Aims. Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) patients report exacerbation of hip pain in deep flexion. However, the exact impingement location in deep flexion is unknown. The aim was to investigate impingement-free maximal flexion, impingement location, and if cam deformity causes hip impingement in flexion in FAI patients. Methods. A retrospective study involving 24 patients (37 hips) with FAI and femoral retroversion (femoral version (FV) < 5° per Murphy method) was performed. All patients were symptomatic (mean age 28 years (SD 9)) and had anterior hip/groin pain and a positive anterior impingement test. Cam- and pincer-type subgroups were analyzed. Patients were compared to an asymptomatic control group (26 hips). All patients underwent pelvic CT scans to generate personalized CT-based 3D models and validated software for patient-specific impingement simulation (equidistant method). Results. Mean impingement-free flexion of patients with mixed-type FAI (110° (SD 8°)) and patients with pincer-type FAI (112° (SD 8°)) was significantly (p < 0.001) lower compared to the control group (125° (SD 13°)). The frequency of extra-articular subspine impingement was significantly (p < 0.001) increased in patients with pincer-type FAI (57%) compared to cam-type FAI (22%) in 125° flexion. Bony impingement in maximal flexion was located anterior-inferior at femoral four and five o’clock position in patients with cam-type FAI (63% (10 of 16 hips) and 37% (6 of 10 hips)), and did not involve the cam deformity. The cam deformity did not cause impingement in maximal flexion. Conclusion. Femoral impingement in maximal flexion was located anterior-inferior distal to the cam deformity. This differs to previous studies, a finding which could be important for FAI patients in order to avoid exacerbation of hip pain in deep flexion (e.g. during squats) and for hip arthroscopy (hip-preservation surgery) for planning of bone resection. Hip impingement in flexion has implications for daily activities (e.g. putting on shoes), sports, and sex. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(1):22–32

Proximal femoral replacements are commonly used in oncologic limb salvage procedures. Recently, these megaprostheses have been utilized in complex revision arthroplasties where proximal femoral bone is compromised. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic survivorship of proximal femoral replacements as a salvage treatment for bone loss after hip arthroplasty. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 31 proximal femoral replacements of a single design between 2004 and 2013 at a single institution. The mean age at time of index surgery was 62 years, 58% were female, and mean BMI was 28.1 Kg/m. 2. The indications and complications associated with megaprosthesis implantation were collected. Average follow-up was 60 months (range 24–120 months). Kaplan-Meier survivorship assessed clinical and radiographic survivorship. Indication for revision, use of a constrained liner and construct length were assessed as risk factors for construct failure. The indications for proximal femoral replacement were periprosthetic infection (n=12, 38.7%), aseptic loosening (n=10, 32.3%), periprosthetic fracture (n=6, 19.3%), and non-union (n=3, 9.7%). A constrained liner was used in 22 hips (71%). The average length of bone resection was 148 cm (range 81–240 cm). There were nine revisions (29.2%): 3 for infection (9.7%) 2 for dislocation (6.5%), 2 for aseptic loosening (6.5%), and 2 for periprosthetic fracture (6.5%). Two of the 3 infections were in patients treated for infection. Overall survivorship was at 70.8%. There was no relation between the length of the bone resection, indication for revision and failure rate. Proximal femoral replacement in non-oncologic revision hip arthroplasty demonstrated a high failure rate at 2–10 year follow-up. Despite the high failure rate, the benefits of this salvage construct are that they allow full weight-bearing and allow rapid mobilization with minimal morbidity

Aims

One-stage revision hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has several advantages; however, resection of the proximal femur might be necessary to achieve higher success rates. We investigated the risk factors for resection and re-revisions, and assessed complications and subsequent re-revisions.

The major advantage of hip resurfacing is the decreased amount of bone resection compared with a standard total hip replacement. Fracture of the femoral neck is the most common early complication and poor bone quality is a major risk factor. We undertook a prospective consecutive case control study examining the effect of bone mineral density changes in patients undergoing hip resurfacing surgery. A total of 423 patients were recruited with a mean age of 54 years (24 to 87). Recruitment for this study was dependent on pre-operative bilateral femoral bone mineral density results not being osteoporotic. The operated and non-operated hips were assessed. Bone mineral density studies were repeated over a two-year period. The results showed no significant deterioration in the bone mineral density in the superolateral region in the femoral neck, during that period. These findings were in the presence of a markedly increased level of physical activity, as measured by the short-form 36 health survey physical function score

Objectives

The primary objective of this study was to compare accuracy in restoring the native centre of hip rotation in patients undergoing conventional manual total hip arthroplasty (THA) versus robotic-arm assisted THA. Secondary objectives were to determine differences between these treatment techniques for THA in achieving the planned combined offset, component inclination, component version, and leg-length correction.

We report a 12- to 15-year implant survival assessment of a prospective single-surgeon series of Birmingham Hip Resurfacings (BHRs). The earliest 1000 consecutive BHRs including 288 women (335 hips) and 598 men (665 hips) of all ages and diagnoses with no exclusions were prospectively followed-up with postal questionnaires, of whom the first 402 BHRs (350 patients) also had clinical and radiological review.

Mean follow-up was 13.7 years (12.3 to 15.3). In total, 59 patients (68 hips) died 0.7 to 12.6 years following surgery from unrelated causes. There were 38 revisions, 0.1 to 13.9 years (median 8.7) following operation, including 17 femoral failures (1.7%) and seven each of infections, soft-tissue reactions and other causes. With revision for any reason as the end-point Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed 97.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 96.9 to 97.9) and 95.8% (95% CI 95.1 to 96.5) survival at ten and 15 years, respectively. Radiological assessment showed 11 (3.5%) femoral and 13 (4.1%) acetabular radiolucencies which were not deemed failures and one radiological femoral failure (0.3%).

Our study shows that the performance of the BHR continues to be good at 12- to 15-year follow-up. Men have better implant survival (98.0%; 95% CI 97.4 to 98.6) at 15 years than women (91.5%; 95% CI 89.8 to 93.2), and women < 60 years (90.5%; 95% CI 88.3 to 92.7) fare worse than others. Hip dysplasia and osteonecrosis are risk factors for failure. Patients under 50 years with osteoarthritis fare best (99.4%; 95% CI 98.8 to 100 survival at 15 years), with no failures in men in this group.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1298–1306.

Objectives

We aimed to determine the effect of surgical approach on the histology of the femoral head following resurfacing of the hip.

This study evaluates the outcome of arthroscopic femoral osteochondroplasty for cam lesions of the hip in the absence of additional pathology other than acetabular chondral lesions. We retrospectively reviewed 166 patients (170 hips) who were categorised according to three different grades of chondral damage. The outcome was assessed in each grade using the modified Harris Hip Score (MHHS) and the Non-Arthritic Hip Score (NAHS).

Overall, at the last follow-up (mean 22 months, 12 to 72), the mean MHHS had improved by 15.3 points (95% confidence interval (CI), 8.9 to 21.7) and the mean NAHS by 15 points (95% CI, 9.4 to 20.5). Significantly better results were observed in hips with less severe chondral damage. Microfracture in limited chondral lesions showed superior results.

Arthroscopic femoral osteochondroplasty for cam impingement with microfracture in selected cases is beneficial. The outcome correlates with the severity of acetabular chondral damage.

The rate and mode of early failure in 463 Birmingham hip resurfacings in a two-centre, multisurgeon series were examined. Of the 463 patients two have died and three were lost to follow-up. The mean radiological and clinical follow-up was for 43 months (6 to 90).

We have revised 13 resurfacings (2.8%) including seven for pain, three for fracture, two for dislocation and another for sepsis. Of these, nine had macroscopic and histological evidence of metallosis. The survival at five years was 95.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 94.1 to 96.8) for revision for all causes and 96.9% (95% CI 95.5 to 98.3) for metallosis.

The rate of metallosis related revision was 3.1% at five years. Risk factors for metallosis were female gender, a small femoral component, a high abduction angle and obesity. We do not advocate the use of the Birmingham Hip resurfacing procedure in patients with these risk factors.

Hip resurfacing is a bone-conserving procedure with respect to proximal femoral resection, but there is debate in the literature as to whether the same holds true for the acetabulum. We have investigated whether the Birmingham hip resurfacing conserves acetabular bone.

Between 1998 and 2005, 500 Birmingham hip resurfacings were performed by two surgeons. Between 1996 and 2005 they undertook 700 primary hip replacements, with an uncemented acetabular component. These patients formed the clinical material to compare acetabular component sizing. The Birmingham hip resurfacing group comprised 350 hips in men and 150 hips in women. The uncemented total hip replacement group comprised 236 hips in men and 464 hips in women. Age- and gender-matched analysis of a cohort of patients for the sizes of the acetabular components required for the two types of replacement was also undertaken. Additionally, an analysis of the sizes of the components used by each surgeon was performed.

For age-matched women, the mean outside diameter of the Birmingham hip resurfacing acetabular components was 2.03 mm less than that of the acetabular components in the uncemented total hip replacements (p < 0.0001). In similarly matched men there was no significant difference (p = 0.77). A significant difference was also found between the size of acetabular components used by the two surgeons for Birmingham hip resurfacing for both men (p = 0.0015) and women (p = 0.001). In contrast, no significant difference was found between the size of acetabular components used by the two surgeons for uncemented total hip replacement in either men or women (p = 0.06 and p = 0.14, respectively). This suggests that variations in acetabular preparation also influence acetabular component size in hip resurfacing.

Open reduction of the prominence at the femoral head-neck junction in femoroacetabular impingement has become an established treatment for this condition. We report our experience of arthroscopically-assisted treatment of femoroacetabular impingement secondary to paediatric hip disease in 14 hips in 13 consecutive patients (seven women, six men) with a mean age of 30.6 years (24 to 39) at the time of surgery. The mean follow-up was 2.5 years (2 to 4).

Radiologically, 13 hips had successful restoration of the normal geometry and only one had a residual deformity. The mean increase in the Western Ontario McMasters Osteoarthritis Index for the series at the last follow-up was 9.6 points (4 to 14). No patient developed avascular necrosis or sustained a fracture of the femoral neck or any other complication.

These findings suggest that femoroacetabular impingement associated with paediatric hip disease can be treated safely by arthroscopic techniques.

We have undertaken a prospective, randomised study to compare conservation of acetabular bone after total hip replacement and resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. We randomly assigned 210 hips to one of the two treatment groups. Uncemented, press-fit acetabular components were used for both.

No significant difference was found in the mean diameter of acetabular implant inserted in the groups (54.74 mm for total hip replacement and 54.90 mm for resurfacing arthroplasty). In seven resurfacing procedures (6.8%), the surgeon used a larger size of component in order to match the corresponding diameter of the femoral component.

With resurfacing arthroplasty, conservation of bone is clearly advantageous on the femoral side. Our study has shown that, with a specific design of acetabular implant and by following a careful surgical technique, removal of bone on the acetabular side is comparable with that of total hip replacement.