Aims

Using a systematic review, we investigated whether there is an increased risk of post-operative infection in patients who have received an intra-articular corticosteroid injection to the hip for osteoarthritis prior to total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Image-guided intra-articular hip injection of local-anaesthetic and steroid is commonly used in the management of hip pain. It can be used as a diagnostic and/or therapeutic tool and is of low cost (£75). The aim of this study was to assess how often a hip injection has a therapeutic effect.

This is a retrospective, consecutive, case series of intra-articular hip injections performed in a tertiary referral hospital over a 2-year period (2013–4). Patients were identified from the radiology department's prospectively entered database. Clinical information, reason for injection and subsequent management was obtained from hospital records. All patients prospectively reported their pain levels in a numeric pain scale diary (out of 10) at various time points; pre-, immediately post-, 1st day-, 2nd day- and 2 weeks- post-injection. Only patients with complete pain scores at all time points were included (n=200, of the 250 injections performed over study period, 80%).

The majority of injections were performed for osteoarthritis (OA) treatment (82%). The pain was significantly reduced from a pre-injection score of 7.5 (SD:2) to 5.0 (SD:3) immediately post-injection(p<0.001); only 24 (11%) reported any worsening of pain immediately post-injection. Pain significantly reduced further to 3.8(SD:3) at 2-weeks post-injection (p<0.001). 50% of patients had at least a 3 point drop in reported pain. No improvement was seen in 18 patients and 10 (5%) reported worse pain at 2-weeks compared to pre-injection. Of the OA cohort, 10% have required repeat injections, 45% required no further intervention and 45% underwent or are due for hip replacement. No immediate complications occurred.

Intra-articular hip injection reduced pain in 86% of cases and has delayed any further surgical treatment for at least 2 years in over 50% of OA cases. It is hence a cost-effective treatment modality. Further work is necessary to describe factors predicting response.

An intra-articular steroid injection can be a useful diagnostic tool in patients presenting with debilitating hip pain and radiographically mild osteoarthritis. The clinical and patient reported outcomes associated with patients who have radiographically mild osteoarthritis and undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA) remain poorly studied. Patients undergoing primary, elective THA at a single academic medical center by a fellowship-trained adult reconstruction surgeon between 2017–2023 were identified. Only those patients who underwent an intra-articular corticosteroid injection into the operative hip within one year of surgery were included. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on the severity of their osteoarthritis as determined by preoperative radiographs; those with Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) grade I-II arthritis were classified as “mild” whereas those with KL grade III-IV arthritis were classified as “severe”. Clinical and patient reported outcomes at final follow-up were compared between cohorts. The final cohorts included 25 and 224 patients with radiographically mild and severe osteoarthritis, respectively. There were no baseline differences in age, gender or time between intra-articular corticosteroid injection and THA between cohorts. There were no significant differences in the preoperative or postoperative HOOS JR values between patients with mild or severe arthritis (all p>0.05). There were no significant differences in the change in HOOS JR scores from the preoperative to final follow-up timepoints between cohorts. There were no significant differences in the percentage of patients who achieved the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on the HOOS JR questionnaire between cohorts. Patients with radiographically mild osteoarthritis who feel relief of their hip pain following an intra-articular corticosteroid injection report similar preoperative debility and demonstrate similar improvements in patient reported outcome scores following THA compared to patients with radiographically severe osteoarthritis

Intra-articular injections of steroid into the hip are used for a variety of reasons in current orthopaedic practice. Recently their safety prior to ipsilateral total hip replacement has been called into question owing to concerns about deep joint infection.

We undertook a retrospective analysis of all patients who had undergone local anaesthetic and steroid injections followed by ipsilateral total hip replacement over a five-year period. Members of the surgical team, using a lateral approach to the hip, performed all the injections in the operating theatre using a strict aseptic technique. The mean time between injection and total hip replacement was 18 months (4 to 50). The mean follow-up after hip replacement was 25.8 months (9 to 78), during which time no case of deep joint sepsis was found.

In our series, ipsilateral local anaesthetic and steroid injections have not conferred an increased risk of infection in total hip replacement. We believe that the practice of intra-articular local anaesthetic and steroid injections to the hip followed by total hip replacement is safer than previously reported.

Aims

Femoroacetabular Junction Impingement (FAI) describes abnormalities in the shape of the femoral head–neck junction, or abnormalities in the orientation of the acetabulum. In the short term, FAI can give rise to pain and disability, and in the long-term it significantly increases the risk of developing osteoarthritis. The Femoroacetabular Impingement Trial (FAIT) aims to determine whether operative or non-operative intervention is more effective at improving symptoms and preventing the development and progression of osteoarthritis.

Immunosuppression following intra-articular injections of steroid into the hip may interfere with asepsis in a subsequent total hip arthroplasty (THA). We have undertaken a retrospective, matched, cohort study of infective complications after THA, in 40 patients who had received such an injection and 40 who had not.

In the injection group there were five revisions, four of which were for deep infection. There were none in the matched group. The overall rate of revision in our database of 979 primary THAs was 1.02%. Six additional patients who had received injections underwent investigation for infection because of persistent problems in the hip as compared with one in the control group.