Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of cemented hemiarthroplasty (HA) versus hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented HA for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults. Methods. A within-trial economic evaluation was conducted based on data collected from the World Hip Trauma Evaluation 5 (WHiTE 5) multicentre randomized controlled trial in the UK. Resource use was measured over 12 months post-randomization using trial case report forms and participant-completed questionnaires. Cost-effectiveness was reported in terms of incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the NHS and personal social service perspective. Methodological uncertainty was addressed using sensitivity analysis, while decision uncertainty was represented graphically using confidence ellipses and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Results. The base-case analysis showed that cemented implants were cost-saving (mean cost difference -£961 (95% confidence interval (CI) -£2,292 to £370)) and increased QALYs (mean QALY difference 0.010 (95% CI 0.002 to 0.017)) when compared to uncemented implants. The probability of the cemented implant being cost-effective approximated between 95% and 97% at alternative cost-effectiveness thresholds held by decision-makers, and its net monetary benefit was positive. The findings remained robust against all the pre-planned sensitivity analyses. Conclusion. This study shows that cemented HA is cost-effective compared with hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented HA in older adults with displaced intracapsular hip fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(8):922–928

Using data from the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register, 8639 cemented and 2477 uncemented primary hemiarthroplasties for displaced fractures of the femoral neck in patients aged > 70 years were included in a prospective observational study. A total of 218 re-operations were performed after cemented and 128 after uncemented procedures. Survival of the hemiarthroplasties was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and hazard rate ratios (HRR) for revision were calculated using Cox regression analyses. At five years the implant survival was 97% (95% confidence interval (CI) 97 to 97) for cemented and 91% (95% CI 87 to 94) for uncemented hemiarthroplasties. Uncemented hemiarthroplasties had a 2.1 times increased risk of revision compared with cemented prostheses (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 2.6, p < 0.001). The increased risk was mainly caused by revisions for peri-prosthetic fracture (HRR = 17), aseptic loosening (HRR = 17), haematoma formation (HRR = 5.3), superficial infection (HRR = 4.6) and dislocation (HRR = 1.8). More intra-operative complications, including intra-operative death, were reported for the cemented hemiarthroplasties. However, in a time-dependent analysis, the HRR for re-operation in both groups increased as follow-up increased. This study showed that the risk for revision was higher for uncemented than for cemented hemiarthroplasties

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. Cemented hemiarthroplasty is an effective form of treatment for most patients with an intracapsular fracture of the hip. However, it remains unclear whether there are subgroups of patients who may benefit from the alternative operation of a modern uncemented hemiarthroplasty – the aim of this study was to investigate this issue. Knowledge about the heterogeneity of treatment effects is important for surgeons in order to target operations towards specific subgroups who would benefit the most. Methods. We used causal forest analysis to compare subgroup- and individual-level treatment effects between cemented and modern uncemented hemiarthroplasty in patients aged > 60 years with an intracapsular fracture of the hip, using data from the World Hip Trauma Evaluation 5 (WHiTE 5) multicentre randomized clinical trial. EuroQol five-dimension index scores were used to measure health-related quality of life at one, four, and 12 months postoperatively. Results. Our analysis revealed a complex landscape of responses to the use of a cemented hemiarthroplasty in the 12 months after surgery. There was heterogeneity of effects with regard to baseline characteristics, including age, pre-injury health status, and lifestyle factors such as alcohol consumption. This heterogeneity was greater at the one-month mark than at subsequent follow-up timepoints, with particular regard to subgroups based on age. However, for all subgroups, the effect estimates for quality of life lay within the confidence intervals derived from the analysis of all patients. Conclusion. The use of a cemented hemiarthroplasty is expected to increase health-related quality of life compared with modern uncemented hemiarthroplasty for all subgroups of patients aged > 60 years with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(7):656–661

We randomised 24 patients before they had a cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture to receive either thorough or minimal saline lavage of the femoral canal. We then determined the effect in each group on the thromboembolic and cardiopulmonary responses to the pressurised insertion of cement, using transoesophageal echocardiography to show the echogenic embolic response. We found a statistically significant reduction in both the duration of the response and the number of large emboli in patients who had had thorough lavage as compared with the control group with minimal lavage. There was also less disturbance of pulmonary function, as assessed by the change in end-tidal CO2 levels and oxygen saturation, in patients who had thorough lavage. Three patients had a significant fall in blood pressure during cement insertion; all had only minimal lavage. We consider that thorough lavage should be an essential part of the preparation of the proximal femur before cement insertion

Introduction. Following National patient safety alert on cement use in hip fracture surgery, we investigated the incidence and pattern of 72 hours peri-operative mortality after hip fracture surgery in a District General Hospital. Methods. We reviewed all patients who had hip fracture surgery between 2005-April, 2010. We recorded demographic variables, type of fracture, implant used, medical co-morbidity, seniority of operating surgeon and anaesthetist, peri-operative haemodynamic status, time and cause of death. Results. Over a 64 month period 15 cases were identified. Peri-operative death (PAD) was 1% (15/1402). 4/15 patients died intra-operatively. PAD was highest following Exeter Trauma Stem (ETS) implantation (5/85, 6%) and nil following Bipolar arthroplasty, Austin-Moore arthroplasty (AMA) or Cannulated screw fixation. PAD following total hip arthroplasty was 4% (1/25), Thompson's hemi-arthroplasty 2% (3/191), and Dynamic Hip Screw fixation 1% (6/695). Overall mortality after cemented implant was 2%. ETS implantation led to significantly increased peri-operative mortality compared to AMA (p=0.004). Operations were performed by both trainees (12) and Consultants (3). Both trainees (9) and Consultants (6) anaesthetised the patients. None of the patients belonged to ASA I or II (ASA III 6 and IV 9). All patients had significant cardio-vascular or pulmonary co-morbidity (Ca Lung 2, pulmonary fibrosis 1, end stage COAD 1, AF 6). Cemented implant insertion was followed by immediate haemodynamic collapse and death in 4/15, intra-operative haemodynamic instability in 1/15 and peri-operative instability in 5/15. Post-mortem was performed in 5/15: 2/5 were Pulmonary Embolism (PE), 2/5 bronchopneumonia and 1/5 Myocardial infarction (MI). 4/15 had suspected MI and 1/15 suspected PE. Conclusion. There was 1% risk of peri-operative death after hip fracture surgery. This risk was increased following cemented hemiarthroplasty and highest after ETS implantation. Risk was exacerbated in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular morbidity and independent of the seniority of the surgeon or the anaesthetist

The December 2022 Trauma Roundup. 360. looks at: Anterior approach for acetabular fractures using anatomical plates; Masquelet–Ilizarov for the management of bone loss post debridement of infected tibial nonunion; Total hip arthroplasty – better results after low-energy displaced femoral neck fracture in young patients; Unreamed intramedullary nailing versus external fixation for the treatment of open tibial shaft fractures in Uganda: a randomized clinical trial; The Open-Fracture Patient Evaluation Nationwide (OPEN) study: the management of open fracture care in the UK; Cost-utility analysis of cemented hemiarthroplasty versus hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented hemiarthroplasty; Unstable ankle fractures: fibular nail fixation compared to open reduction and internal fixation; Long-term outcomes of randomized clinical trials: wrist and calcaneus; ‘HeFT’y follow-up of the UK Heel Fracture Trial

Aims. The aims of this study were to develop an in vivo model of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in cemented hip hemiarthroplasty, and to monitor infection and biofilm formation in real-time. Methods. Sprague-Dawley rats underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty via the posterior approach with pre- and postoperative gait assessments. Infection with Staphylococcus aureus Xen36 was monitored with in vivo photoluminescent imaging in real-time. Pre- and postoperative gait analyses were performed and compared. Postmortem micro (m) CT was used to assess implant integration; field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) was used to assess biofilm formation on prosthetic surfaces. Results. All animals tolerated surgery well, with preservation of gait mechanics and weightbearing in control individuals. Postoperative in vivo imaging demonstrated predictable evolution of infection with logarithmic signal decay coinciding with abscess formation. Postmortem mCT qualitative volumetric analysis showed high contact area and both cement-bone and cement-implant interdigitation. FE-SEM revealed biofilm formation on the prosthetic head. Conclusion. This study demonstrates the utility of a new, high-fidelity model of in vivo PJI using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty in rats. Inoculation with bioluminescent bacteria allows for non-invasive, real-time monitoring of infection. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):9–16

Aim

This paper describes the methods applied to assess the cost-effectiveness of cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty among hip fracture patients in the World Hip Trauma Evaluation Five (WHiTE5) trial.

Aims

To compare the cost-effectiveness of high-dose, dual-antibiotic cement versus single-antibiotic cement for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures in older adults.

Aims. The aim of this study was to report the three-year follow-up for a series of 400 patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip, who were randomized to be treated with either a cemented polished tapered hemiarthroplasty or an uncemented hydroxyapatite-coated hemiarthroplasty. Methods. The mean age of the patients was 85 years (58 to 102) and 273 (68%) were female. Follow-up was undertaken by a nurse who was blinded to the hemiarthroplasty that was used, at intervals for up to three years from surgery. The short-term follow-up of these patients at a mean of one year has previously been reported. Results. A total of 210 patients (52.5%) died within three years of surgery. One patient was lost to follow-up. Recovery of mobility was initially significantly better in those treated with a cemented hemiarthroplasty, although by three years after surgery this difference became statistically insignificant. The mortality was significantly lower in those treated with a cemented hemiarthroplasty (p = 0.029). There was no significant difference in pain scores, or in the incidence of implant-related complications or revision surgery, between the two groups. Conclusion. These results further support the use of a cemented hemiarthroplasty for the routine management of elderly patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(11):1196–1200

Aims. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the mortality, morbidity, and functional outcomes of cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty in the treatment of intracapsular hip fractures, analyzing contemporary and non-contemporary implants separately. Methods. PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library were searched to 2 February 2020 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the primary outcome, mortality, and secondary outcomes of function, quality of life, reoperation, postoperative complications, perioperative outcomes, pain, and length of hospital stay. Relative risks (RRs) and mean differences (with 95% confidence intervals (CIs)) were used as summary association measures. Results. A total of 18 studies corresponding to 16 non-overlapping RCTs with a total of 2,819 intracapsular hip fractures were included. Comparing contemporary cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty, RRs (95% CIs) for mortality were 1.32 (0.44 to 3.99) perioperatively, 1.01 (0.48 to 2.10) at 30 days, and 0.90 (0.71 to 1.15) at one year. The use of contemporary cemented hemiarthroplasty reduced the risk of intra- and postoperative periprosthetic fracture. There were no significant differences in the risk of other complications, function, pain, and quality of life. There were no significant differences in perioperative outcomes except for increases in operating time and overall anaesthesia for contemporary cemented hemiarthroplasty with mean differences (95% CIs) of 6.67 (2.65 to 10.68) and 4.90 (2.02 to 7.78) minutes, respectively. The morbidity and mortality outcomes were not significantly different between non-contemporary cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Conclusion. There are no differences in the risk of mortality when comparing the use of contemporary cemented with uncemented hemiarthroplasty in the management of intracapsular hip fractures. Contemporary cemented hemiarthroplasty is associated with a substantially lower risk of intraoperative and periprosthetic fractures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(9):1113–1121

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

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

Aims. Patients receiving cemented hemiarthroplasties after hip fracture have a significant risk of deep surgical site infection (SSI). Standard UK practice to minimize the risk of SSI includes the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement with no consensus regarding type, dose, or antibiotic content of the cement. This is the protocol for a randomized clinical trial to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of high dose dual antibiotic-loaded cement in comparison to low dose single antibiotic-loaded cement in patients 60 years and over receiving a cemented hemiarthroplasty for an intracapsular hip fracture. Methods. The WHiTE 8 Copal Or Palacos Antibiotic Loaded bone cement trial (WHiTE 8 COPAL) is a multicentre, multi-surgeon, parallel, two-arm, randomized clinical trial. The pragmatic study will be embedded in the World Hip Trauma Evaluation (WHiTE) (ISRCTN 63982700). Participants, including those that lack capacity, will be allocated on a 1:1 basis stratified by recruitment centre to either a low dose single antibiotic-loaded bone cement or a high dose dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement. The primary analysis will compare the differences in deep SSI rate as defined by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention within 90 days of surgery via medical record review and patient self-reported questionnaires. Secondary outcomes include UK Core Outcome Set for hip fractures, complications, rate of antibiotic prescription, resistance patterns of deep SSI, and resource use (more specifically, cost-effectiveness) up to four months post-randomization. A minimum of 4,920 patients will be recruited to obtain 90% power to detect an absolute difference of 1.5% in the rate of deep SSI at 90 days for the expected 3% deep SSI rate in the control group. Conclusion. The results of this trial will provide evidence regarding clinical and cost-effectiveness between low dose single and high dose dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement, which will inform policy and practice guidelines such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidance on management of hip fractures. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(2):72–78

The aim of this study was to analyze and compare clinical, radiological and mortality outcomes of patients who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced neck of femur fractures using a SPAIRE technique when compared to a pair-matched control cohort who underwent the same procedure using the direct lateral approach. A retrospective review of patients who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced neck of femur fractures by a single surgeon using a SPAIRE technique over a two-year period between July 2019 and July 2021 was performed. These were subsequently pair matched in a 5:1 ratio for age, gender, ASA grade and residential status with a control group who underwent cemented hip hemiarthroplasty by 4 other surgeons using a direct lateral approach. The study included a total of 240 patients (40 and 200 pairmatched to SPAIRE and control groups respectively), with a mean age of 81.0 ± 8.2 years (63–99) and a mean follow-up of 12 ± 3 months (3–30). Overall, there was no significant difference in any of the radiological or mortality outcome scores assessed between the SPAIRE and control groups (p > 0.05 for all). There was a significantly lower number of patients in the SPAIRE group who dropped a level of mobility from their pre-injury baseline at 30-days post-operatively (8.1% versus 31.6%; p = 0.003). However, this appeared to have resolved at 120-day follow-up with no significant differences between the groups in terms of those acquiring a new baseline mobility at 120-days post-operatively (2.7% versus 13.2%, p = 0.09). In cases of cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular neck of femur fractures, the SPAIRE technique appears to offer patients an earlier return to levels of baseline pre-injury mobility when compared to a direct lateral approach

Aims. Despite few good-quality studies on the subject, total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increasingly being performed for displaced intracapsular fractures of the neck of femur. We compared outcomes of all patients with displacement of these fractures treated surgically over a ten-year period in one institution. Methods. A total of 2,721 patients with intracapsular fractures of the femoral neck treated with either a cemented hemiarthroplasty or a THA at a single centre were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcomes analyzed were readmission for any reason and revision surgery. We secondarily looked at mortality rates. Results. We found no difference in the overall revision rate or rate of infection. However, the rates of readmission due to dislocation, pain, and trochanteric bursitis were significantly higher in the THA group (p = 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, and p = 0.001, respectively). Conclusion. Our study, comparing the outcomes of neck of femur fractures treated with a cemented hemiarthroplasty and THA, revealed the perceived superiority of THA was not borne out by our results. This should be carefully considered before any radical change in practice regarding the use of THA for displaced intracapsular fractures of the femoral neck. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6):693–698

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in geriatric and/or multimorbid patients is an enormous challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Revision procedures have also been demonstrated to expose patients to higher infection risks. Prior patient stratification according to presumed infection risks, followed by a more potent local antibiotic prophylaxis protocol with selective use of DALBC, is an interesting strategy to decrease the burden of PJI in high risk patients. The PubMed & EMBASE databases were screened for publications pertaining to the utilization of DALBC in cement for infection prophylaxis & prosthesis fixation. 6 preclinical & 7 clinical studies were identified which met the inclusion criteria and were stratified by level of clinical evidence. Only those studies were considered which compared the PJI outcome in the DALBC vs the SALBC group. (1). DALBC have been shown to exert a much stronger and longer lasting inhibition of biofilm formation on many PJI relevant bacteria (gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens) than single gentamicin-only containing cements. (2). DALBC use (COPAL G+C) in the intervention arm of 7 clinical studies has led to a significant reduction of PJI cases in a) cemented hemiarthroplasty procedures (3 studies, evidence level I and III), in b) cemented septic revision surgeries (2 studies, evidence level III), in c) cemented aseptic knee revisions (1 study, evidence level III) and in d) cemented primary arthroplasties in multi-morbid patients (1 study, evidence level III-IV). These benefits were not associated with more systemic side effects or a higher prevalence of broad antimicrobial resistancies. Use of DALBC is likely to be more effective in preventing PJI in high risk patients. The preliminar findings so far may encourage clinicians to consolidate this hypothesis on a wider clinical range