Aims. The National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland
(NJR) has extended its scope to report on hospital, surgeon and
implant performance. Data linkage of the NJR to the London Implant
Retrieval Centre (LIRC) has previously evaluated data quality for
hip primary procedures, but did not assess revision records. . Methods. We analysed metal-on-metal
Aim of this monocentric, prospective study was to evaluate the safety, efficacy, clinical and radiographical results at 24-month follow-up (N = 6 patients) undergoing hip revision surgery with severe acetabular bone defects (Paprosky 2C-3A-3B) using a combination of a novel phase-pure betatricalciumphosphate - collagen 3D matrix with allograft bone chips. Prospective follow-up of 6 consecutive patients, who underwent revision surgery of the acetabular component in presence of massive bone defects between April 2018 and July 2019. Indications for revision included mechanical loosening in 4 cases and history of hip infection in 2 cases. Acetabular deficiencies were evaluated radiographically and CT and classified according to the Paprosky classification. Initial diagnosis of the patients included osteoarthritis (N = 4), a traumatic fracture and a congenital hip dislocation. 5 patients underwent first revision surgery, 1 patient underwent a second revision surgery.Aim
Method
During
We investigated whether the indentation of bone
cement spacers used in revision of infected joint arthroplasty with a
MacDonald dissector increased the elution of antibiotic The fluid sampled at 72 hours from the indented discs containing
0.17 g gentamicin (0.88% w/w) contained a mean of 113 mcg/ml (90.12
to 143.5) compared with 44.5 mcg/ml (44.02 to 44.90) in the fluid
sampled from the plain discs (p = 0.012). In discs containing 0.33
g gentamicin (1.75% w/w), the concentration eluted from the indented discs
at 72 hours was a mean of 316 mcg/ml (223 to 421) compared with
a mean of 118 mcg/ml (100 to 140) from the plain discs (p <
0.001). At two weeks, these significant differences persisted. At nine
weeks the indented discs eluted a greater concentration for all
gentamicin doses, but the difference was only significant for the
discs containing 0.17 g (0.88% w/w, p = 0.006). However if the area
under the curve is taken as a measure of the total antibiotic eluted,
the indented discs eluted more gentamicin than the plain discs for
the 0.17 g (0.88% w/w, p = 0.031), the 0.25 g (1.41% w/w, p <
0.001) and the 0.33 g (1.75% w/w, p <
0.001) discs. When preparing antibiotic spacers for use in staged revision
arthroplasty surgery we recommend indenting the spacer with a MacDonald
dissector to increase the elution of antibiotic. Cite this article:
Introduction. Large acetabular bone defects caused by aseptic loosening are common. Reconstruction of large segmental defects can be challenging. Various implants and operative techniques have been developed to allow further acetabular revision in cases where bone stock is poor. Reconstitution of bone stock is desirable especially in younger patients. The aim of the study was to review the clinical and radiological results of
Introduction: today there is still no consense in reconstruction of severe acetabular defects in
Introduction. Osteolysis causing proximal femoral deficiency is a major problem in revision hip arthroplasty. Various methods including impaction bone grafting and bone allografts have been used to address this issue. We have analysed bone reformation using extended trochanteric osteotomy and distally fixed proximal hydroxyapatite-coated modular
The Oxford hip score (OHS) at 6 months and five years of less than 27 has previously been reported as having a 5.2% chance of requiring revision of their total hip arthroplasty (THA) within 2 years. We determined whether the OHS obtained at 10 years after surgery would be a suitable screening tool in lieu of clinic visits to detect patients requiring closer monitoring. We reviewed data from the NZ Joint Registry between January 1999 and December 2016. OHS at 10 years was available for 5,165 non-revised THA patients. Patients were separated into four categories based on their OHS: 3,483 (67%) scored 42–48, 1,023 (20%) scored 34–41, 373 (7%) scored 27–33, and 286 (5%) scored 0–26. For patients with a 6-month OHS, revision risk within 2 years was 1.3% in the 42–48 group, 2.5% in the 34–41 group, 4.6% in the 27–33 group, and 10.2 % in the 0–27 group. If only patients with a grading of 33 or less were offered clinical follow-up, 659/5165 patients (12.7%) would require evaluation and of these, 46/659 (7%) could be expected to require revision within two years. Of those patients with an OHS > 34 not evaluated, only a small number, 72/4506 (1.6%), might require a revision. The OHS at 10 years of patients with a THA who have a grading less than 27 is a much stronger predictor of revision than OHS at 6 months or 5 years. Use of the 10 year OHS as a screening tool for THA requires evaluation of only one in eight patients, with the chance of missing 1 in 63 patients not followed up who might require a revision.
We present the early results of a bone conserving implant, the Thrust Plate Prosthesis (TPP) used for the revision of failed resurfacings of the hip in nine patients. Four revisions were for fractured neck of femurs. The original implant in this fracture group was a McMinn resurfacing. The original acetabular component was retained. Five revisions were due to aseptic loosening. Four of the original implants in this group were Beuchal Pappas (BP) resurfacings and one was a Cormet2000 resurfacing. In the fracture group the average age was 46yrs (34–70). The time from primary to revision surgery was 5.8 months (3–11). The Harris hip scores improved in all patients to their pre fracture level of 90 (83–99). In the aseptic loosening group the average age was 62yrs (53–67). The time from primary to revision surgery was 121 months for the BP resurfacings and 19 months for the Cormet. The Harris hip scores also improved in this group to an average of 73.8 (50–100). Hip resurfacing presents an attractive option for the younger patient. It is a bone conserving procedure with the added benefit of increased stability by using a large diameter head. Fracture of the femoral neck is a specific early complication. The usual treatment of this complication has been revision to a more traditional design, loosing the benefits of bone conservation. The TPP is a bone preserving implant that has metaphyseal fixation of the proximal femur. It has satisfactory long term results (
Great diffusion of hip prosthetic surgery, in relatively-young patients too, generates as consequence an increase in prosthesis failures associated with limited or massive bone losses, making revision surgery mandatory, even in most advanced degrees of osteolysis. In best surgery strategy planning are essential: - evaluation of osteolysis degree with standard x-Rays; - evaluation of periprosthetic bone turn-over with scintigraphy (both a specific as they give merely qualitative evaluations of bone remodeling); – quantitative evaluation of periprosthetic bone mineral density with periprosthetic mineralometry (D.E.X.A.). Data obtained with these methods allow more accurate decisions, during the pre-operative phase, regarding the most indicated implant for revision surgery: mid or long-stem, with or without omoplastic transplants, with or without materials promoting bone rehabitation. In any case, the surgeon must have all possible solutions in order to eventually change the operative plan during surgical act. Following qualitative and quantitative periprosthetic bone evaluations, we use to classify stem and cup mobilizations with Italian Group for Revision (GIR) classification. According to GIR classification, our actual trends in the choice of revision prostheses, in the most advanced degrees of complex mobilizations of stem and cup, are the following: - GIR 3 (Enlargement of the femoral shaft with thinning of cortical bone and loosing of 2 or more walls; loosening and acetabular deformation with losing of one ore more columns and the bottom). In this degree we prefer a long-stem concept straight prosthesis; this prosthesis allows an immediately more stable implant, due to optimized length, in opposition to rotation forces and assuring force transfer in both proximal and distal direction. When osteolysis is wider, it was necessary a strategy change, searching a more distal locking of the implant, according to Wagner’s criteria. The SL Wagner’s prosthesis restores cohesion with the reabsorbed bone surface, generating a relative stability in the immediate post-op period; in the following 2 months, an intense bone apposition, which brings to a progressive filling of bone losses, takes place. For this purpose, it is not indicated, apart from surgical way used, cutting the muscle insertions around the thinned wall. This revision prosthesis is fixed without the use of cement due to the distal blocking, guaranteed by his conical shape; the stem is straight and it is not fit to the natural front-bending of femoral shaft. For this last explained reason, we follow these guidelines, improving our results, using a cementless anatomic modular stem: with this kind of implant design, that preserves cortical bone of femoral shaft from stress shielding, and the extremely wide (XX combination) choice of head and neck components, we are now able to regain as well as possible, the correct offset and center of rotation. For the acetabular loosening, we use to implant oval cups, that naturally fit the acetabular lesion, with or without bone grafts impaction in bone loss areas.- GIR 4 (Massive proximal bone loss all around the shaft; massive peri-acetabular loss). In the past we implanted wide-resection cemented (Muller) or non cemented (Kotz) prosthesis, originally designed for onchologic patients, to treat complete femoral osteolysis. The wide resection uncemented prosthesis, after follow up, supports the Wagner’s theory of distal support, because in spite of an almost complete bone sacrifice, there is an attempt of periprosthetic corticalization by the femoral bone. Since some years we implant even in this cases a modular distally-anatomic revision prosthesis, this type of prosthesis, thanks to his proximal component, provides a relative primary metaphyseal support, that improves global stability of implant. In massive peri-acetabular loss we prefer the use of oval components with peripheral supports and obturatory hook, with bone graft impaction. Only as “extrema ratio” we choose for the implant a McMinn stemmed cup. From these guidelines, integrated with clinical observation at mid range follow-up, appears clerarly that cementless prosthesis in hip revision surgery, even in most advanced degrees of osteolysis, are really able to guarantee good results for the patient. These patients, previously implanted with hip prosthesis, have intrinsic limitations of hip joint ROM, sometimes associated with muscular impairments; therefore it’s rarely possible to bring back the hip to an optimal degree of function, especially if compared with a normal joint. The goodness of long-term results must be therefore evaluated in relation to patient’s conditions before the operation itself, especially according to bone conditions regarding osteointegration of prosthesis. If follow up of patient is constant, allowing to program with good timing the revision surgery, if necessary, the use of cementless prostheses is a very powerful (nevertheless conservative) instrument for good functional recovery of these patients.
At 70 patients the femur was augmented (mesh, cerclage(s) and/or plate). A short stem (115–135mm) was used in 48% and a long stem (165–225mm) in 52% of the cases.
Postoperative the femoral stem had a varus position (6 –10°) in 4 cases. In 6 cases the stem was in posterior and 3 cases in anterior position. Progressive subsidence was demonstrated in 1 patient increasing to 5 mm at 1 year fu. Three patients showed subsidence of 3 mm at 3 months, but were stable afterwards. Slightly increasing radiolucent lines (>
2 mm) were noticed in 2 patients in subcortical areas, but never any signs of osteolysis. Intra- and postoperative femoral fractures occurred in 12 patients (13,6%). There were 3 dislocations and 1 loosening of a trochanteric osteotomy. Despite the fractures there was no loosening of a stem during follow-up period. After bivariate multilevel analysis, conducted to determine a relationship between the fracture complication and all other variables, a multivariate model was developed of the most significant variables to determine the predictor factors for femoral fracture. Only the Endo-classification and age are predictors for a fracture following a RIG procedure (p-value 0.003). Each higher EC type increases the probability of a fracture after RIG 2.01 times and each added year of life 1.07 times. So the risk of getting a femoral fracture increases exponentially with age from 1.7% at 55 years to 15.5% at 90 years in EC type 1. The fracture risk in EC type 4 increases from 4.7% at 40 years to almost 60% at 90 years.
This study utilised NJR primary hip data from the 6th Annual Report to determine the rate and indication for revision between cemented, uncemented, hybrid and resurfacing prosthetic groups. Regression analysis was performed to identify the influence of gender and ASA grade on these revision rates. Validity of the data was interrogated by exploring for episodes of misclassification. We identified 2,264 misclassified episodes within the four groups (Misclassification rate 2.7% primary, 4.3% revision procedures). Analysis was performed using the “reclassified dataset”. The Kaplan-Meier revision rates at 3 years were 0.9% (95%CI: 0.8%-1.0%) for cemented prostheses, 1.9% (95%CI: 1.8%-2.0%) for uncemented hips, 1.2% (95%CI: 1.0%-1.4%) for hybrids and 3.0%, (95%CI: 2.7%-3.3%) in the resurfacing group. The trends in revision rates were comparable to those published in the NJR (6th Edn.) with significant differences across all groups (p< 0.0001). Revision rates in the under 55 year age group showed an identical hierarchy with cemented and hybrid arthroplasty having the lowest revision rates. Cox Regression analysis indicated that both the prosthesis group in isolation and the interaction between prosthesis group and ASA grade significantly influenced the rate of failure (p< 0.001). Indications for revision showed significant differences in rates for, pain, aseptic loosening, dislocation and malalignment between prosthesis types (p< 0.001). The indications including Aseptic loosening, pain, malalignment and dislocation all demonstrated similar trends in revision rates between prosthetic groups with cemented hips having the lowest rates followed by ascending rates for hybrid, uncemented and resurfacing groups. The exception being dislocation with resurfacings having the lowest revision rates. This study provides important baseline revision rates by indication for each prosthetic group from which future comparisons can be made. Areas of misclassification within the NJR dataset have been reported back for future annual analysis.Results
Discussion
Two-staged exchange arthroplasty with an antibiotic-impregnated PMMA cement spacer in-between two stages has a success rate of 85% to 95% in eradication of infection. Use of vancomycine in high doses has a high potential for complications due to nephrotoxicity. The aim of this study was to evaluate the results of two-staged exchange arthroplasty in infected hip arthroplasty using low-dose vancomycine-impregnated PMMA cement as an interim spacer between stages. Thirty-five (20 females, 15 males, average age: 60) patients with a confirmed infected total hip arthroplasty who were treated between 1999 and 2005 were the subjects of the study. In the first stage after removal of the prosthesis and debridement, a spacer made of 40 grams of PMMA cement impregnated with 1 gr vancomycine was placed in the infected joint space. Postoperatively, patients were treated with 6 weeks of intravenous antibiotics in consultation with an infectious disease consultant. When CRP and ESR returned to normal levels, revision surgery with cementless components was performed. The average follow-up after the second stage was 4 years. The ESR and CRP decreased significantly before the second stage with this treatment protocol (from 81.28 to 17.54 mm/h p<
0.001 and 10.05 to 0.64 mg/dl respectively, p<
0.001). The mean interval between the two stages was 193.3 days. A second debridement was needed in 4 patients (10.8 %) because they did not respond to treatment. Two patients (5.4 %) had recurrent infections after reimplantation and underwent a resection arthroplasty. None of the patients suffered from antibiotic toxicity. Two-stage exchange arthroplasty using a low dose vancomycine-impregnated cement spacer was an effective method in treating infected hip replacements. With using a lower dose than previously reported, we were able to avoid antibiotic toxicity while effectively treating our patients with the same success rate.
Revision total hip replacement may be technically challenging, with component selection being one of the challenges. Modular titanium femoral components have some advantages, and our aim was to assess the medium term outcome of the use of such a component [Revitan or PFM] We reviewed 323 patients undergoing revision with one of these femoral stems. We applied the Oxford Hip Score, the Charnley Class, and the Devane Patient Activity Level to each patient. The average follow up time was 6.58 years. The mean Oxford score was 35.74.39.8% of the patients were Charnley Class B. 52.4% of patients had an activity score indicating a moderate level of activity ie they could participate in gardening, swimming and other leisure pursuits. The overall outcome was good with this prosthesis. The Oxford scores were comparable with the national mean for revision THR on the NZ National Joint Register.
Aims. The burden of revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) continues to grow. The surgery is complex and associated with significant costs. Regional rTHA networks have been proposed to improve outcomes and to reduce re-revisions, and therefore costs. The aim of this study was to accurately quantify the cost and reimbursement for a rTHA service, and to assess the financial impact of case complexity at a tertiary referral centre within the NHS. Methods. A retrospective analysis of all