Introduction. Dislocation as a primary cause of revision has been on the increase in Sweden (14% in 2014). The increasing use of Dual Mobility cups (DMC) could well be explained by the increased revision burden due to dislocation, patients undergoing revision having increased comorbidities and reports that dual articular cup designs reduce the risk of dislocation. The aim of this study was to analyze the change in utilization pattern of the dual articular designs used in acetabular revision surgery in Sweden. The short-term survival of DMC was compared to traditional designs. Patients/Materials & Methods. During years 2004–2014, 1111 (925 cemented) revisions performed with a DMC design were reported to SHAR. About half (n=426) of these cases were first time revisions performed due to dislocation. During the same time period 520 dislocations were revised for dislocation using a standard cemented cup. There was no differences regarding the age, gender and primary diagnosis (p≥0.12) between the two groups. A second cup revision for all reasons and specifically for dislocation was used as end-point. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed. Results. Survival analysis at 5 years for all reasons (91.6% versus 87.9% p=0.002) and especially for reoperation because of instability (96.7 versus 90.9 p<0.0005) favors the DMC group. Discussion. We found a lower risk for a second revision when a dual mobility cup is used in revisions performed due to dislocation. Conclusion. Our findings indicate that use of a cemented DMC could be considered in first time revisions performed due to dislocation. Longer follow-up is needed to establish any long-term clinical advantages when dual mobility cups are used in revisions

The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to determine whether the five-year results of hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) in Canada justified the continued use of HRA; and second, to identify whether greater refinement of patient selection was warranted.

This was a retrospective cohort study that involved a review of 2773 HRAs performed between January 2001 and December 2008 at 11 Canadian centres. Cox’s proportional hazards models were used to analyse the predictors of failure of HRA. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was performed to predict the cumulative survival rate at five years. The factors analysed included age, gender, body mass index, pre-operative hip pathology, surgeon’s experience, surgical approach, implant sizes and implant types. The most common modes of failure were also analysed.

The 2773 HRAs were undertaken in 2450 patients: 2127 in men and 646 in women. The mean age at operation was 50.5 years (sd 8.72; 18 to 82) and mean follow-up was 3.4 years (sd 2.1; 2.0 to 10.1). At the last follow-up a total of 101 HRAs (3.6%) required revision. Using revision for all causes of failure as the endpoint, Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed a cumulative survival of 96.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 96.1 to 96.9) at five years. With regard to gender, the five-year overall survival was 97.4% in men (95% CI 97.1 to 97.7) and 93.6% in women (95% CI 92.6 to 94.6). Female gender, smaller femoral components, specific implant types and a diagnosis of childhood hip problems were associated with higher rates of failure. The most common cause of failure was fracture of the femoral neck, followed by loosening of the femoral component.

The failure rates of HRA at five years justify the ongoing use of this technique in men. Female gender is an independent predictor of failure, and a higher failure rate at five years in women leads the authors to recommend this technique only in exceptional circumstances for women.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1044–50.

We determined the midterm survival, incidence of peri-prosthetic fracture and the enhancement of the width of the femur when combining struts and impacted bone allografts in 24 patients (25 hips) with severe femoral bone loss who underwent revision hip surgery. The pre-operative diagnosis was aseptic loosening in 16 hips, second-stage reconstruction in seven, peri-prosthetic fracture in one and stem fracture in one hip. A total of 14 hips presented with an Endoklinik grade 4 defect and 11 hips a grade 3 defect. The mean pre-operative Merle D’Aubigné and Postel score was 5.5 points (1 to 8).

The survivorship was 96% (95% confidence interval 72 to 98) at a mean of 54.5 months (36 to 109). The mean functional score was 17.3 points (16 to 18). One patient in which the strut did not completely bypass the femoral defect was further revised using a long cemented stem due to peri-prosthetic fracture at six months post-operatively. The mean subsidence of the stem was 1.6 mm (1 to 3). There was no evidence of osteolysis, resorption or radiolucencies during follow-up in any hip. Femoral width was enhanced by a mean of 41% (19% to 82%). A total of 24 hips had partial or complete bridging of the strut allografts.

This combined biological method was associated with a favourable survivorship, a low incidence of peri-prosthetic fracture and enhancement of the width of the femur in revision total hip replacement in patients with severe proximal femoral bone loss.

Many different lengths of stem are available for use in primary total hip replacement, and the morphology of the proximal femur varies greatly. The more recently developed shortened stems provide a distribution of stress which closely mimics that of the native femur. Shortening the femoral component potentially comes at the cost of decreased initial stability. Clinical studies on the performance of shortened cemented and cementless stems are promising, although long-term follow-up studies are lacking. We provide an overview of the current literature on the anatomical features of the proximal femur and the biomechanical aspects and clinical outcomes associated with the length of the femoral component in primary hip replacement, and suggest a classification system for the length of femoral stems.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:442-8.

Between 1990 and 2000, 123 hips in 110 patients were reconstructed for aseptic loosening using impaction bone grafting with frozen, irradiated, morsellised femoral heads and cemented acetabular components. This series was reported previously at a mean follow-up of five years. We have extended this follow-up and now describe the outcome of 86 hips in 74 patients at a mean of ten years. There have been 19 revisions, comprising nine for infection, seven for aseptic loosening and three for dislocation. In surviving acetabular reconstructions, union of the graft had occurred in 64 of 67 hips (95.5%).

Survival analysis for all indications at ten years was 83.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 68 to 89) and 71.3% (95% CI 58 to 84) at 15 years.

Acetabular reconstruction using irradiated allograft and a cemented acetabular component is an effective method of reconstruction, providing results in the medium- to long-term comparable with those of reported series where non-irradiated freshly-frozen bone was used.