Introduction

Infection after total hip arthroplasty is a severe complication. Controversies still exist as to the use of cemented or uncemented implants in the revision of infected THAs. Based on the data in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR) we have studied this topic.

Aims. Debate continues about whether it is better to use a cemented or uncemented hemiarthroplasty to treat a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. The aim of this study was to attempt to resolve this issue for contemporary prostheses. Methods. A total of 400 patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip were randomized to receive either a cemented polished tapered stem hemiarthroplasty or an uncemented Furlong hydroxyapatite-coated hemiarthroplasty. Follow-up was conducted by a nurse blinded to the implant at set intervals for up to one year from surgery. Results. A total of 115 patients died in the year after surgery. There was a tendency towards a slightly higher mortality in those treated with the uncemented prosthesis after one year (64 vs 51; p = 0.18). For the survivors, there was no significant difference in pain score at any of the time intervals. Patients treated using the cemented hemiarthroplasty recovered mobility better than those treated with the uncemented hemiarthroplasty (mean decrease in mobility score at one year: 1.7 vs 1.1, SD 1.9; p = 0.008). There was a tendency to more periprosthetic fractures in the uncemented group (five vs two cases; p = 0.45), but overall the need for further surgery was similar in both groups (nine vs seven cases). There were four perioperative deaths in the cemented group. Conclusion. These results indicate that a contemporary cemented hemiarthroplasty gives better results than an uncemented hemiarthroplasty for patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. When the condition of the patient permits, a cemented hemiarthroplasty should be used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(1):11–16

We undertook a prospective randomised controlled trial involving 400 patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip to determine whether there was any difference in outcome between treatment with a cemented Thompson hemiarthroplasty and an uncemented Austin-Moore prosthesis. The surviving patients were followed up for between two and five years by a nurse blinded to the type of prosthesis used. The mean age of the patients was 83 years (61 to 104) and 308 (77%) were women. The degree of residual pain was less in those treated with a cemented prosthesis (p < 0.0001) three months after surgery. Regaining mobility was better in those treated with a cemented implant (p = 0.005) at six months after operation. No statistically significant difference was found between the two groups with regard to mortality, implant-related complications, re-operations or post-operative medical complications. The use of a cemented Thompson hemiarthroplasty resulted in less pain and less deterioration in mobility than an uncemented Austin-Moore prosthesis with no increase in complications

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe variation in hip fracture treatment in Norway expressed as adherence to international and national evidence-based treatment guidelines, to study factors influencing deviation from guidelines, and to analyze consequences of non-adherence.

Introduction. The postoperative management of patients after total hip replacement traditionally includes restrictions of movements and the use of aids (toiletelevation, sleeping pillow, a.o.) in the first 3 months after operation. Few studies have investigated the benefit of such restrictions. The aim of the present study was to evaluate how patients with total hip replacements (THR) are doing with and without restrictions in the first 3 months after surgery, and if walking ability and patients satisfaction was influenced by the postoperative regime. Patients and Methods. 80 patients undergoing primary uncemented THR were randomized to either the conventional regime with restrictions of movement and obligatory use of aids, or a postoperative regime without restrictions. Surgery was performed through a posterolateral short incision. The femoral component was the uncemented Bimetric prosthesis, non collared with HA coating, and a 36 mm femoral head. The cup was the Trilogy cup with a highly crosslinked polyethylen liner. No postoperative drainage was used and immediate weight bearing was allowed in both groups. We monitored walking speed, TUG score (timed up and go) and VAS pain score. The patients were scored by a trained physiotherapist preoperatively, 2 times each day during admission, and 14 and 90 days after surgery. Radiographic examination was performed after 3 days and after 3 months. At the 3 months evaluation a SF-36 score was registered. Results. The two groups were similar in age, operation time blood loss, and position of the prosthesis. None of the patients had postoperative dislocation. No significant difference was seen in any of the registered parameters (p< 0,05). The two groups were not similar regarding pain score. Preoperatively there was a significant higher pain score(p<0,05) in the group without restrictions and this difference was present throughout the first postoperative days. Accordingly they spent more time walking 10m during the first postoperative days, though this difference was not statistically significant. After 3 months the results in the two groups were similar and the SF-36 score was without significant difference. Conclusion. There is no significant difference in TUG test, 10m test, SF 36 score and VAS score the first 3 months after THR in the 2 groups. We did not see an increase in postoperative complications, which implies that postoperative mobilisation without restrictions, can be allowed without the risk of increased complications, and the use of aids in activities of daily living are not necessary. This also implies the possibility of savings in the rehabilitation of patients after THR

National Institute of Clinical Excellence guidelines state that cemented stems with an Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel (ODEP) rating of > 3B should be used for hemiarthroplasty when treating an intracapsular fracture of the femoral neck. These recommendations are based on studies in which most, if not all stems, did not hold such a rating.

This case-control study compared the outcome of hemiarthroplasty using a cemented (Exeter) or uncemented (Corail) femoral stem. These are the two prostheses most commonly used in hip arthroplasty in the UK.

Data were obtained from two centres; most patients had undergone hemiarthroplasty using a cemented Exeter stem (n = 292/412). Patients were matched for all factors that have been shown to influence mortality after an intracapsular fracture of the neck of the femur. Outcome measures included: complications, re-operations and mortality rates at two, seven, 30 and 365 days post-operatively. Comparable outcomes for the two stems were seen.

There were more intra-operative complications in the uncemented group (13% vs 0%), but the cemented group had a greater mortality in the early post-operative period (n = 6). There was no overall difference in the rate of re-operation (5%) or death (365 days: 26%) between the two groups at any time post-operatively.

This study therefore supports the use of both cemented and uncemented stems of proven design, with an ODEP rating of 10A, in patients with an intracapsular fracture of the neck of the femur.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:94–9.