Subcapital fractures about the hip continue to be a common clinical scenario with which we all face. There are estimated to be over 350,000 hip fractures annually in the U.S. with 40% being displaced femoral neck fractures. The mean cost is over $30,000. Optimizing surgical care is essential with the overall goal being to perform the most effective treatment with the lowest risk of reoperation that provides the best postoperative function and pain relief. In the “young” (which is often defined as whatever age is younger than you!) reduction and internal fixation is often the most effective retaining the native femoral head. The risk of non-union and AVN is often less than potential complications that can follow an arthroplasty with 40% of displaced fractures treated with ORIF eventually requiring reoperation. Essentially for every 100 patients that undergo ORIF for displaced femoral neck fracture, choosing arthroplasty instead results in 17 conversions avoided. In the “elderly” in general we treat all displaced fractures with a total hip replacement which reduced re-admissions and is more cost effective for displaced femoral neck fractures. Aside from the medical morbidity following an arthroplasty dislocation is the primary concern. We have found the anterolateral approach reduces this significantly. Non-displaced fractures that are valgus impacted and biomechanically stable are treated with cannulated screws. Perhaps it can be argued that a hemiarthroplasty (bipolar or monopolar) has a lower risk of dislocation compared to a total hip replacement if performed by a surgical team with less frequent total hip replacement experience. However, total hip replacement results in less pain and better function when the patients are independent with intact mental status (patient not the surgeon…!). My algorithm is non-displaced valgus impacted or “stable” fractures undergo cannulated screws and the displaced fractures receive a total hip arthroplasty via an anterolateral approach

There is continuing debate among orthopedists regarding the appropriate treatment of femoral neck fractures, open reduction internal fixation (ORIF), Total hip arthroplasty (THA) or hemiarthroplasty. In 2003 310,000 patients were hospitalized for hip fracture in the United States and about one-third were treated with total hip arthroplasty. Worldwide, the total number of hip fractures is expected to surpass 6 million by the year 2050. In a survey distributed by the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, and of the 381 members who responded, 85% preferred hemiarthroplasty, 2% preferred ORIF and 13% preferred THA. The decision to perform internal fixation, hemiarthroplasty, or THA is based on comminution of the fracture activity level and independence, bone quality, presence of rheumatoid or degenerative arthritis, and mental status. Evidence based practice indicates that in a young patient with good bone stock and a fracture with relatively low comminution an ORIF is the treatment of choice. If the patient has a comminuted fracture with poor bone quality, minimal DJD, no RA, and low activity demand a hemiarthroplasty is a reasonable choice. If the patient has a comminuted fracture with poor bone quality, DJD and high activity demand a total hip replacement is a reasonable choice.

Over the past decade there has been a shift in the approach to management of many femoral neck fractures. As noted by Miller et al. those trends are reflected in the practice patterns of surgeons applying for board certification through the American Board of Orthopaedic Surgeons. From 1999 to 2011 there was a trend toward total hip arthroplasty and corresponding small decreases in the use of hemi-arthroplasty and internal fixation for treatment of femoral neck fractures. For many years the treatment approach has been a simple diagnosis-related algorithm predicated upon classification of the fracture as displaced (historically treated with hemi-arthroplasty) or non-displaced (historically treated with internal fixation). More recently, however, the focus has shifted to a patient-centered approach. In the patient-centered approach factors such as age, functional demands, pre-existent hip disease and bone quality should all be considered. In the contemporary setting it is still important to distinguish between displaced and non-displaced fracture patterns. Non-displaced femoral neck fractures, regardless of patient age or activity, are well-suited to closed reduction and internal fixation, most commonly with three cannulated screws. The union rate is high in non-displaced fractures treated with internal fixation and the benefits of preserving the native hip joint are substantial. Displaced femoral neck fractures in younger active patients, particularly those without pre-existent hip arthritis, are best treated with early anatomic reduction and internal fixation. While a subgroup of young, active patients who undergo ORIF may fail, the benefits of native hip preservation in that group are again substantial. Displaced femoral neck fractures in older patients or those with substantial pre-existing hip arthritis are best treated with arthroplasty. The biggest practice change has been the trend to total hip arthroplasty as opposed to hemi-arthroplasty for a subgroup of patients. Total hip arthroplasty is now favored in almost all active, cognitively well-functioning patients as the degree of pain relief is better and the risk of reoperation is lower in the current era (32mm and 36mm femoral heads). Hemi-arthroplasty, either uni-polar or bi-polar, remains an appropriate treatment for cognitively impaired patients who also have limited functional demands in whom the risk of dislocation is particularly high.

To properly care for femoral neck fractures, the surgeon must decide which fractures are to be fixed and which fractures will require a prosthesis. In addition, the type of prosthesis, hemiarthroplasty versus total hip arthroplasty must be selected. Total hip arthroplasty is an option in the active elderly.

The literature supports internal fixation in non-displaced fractures. Current literature supports the fact that ORIF of displaced femoral neck fractures results in failure and re-operation of 20% to 30%. By considering arthroplasty when the patient has multiple co-morbidities including renal disease, diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis and severe osteoporosis the re-operation rate can be reduced significantly. The single most important factor in preventing failure with fixation is an anatomic reduction. A femoral neck fracture left in varus is doomed to failure and re-operation.

A prosthesis should be used in most displaced femoral neck fractures in patients physiologically older than 65. In active elderly patients total hip replacement should be considered. In elderly patients with multiple co-morbidities who are relatively inactive in a nursing home or lower level community ambulators, a hemi-prosthesis should be considered. The decision-making process is always shared with the patient.

When a prosthetic replacement is performed, the low level nursing home or community ambulator who is not expected to live longer than six to seven years is a candidate for a cemented hemi-arthroplasty. Studies report a 25% – 30% re-operation rate in hemi-arthroplasty if the patient survives greater than six to seven years. In the active elderly with little co-morbidity, a total hip replacement should be used. This is not only cost effective but provides the best pain relief of any of the options for treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures. Treatment of femoral neck fractures remains a challenge but the surgeon must select the proper treatment based on fracture displacement, physiologic age of the patient as well as co-morbidities of the patient.

In 2000, Reinhold Ganz developed a surgical technique for treating slipped capital femoral epiphysis using his surgical hip dislocation approach to facilitate anatomical reconstruction of the slipped epiphysis—reportedly, without risk of avascular necrosis. This technique is now being adopted cautiously in paediatric orthopaedic centres internationally.

The technique will be described and early results presented. Complications and their treatments will also be discussed.

Early experience suggests morbidity following the procedure is not insignificant and until more corroborating safety data is available, the author suggests this technically demanding surgery should only be offered to children whose significant deformity would otherwise result in childhood disability.

Anatomic reduction (subcapital re-alignment osteotomy) via surgical hip dislocation – increasingly popular. While the reported AVN rates are very low, experiences seem to differ greatly between centres. We present our early experience with the first 29 primary cases and a modified fixation technique.

We modified the fixation from threaded Steinman pins to cannulated 6.5mm fully-threaded screws: retrograde guidewire placement before reduction of the head ensured an even spread in the femoral neck and head. The mean PSA (posterior slip angle) at presentation (between 12/2008 and 01/2011) was overall 68° (45–90°). 59% (17/29) were stable slips (mean PSA 68°), and 41% (12/29) were unstable slips unable to mobilise (mean PSA 67°). The vascularity of the femoral head was assessed postoperatively with a bone scan including tomography.

The slip angle was corrected to a mean PSA of 5.8° (7° anteversion to 25° PSA). We encountered no complications related to our modified fixation technique.

All cases with a well vascularised femoral head on the post-operative bone scan (15/17 stable slips and 8/12 unstable slips) healed with excellent short term results.

Both stable slips with decreased vascularity on bone scan (2/17, 12%) had been longstanding severe slips with retrospectively suspected partial closure of the physis, which has been described as a factor for increased risk of avascular necrosis (AVN). One of these cases was complicated by a posterior redislocation due to acetabular deficiency. In the unstable group, 4/12 cases (33%) had avascular heads intra-operatively and cold postoperative bone scans, 3 have progressed to AVN and collapse.

Anatomic reduction while sparing the blood supply of the femoral head is a promising concept with excellent short term results in most stable and many unstable SCFE cases. Extra vigilance for closed/closing physes in longstanding severe cases seems advisable. Regardless of treatment, some unstable cases inevitably go on to AVN.

Displaced femoral neck fractures can have devastating impacts on quality of life and patient function. Evidence for optimal surgical approach is far from definitive. The Hip Fracture Evaluation with Alternatives of Total Hip Arthroplasty versus Hemi-Arthroplasty (HEALTH) trial aimed to evaluate unplanned secondary procedures following total hip arthroplasty (THA) versus hemi-arthroplasty (HA) within two years of initial surgery for displaced femoral neck fractures. Secondary objectives evaluated differences in patient function, health-related quality of life, mortality, and hip-related complications HEALTH is a large randomized controlled trial that included 1,495 patients across 81 centers in 10 countries. Patients aged 50 years or older with displaced femoral neck fractures received either THA or HA. Participants were followed for 24 months post-fracture and a Central Adjudication Committee adjudicated fracture eligibility, technical placement of prosthesis, additional surgical procedures, hip-related complications, and mortality. The primary analyses were a Cox proportional hazards model with time to the primary study endpoint as the outcome and THA versus HA as the independent variable. Using multi-level linear models with three levels (centre, patient, and time), with patient and centre entered as random effects, the effect of THA versus HA on quality of life (Short Form-12 (SF-12) and EQ-5D), function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)), and mobility (Timed Up and Go Test (TUG)) were estimated separately. The majority of patients were female (70.1%), 70 years of age or older (80.2%), and able to ambulate without the aid of an assistive device before their fracture (74.4%), and the injury in the majority of the patients was a subcapital femoral neck fracture (61.9%). The primary end point occurred in 57 of 718 patients (7.9%) who were randomly assigned to THA and 60 of 723 patients (8.3%) who were randomly assigned to HA (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 1.40; p=0.79). Hip instability or dislocation occurred in 34 patients (4.7%) assigned to total hip arthroplasty and 17 patients (2.4%) assigned to hemi- arthroplasty (hazard ratio, 2.00; 99% CI, 0.97 to 4.09). Function, as measured with the total WOMAC total score, pain score, stiffness score, and function score, modestly favored THA over HA. Mortality was similar in the two treatment groups (14.3% among the patients assigned to THA and 13.1% among those assigned to HA, p=0.48). Serious adverse events occurred in 300 patients (41.8%) assigned to THA and in 265 patients (36.7%) assigned to HA. Among independently ambulating patients with displaced femoral neck fractures, the incidence of secondary procedures did not differ significantly between patients who were randomly assigned to undergo THA and those who were assigned to undergo HA, and THA provided a clinically unimportant improvement over HA in function and quality of life over 24 months

Despite recent advances in the management of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE), controversy remains about the treatment of choice for unstable slips. Surgical dislocation and open reduction has the advantage of identifying and preserving the blood supply of femoral head thereby potentially reducing the risk of avascular necrosis, (AVN). There is large variation in the literature from several small series about reported AVN rates ranging from two to 66% for unstable SCFE treated with surgical dislocation. The aim of our study was to analyze our experience with acute open reduction and internal fixation of unstable acute and unstable acute on chronic slips using the technique of surgical dislocation described by Professor Reinhold Ganz. A retrospective review of 11 patients (12 hips) treated by surgical dislocation, reduction and pinning as the primary procedure for unstable acute and unstable acute on chronic SCFE in a tertiary referral children's hospital was undertaken. This represents the entire series treated in this manner from September 2007 to January 2018. These procedures were performed by a team of Orthopaedic surgeons with significant experience performing surgical dislocation of the hip including patients with chronic SCFE, Perthes' disease, impingement and acetabular fractures. Demographic data, intraoperative records, postoperative notes and radiographs including details of subsequent surgery were reviewed. There were seven boys and four girls with mean age of 13.4 years, range 11 to 15 years at the time of surgical dislocation. Out of 12 hips, two had acute unstable slip while the remaining 10 had acute on chronic unstable slip. Six patients had good or excellent results. The remaining six patients developed AVN of which three patients had total hip replacement at six months, 17 months and 18 months following primary procedure. Seven patients required more than one operation. Three patients lost their correction and required re fixation despite surgical dislocation, reduction and fixation being their primary procedure. This series demonstrates a high percentage of AVN (50%) in severe unstable SCFE treated with surgical dislocation despite careful attention to retinacular flap development and intra operative doppler studies. This is in direct contrast to our experience with subcapital reorientation with surgical dislocation in stable slips where excellent results were achieved with a low rate of AVN. Pre-operative imaging with MRI and perfusion studies may identify where ischemia has occurred and might influence operative treatment. Based on our results, we do not recommend routine use of surgical dislocation in unstable SCFE. This technique requires further scrutiny to define the operative indications in unstable SCFE

Despite the best of technique, when faced with a sub-capital or per-trochanteric fracture, inevitably there are failures of proximal fixation. These situations provide unique challenges for the reconstructive surgeon. While there are specific issues related to either sub-capital or per-trochanteric fractures, there also are many commonalities. The causes of failure are nonunion, malunion, failure of fixation or avascular necrosis. In all cases, it is imperative to rule out infection. Since the surgery is now elective, the patient's medical status must be optimised prior to the intervention. Basic surgical principles apply to both fracture types. Use the old incision (if possible) and choose an approach that can be extensile. Of course, the old hardware needs to be removed – this task can be quite frustrating, so good preparation and patience is imperative. Retrieve old operative notes to identify the type of hardware so that any special tools needed are available. Hardware can be intra-osseous in location and excavation of the hardware may require bone osteotomy. These patients are at higher risk of post-operative dislocation, so absolute hip stability must be achieved and confirmed in the OR. Bigger heads and dual mobility options improve stability provided that the components are properly positioned and offset and leg length are restored. Subcapital fractures provide certain specific issues related to stem choice. While, my bias is towards THA because of better chance of complete pain relief, especially in community ambulators, certainly bipolar arthroplasties can be a satisfactory solution. Stem fixation can be either cemented or cementless. For per-trochanteric fractures in younger patients, repeat osteosynthesis should be considered if the femoral head is viable. Bone deformity – trochanteric overhang, shaft offset – may necessitate an osteotomy as part of the reconstruction. While proximal fixation primary type stems are often possible, distal fixation revision stems may be required. Any bone defects related to screw holes should be bypassed by the femoral component

Despite the best of technique when faced with a sub-capital or per-trochanteric fracture, inevitably there are failures of proximal fixation. These situations provide unique challenges for the reconstructive surgeon. While there are specific issues related to either sub-capital or per-trochanteric fractures, there also are many commonalities. The causes of failure are nonunion, malunion, failure of fixation or avascular necrosis. In all cases, it is imperative to rule out infection. Since the surgery is now elective, the patient's medical status must be optimised prior to the intervention. Basic surgical principles apply to both fracture types. Use the old incision (if possible) and choose an approach that can be extensile. Of course, the old hardware needs to be removed – this task can be quite frustrating, so good preparation and patience is imperative. Retrieve old OP notes to identify the type of hardware so that any special tools needed are available. Hardware can be intra-osseous in location and excavation of the hardware may require bone osteotomy. These patients are at higher risk of postoperative dislocation, so absolute hip stability must be achieved and confirmed in the OR. Bigger heads and dual mobility options improve stability provided that the components are properly positioned and offset and leg length are restored. Subcapital fractures provide certain specific issues related to stem choice. While, my bias is towards total hip arthroplasty because of better chance of complete pain relief, especially in community ambulators, certainly bipolar arthroplasties can be a satisfactory solution. Stem fixation can be either cemented or cementless. For per-trochanteric fractures in younger patients, repeat osteosynthesis should be considered if the femoral head is viable. Bone deformity – trochanteric overhang, shaft offset – may necessitate an osteotomy as part of the reconstruction. While proximal fixation primary type stems are often possible, distal fixation revision stems may be required. Any bone defects related to screw holes should be bypassed by the femoral component

Report of a case of migrating periprosthetic infection from a hip replacement to a contralateral knee joint undergoing a total knee replacement. We present a 74-year old female patient who underwent a total hip arthroplasty of the left hip after a subcapital fracture of the femur. Four months after the index procedure the patient presented with signs and symptoms of infection of the operated joint. Staph aureus and Enterococcus faecalis were recognized as the infecting bacteria. The implants were removed, cement spacers were placed and a total hip arthroplasty was performed again after three months. Unfortunately, infection ensued again and the patient underwent three more procedures until the joint was considered clean and t he hip remained flail without implants. The patient elected to undergo a total knee arthroplasty due to severe osteoarthritis of right knee. Intraoperatively tissue samples were taken and sent for cultures which identified Enterococcus faecalis present in the knee joint. Enterococcus migrated from the infected hip to nonoperated knee joint. Intravenous antibiotics were administered for three weeks but the knee presented with infection of the arthroplasty ten months after its insertion. The implants were removed the joint was debrided and cement spacers were inserted. The patient decided not to proceed with another procedure and she remains with the cement spacers in her knee. Rare report of migrating periprosthetic infection. Nosocomial enterococci acquired resistance cannot be ruled out. Unique characteristics in enterococci antibiotic resistance and biofilm formation

Management of the young adult hip pathologies is a special entity in orthopaedic surgical practice that needs special emphasis and consideration. A wide range of pathological and traumatic conditions occur in the young adult hip that lead to functional disability and the development of premature osteoarthritis. Proper surgical interference when the hip is still in the pre-arthritic stage restores function to the young hip and protects it from early degenerative changes, and hence the anticipated need for future joint replacement surgery is prevented. Accurate estimation of the biomechanical error combined with careful understanding of the hip joint biology is the cornerstone of success of any hip preservation surgery ever performed to save the young adult hip. Safe surgical hip dislocation approach was adopted as one of the tools in the hands of the hip preservation surgeon to treat a broad spectrum of intra-articular hip pathologies like Perthes disease and severe forms of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE). Osteo-chondroplasty at the head-neck junction with relative femoral neck lengthening for Perthes disease, and Subcapital re-orientation of severe SCFE based on its retinacular vascular pedicle are often performed via the surgical hip dislocation approach. The approach is also useful with certain types of acetabular fractures that enables fixation of dual-column fractures via single approach with intra-articular visualization for the accuracy of reduction and hardware placement. The 4 cm mini-open direct anterior approach is ideal for the surgical treatment of cases with cam and/or pincer types of femoro-acetabular impingement. Peri-articular osteotomies performed either on the acetabular or the femoral sides of the hip joint are extremely useful in the correction of the biomechanical error that led to an existing hip pathology. Periacetabular osteotomies are commonly performed to treat dysplasia of the young hip. Proximal femoral osteotomies are commonly performed to treat a wide range of hip pathologies including non-unions of femoral neck fractures in the young adult. Correction of the biomechanical error at the proper timing ensures normalization of the hip joint loading conditions and range of motion that leads to reversal of the pathologic process and prevention of osteoarthritis. A hip joint replacement would have an unknown but certainly a finite life, whereas a young hip that has healed after hip preservation surgery would definitely last for a lifetime

The surgical approach that is adequate for a primary total hip replacement may need to be modified to achieve a more extensile exposure as required for the revision procedure. A straightforward revision total hip replacement procedure can become quite complex when implant removal is attempted without adequate skill, instrumentation, or exposure. The most commonly used approaches in total hip replacement revision surgery are the transtrochanteric, posterolateral, and anterolateral. Although the effects of these approaches on the long-term clinical survival of the prosthetic composite are not completely clear, surgical approach does affect dislocation rates, trochanteric nonunion rates, and other indicators of clinical success. Transtrochanteric Approach - Three variations of the transtrochanteric approach exist: A) The classic Charnley trochanteric approach was popularised by virtue of its use in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and, therefore, was easily applied to revision THA. This approach allows excellent visualization of the lateral shaft of the femur, thus enhancing implant and cement removal. However, the classic Charnley approach is associated with a high incidence of trochanteric nonunion. Reattachment of the atrophied trochanteric fragment often requires adjunct fixation such as cables, hooks, or bolts. These devices can subsequently break, migrate, or generate particulate debris which, in turn, is capable of producing extensive granuloma. B) The trochanteric slide is accomplished by an anteromedial inclination of the osteotomy, thus providing a more stable interface for reattachment. The trochanteric slide offers the advantage of maintaining muscle continuity. The disadvantage of this technique is decreased visualization of the acetabulum. Adjunct fixation of the trochanter is also required with this approach. C) By creating a 6 cm to 12 cm distal extension to the trochanteric fragment, a large lateral window is developed which enhances both prosthesis and cement removal. Subsequently, trochanteric fixation is enhanced because the extended fragment increases the surface area available for fixation. Because the extended trochanteric osteotomy requires a larger bone resection, proximal femoral bone stock can be compromised. As a result, proximal prosthetic support with a tapered device can force the trochanteric fragment laterally, increasing the likelihood of nonunion. When an extended trochanteric osteotomy is used, the patient's postoperative physical therapy and rehabilitation course should be modified to protect the healing trochanteric fragment. Posterolateral Surgical Approach is used commonly in revision THA. The technique is popular because it is used widely for endoprosthetic replacement in the treatment of subcapital fractures. Also, the posterolateral approach is quite popular for primary THA. This approach has the advantage of maintaining the integrity of the abductor mechanism. Although femoral exposure is adequate, acetabular exposure can be limited. Also, this approach is associated with an increased incidence of dislocation. Another concern is its close proximity to the sciatic nerve, thus predisposing the patient to the risk of nerve injury. Anterolateral Surgical Approach has the advantage of improved visualization of the acetabulum and femur without the attending trochanteric complications and proximity to the sciatic nerve. This approach is associated with a low incidence of dislocation. However, the abductor muscle is divided or split and, therefore, abductor dysfunction can occur post-operatively. There also can be an increased incidence of heterotopic ossification, but it avoids the problem of trochanteric nonunion

Collo MIS is a new short stem created to achieve minimal metaepiphyseal invasiveness, to respect the joint physiology, to get optimal primary stability and osteointegration. This stem needs a subcapital osteotomy to respect and preserve the physiologic anteversion of the femoral neck; the technique provide compactation of the cancellous bone of the greater trochanter using just compactors and not rasps during the femur preparation and the stem has to match the calcar curvature to get the right position. This stem has been designed with a lateral wedge to ensure a great primary stability in the femoral neck. Since November 2008 at Niguarda Hospital we have implanted 350 prosthesis in cooperation with Frankfurt Hospital. Patients age varies form 26 to 80 years old with a mean age of 61 y.o. This stem has to be implanted in patients with good bone quality to achieve the compactation of the cancellous bone. We have operated patients affected mostly by coaxrthrosis and just in few cases by dysplasia (Crowe 1); contraindications are represented by a CCD angle less than 120° and more than 140° because of the stem morphology, severe osteoporosis, dymorphism, and dysplasia (Crowe 2,3,4). We have evaluated the offset and CCD angle pre and post op that resulted mostly increased after surgery (average CCD angle +6,15°, offset + 5.95 mm). In the post-op we normally give partial weight bearing after 1 day and the full weight bearing after 20 days. The mean HSS score before surgery was of 57.5 points and after 1 year of 98 points. The complications we have found in these study were: 11 cases of dysmetrias less than 1 cm, 6 cases of neck fissuration. No infection, mobilization, neck impingemen, subsidence, radiolucency have been evaluated

Introduction. The treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly patients is under debate. Hemiarthroplasty is a recognised treatment for elderly patients with reduced capacity for mobilisation. Controversy exists around cemented or uncemented implants for hemiarthroplasty in this population. The aim of this study is to investigate outcomes of cemented vs uncemented hemiarthroplasty implants to two years post operation. Methods. All elderly patients presenting to one institution with a displaced subcapital neck of femur fracture were offered inclusion. One hundred and sixty patients (mean age, 85 years) with acute displaced femoral neck fractures were randomly allocated to be treated with cemented Exeter, or uncemented Zweymüller Alloclassic Hemiarthroplasty. Clinical and radiologic follow-up to two years with the main outcome measurements being pain, mortality, mobility, complications, reoperations, and quality of life using validated scores recorded by a blinded outcome assessor. Results. Complication rates were more frequent in uncemented implants (p< 0.016). Subsidence and perioperative fracture were significantly higher with uncemented components (p< 0.05). Visual analogue pain scores at rest were not significantly different between each group. Mortality rates were not significantly different at any time point. Oxford Hip scores at 6 weeks favoured cemented implants (p< 0.05). These trends persist but are not significant at later follow-up. Mobility measured by a timed up-and-go score favoured cemented at 6 weeks (p< 0.01), 6 months (p< 0.05) and 1 year (p< 0.005). A trend towards less dependence on walking aids also favoured cemented implants. Multifunctional assessment index and Mini-mental scores were similar in each group. Conclusion. Cemented hemiarthroplasty provides a better outcome for elderly patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture when compared with uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Complication rates were significantly lower and function and pain scores were improved at multiple time points following surgery

Purpose. The Birmingham Mid-Head Resection (BMHR) is a bone-conserving, short-stem alternative to hip resurfacing for patients with compromised femoral head anatomy. It is unclear, however, if an uncemented, metaphyseal fixed stem confers a mechanical advantage to that of a traditional hip resurfacing in which the femoral prosthesis is cemented to the prepared femoral head. Thus, we aimed to determine if a metaphyseal fixed, bone preserving femoral component provided superior mechanical strength in resisting neck fracture compared to a conventional hip resurfacing arthroplasty. Method. Sixteen matched pairs of human cadaveric femurs were divided evenly between specimens receiving a traditional epiphyseal fixed hip resurfacing arthroplasty (BHR) and those receiving a metaphyseal fixed BMHR. Pre-preparation scaled digital radiographs were taken of all specimens to determine anatomical parameters as well as planned stem-shaft angles and implant sizes. A minimum of 10 degrees of relative valgus alignment was planned for all implants and the planned stem-shaft angles and implant sizes were equal between femur pairs. Prior to preparation, bone mineral density scans of the femurs were obtained. Prepared specimens were potted, positioned in single-leg stance and tested to failure using a mechanical testing machine. Load-displacement curves were used to calculate construct stiffness, failure energy and ultimate failure load. Results. Human cadaveric femur pairs were well matched for anatomic parameters and BMD with no statistically significant differences in neck-shaft angle (p=0.110), neck width (p=0.173), femoral offset (p=0.224) or neck BMD (p=0.525). There was a statistically significant difference between failure loads for femurs prepared with a BHR and those prepared with a BMHR (p<0.001). Femurs prepared with a BHR (7012 N, SD 2619) failed at an average of 1578 N (SD 865) greater than paired femora prepared with a BMHR (5434 N, SD 2297), representing a 24% increase in failure load. Both construct stiffness and failure energy were not statistically different between groups (p>0.065). Transcervical vertical shear fractures accounted for 19 of 32 failures, the remaining 11 were subcapital fractures. There were no fractures observed at the base of the femoral neck for either implant. Conclusion. A metaphyseal fixed, bone conserving femoral implant does not provide superior mechanical strength nor increased resistance to femoral neck fracture compared to a conventional hip resurfacing arthroplasty

This prospective five-year study analyses the impact of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) on an Irish orthopaedic unit. We identified 318 cases of MRSA, representing 0.76% of all admissions (41 971). A total of 240 (76%) cases were colonised with MRSA, while 120 (37.7%) were infected. Patients were admitted from home (218; 68.6%), nursing homes (72; 22.6%) and other hospitals (28; 8.8%). A total of 115 cases (36.6%) were colonised or infected on admission. Many patients were both colonised and infected at some stage. The length of hospital stay was almost trebled because of the presence of MRSA infection.

Encouragingly, overall infection rates have not risen significantly over the five years of the study despite increased prevalence of MRSA. However, the financial burden of MRSA is increasing, highlighting the need for progress in understanding how to control this resistant pathogen more effectively.