (95% CI 0.43 to 1.27) in the smooth variant. Roughening of the primary mantle may not therefore be as crucial as has been previously thought in clinically relevant circumstances

There is still little information on the histological characteristics of the acetabular bone tissue after failure of the primary prosthetic component. The purpose of this study is to characterize the viability and quality of the acetabular bone tissue in patients undergoing acetabular revision for aseptic loosening of uncemented components.

19 patients were enrolled: 14 hip revisions and 5 primary total hip arthroplasty. Samples collecting: three acetabular bone biopsy of patients were collected at the time of surgery with a 8G diameter needle after reaming. Histological evaluation: all samples, after removing the mineral component, were cut longitudinally with a thickness section of 5μm and colored with hematoxylin-eosin dichromic dye. Histological evaluation was done by optical microscopy with 40× magnification. Five bone quality classes were developed by evaluating percentage of aseptic necrosis, percentage of active osteoblasts, presence of osteopenia, presence of osteoclasts, absence of intramedullary hematopoietic component. Histological evaluation: the bone quality of cases was significantly poorer than the controls. The differences found were statistically significant between the two groups for percentage of necrosis (p=0.0033), percentage of active osteoblasts (p=0.0071) and presence of osteopenia (p=0.037).

Overall bone quality was significantly worse in the study group due reduced viability, overturn of lamellar structures, reduced amount of intramedullary hematopoietic component in respect to the controls; this could result in poor ability of the host bone to interact with the implanted components.