Purpose. Incidence of malrotation of femoral fractures after intramedullary nailing is as high as 28%. Prevention of malrotation is superior to late derotation osteotomy. The lesser trochanter (LT) profile has been in use for some time as a radiographic landmark of femoral rotation. One of the authors has previously described a linear regression model that describes the relationship of the LT to rotation. This paper aims to validate the use of this equation in predicting femoral rotation. Method. A survey was created and circulated online. Twenty images of cadaveric femurs of known rotation were chosen randomly from a large series. Thirty individuals with varying degrees of orthopaedic experience were invited to participate. Participants were asked to take measurements of the LT in a standardized fashion. Inter-observer variation for predicted rotation and the precision of predicted rotation was calculated. Results were grouped into those with the LT readily visible and those with the LT hidden by the femoral shaft. Results. A pilot study found the standard deviation for films with the LT hidden was 10.8 degrees, and only 6.0 degrees for films with the LT visible. The mean difference between the predicted and actual rotation was equally high in both groups (18.3 and 17.3 degrees respectively). Conclusion. Preliminary results found that the LT must be clearly visible to predict femoral rotation. This suggests that the surgeon should place the femur in a neutral or externally rotated position. In a favourable position most predictions were within a 6.0 degree spread, which would be sufficient to prevent a fifteen degree malrotation. Predicted rotation was however not precise enough to prevent a fifteen degree malrotation, regardless of LT visibility. The precision of predicted rotation may be improved by using a non-linear model. Such a model has recently been designed by a group of engineers at the University of Manitoba. The r squared value of the non-linear model was 0.88, in comparison to 0.78 for the linear equation. Precision may be further improved by using the contra-lateral LT for comparison

Objective. In total hip arthroplasty (THA), the femoral component influences leg length inequality and gait, and is associated with poor muscle strength and other unsatisfactory long-term results. We have therefore used intraoperative radiographs to acquire accurate measurements of femoral component size and position. At the last meeting of this society, we reported that accurate positioning was successfully achieved in 68 cases (87.2%) as a consequence of taking intraoperative radiographs. However, we have little understanding as regards to the accuracy of X-ray measurements. We accordingly undertook an examination of the accuracy of such measurements. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the difference between leg length discrepancy (LLD) measured using X-ray and computed tomography (CT). Materials and Methods. The study group comprised 48 primary THAs performed between October 2010 and April 2012. Using 2D template software (JMM Corporation), we measured LLD using pre-operative anteroposterior (AP) radiographs of the pelvis. On the basis of both teardrop lines, we measured LLD of the lesser trochanter top (Fig. 1), lesser trochanter direct top (Fig. 2), and trochanteric top (Fig. 3). Furthermore, using Aquarius NET software, we measured LLD using AP and lateral scout views of the pelvis and bilateral femurs. This data was defined as the true LLD. The difference between the X-ray data (lesser trochanter top, lesser trochanter direct top, and trochanteric top) and the CT data was defined as accuracy. Additionally, we measured the size of the lesser trochanter and examined the association. Results. The mean LLD was 11.4, 12.1, and 9.6 mm on the lesser trochanter top, the lesser trochanter direct top, and the trochanteric top of radiographs, respectively, and 11.6 mm on CT scans. Precision was within 5 mm of the true LLD in 42 cases (87.5%) for the lesser trochanter top, 36 cases (75.0 %) for the lesser trochanter direct top, and 27 cases (63.0%) for the trochanteric top. We observed no association between the size of the lesser trochanter and the measurement accuracy. Conclusions. When using X-ray measurements, the lesser trochanter top is the most useful site for LLD measurement

Purpose. Leg length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty (THA) sometimes causes significant patient dissatisfaction. In consideration of the leg length after THA, leg length discrepancy is often measured using anteroposterior (AP) pelvic radiography. However, some cases have discrepancies in femoral and tibial lengths, and we believe that in some cases, true leg length differences should be taken into consideration in total leg length measurement. We report the lengths of the lower limb, femur, and tibia measured using the preoperative standing AP full-leg radiographs of the patients who underwent THA. Materials and methods. From August 2013 to February 2017, 282 patients underwent standing AP full-leg radiography before THA. Of the patients, 33 were male and 249 were female. The mean age of the patients was 65.7±9.4 years. We measured the distances between the center of the tibial plafond and lesser trochanter apex (A-L), between the femoral intercondylar notch and lesser trochanter (K-L), and between the centers of the tibial plafond and intercondylar spine of the tibia (A-K) on standing AP full-leg radiographs before THA operation. We examined the differences in leg length and the causes of these discrepancies after guiding the difference between them. Results. The mean A-L was 674±44 mm on the right and 677±43 mm on the left. The mean difference between the left and the right was 6.2±7 mm. The differences of ≥5 and ≥10 mm between the left and right were confirmed in 131 (46%) and 39 cases (14%), respectively. The mean K-L was 343±23 mm on the right and 343±23 mm on the left, with a mean difference of 4.4±4 mm. The lateral differences of ≥5 and ≥10 mm were confirmed in 88 (31%) and 22 (8%), respectively. The mean A-K was 325±22 mm on the right and 327±22 mm on the left, with a mean difference of 4±4.5 mm. The differences of ≥5 and ≥10 mm between the left and right were confirmed in 24 (9%) and 67 cases (%), respectively. Discussion. Considering the total length of the lower limbs beyond the little trochanter and the leg length after THA, we confirmed that 46% of the leg length differences of ≥5 mm were admitted to 14%. Thus, THA appeared effective. Perthes head, Crowe classifications 3 and 4, history of childhood paralysis, and so on may be factors for leg length differences beyond the lesser trochanter. Conclusion. We think that it would be preferable to prepare a preoperative plan to measure leg length after THA by measuring the total length of the lower extremity before surgery and determining the difference between the left and right sides

Purpose. Accolade TMZF® has the wedged taper shape and is fixed at the middle part. We testified the short term result of Accolade® and investigated the factor of subsidence. Materials and Methods. We treated 21 hips in 20 patients (6 males and 15 females) with Accolade stem. The mean age was 61.2 years old (40–79 years old). The mean follow-up period was 11.1 months (6–23 months), and those within 5 months after operation were excluded. We measured the width of the stem and the canal of femur at the level of the upper and the lower end of lesser trochanter, and 1 cm above the tip of the stem at operation and at the last follow-up, then calculated the canal fill ratios. We also measured the distance between the tip of the stem and the proximal end of greater trochanter, then calibrated it by directly sizing the acetabular component. The value that subtracted the distance at the last follow-up from the distance at operation meant subsidence. We performed multiple regression study about weight and the canal fill ratio of stem at the level of lower end of lesser trochanter. Results. The mean subsidence of the stem was 1.24 mm (0∼4.50 mm). The patients with 2 mm or more subsidence were four, and the patients with 1 mm or less subsidence were ten. There were no significant differences in weight and the canal fill ratio at the level of lower end of lesser trochanter, but the canal fill ratio of the stem tended to negatively correlate with subsidence. Discussions and conclusions. Some authors reported the most important factors in predicting a failure of osteointegration were canal fill at the mid-third of the stem, canal fill at the distal-third of the stem, and canal flare index. Others reported large stem size was associated with subsidence. Our result showed the canal fill ratio at the level of lower end of lesser trochanter is associated with subsidence. Besides, Accolade® tended to result in more severe resorption of the proximal femur and lack of osteointegration. Accolade® had a good result in the short term evaluation, but we should observe the subsidence carefully because the proximal femur cortex inclines to resorption and the osteointegration doesn't ocuur

I use monolithic, cylindrical, fully porous coated femoral components for many femoral revisions. Our institutional database holds information on 1000 femoral revisions using extensively porous-coated stems. To date, 27 stems have been re-revised (14 for loosening, 4 for infection, 7 for stem fracture, 2 at time of periprosthetic femoral fracture). Using femoral re-revision for any reason as an end point, the survivorship is 99 ± 0.8% (95% confidence interval) at 2 years, 97 ± 1.3% at 5 years, 95.6 ± 1.8% at 10 years, and 94.5 ± 2.2% at 15 years. Similar to Moreland and Paprosky, we have identified pre-revision bone stock as a factor affecting femoral fixation. Among the 777 femoral revisions graded for femoral bone loss, 59% of the femurs were graded as having no cortical damage before the revision, 29% had cortical damage extending no more than 10 cm below the lesser trochanter, and 12% had cortical damage that extended more than 10 cm below the lesser trochanter. When the cortical damage involved bone more than 10 cm below the lesser trochanter, the survivorship, using femoral re-revision for any reason or definite radiographic loosening as an end point, was reduced significantly, as compared with femoral revisions with less cortical damage. In addition to patients with Paprosky type 3B and 4 femoral defects there are rare patients with femoral canals smaller than 13.5 mm or larger than 26 mm that are not well suited to this technique. Eight and 10” stems 13.5 or smaller should be used with caution if there is no proximal bone support for fear of breaking. Patients with canals larger than 18 mm may be better suited for a titanium tapered stem with flutes. While a monolithic stem is slightly more difficult for a surgeon to insert than a modular femoral stem there is little worry about taper junction failure

I prefer monolithic, cylindrical, fully porous coated femoral components for most femoral revisions. Our institutional database holds information on 1000 femoral revisions using extensively porous-coated stems. To date, 27 stems have been rerevised (14 for loosening, 4 for infection, 7 for stem fracture, 2 at time of periprosthetic femoral fracture). Using femoral rerevision for any reason as an end point, the survivorship is 99 ± 0.8% (95% confidence interval) at 2 years, 97 ± 1.3% at 5 years, 95.6 ± 1.8% at 10 years, and 94.5 ± 2.2% at 15 years. Similar to Moreland and Paprosky, we have identified prerevision bone stock as a factor affecting femoral fixation. Among the 777 femoral revisions graded for femoral bone loss, 59% of the femurs were graded as having no cortical damage before the revision, 29% had cortical damage extending no more than 10cm below the lesser trochanter, and 12% had cortical damage that extended more than 10cm below the lesser trochanter. When the cortical damage involved bone more than 10cm below the lesser trochanter, the survivorship, using femoral rerevision for any reason or definite radiographic loosening as an end point, was reduced significantly, as compared with femoral revisions with less cortical damage. In addition to patients with Paprosky type 3B and 4 femoral defects there are rare patients with femoral canals smaller than 13.5mm or larger than 26mm that are not well suited to this technique. Eight and 10-inch stems 13.5 or smaller should be used with caution if there is no proximal bone support for fear of breaking. Patients with canals larger than 18mm may be better suited for a titanium tapered stem with flutes. While a monolithic stem is slightly more difficult for a surgeon to insert than a modular femoral stem there is little worry about taper junction failure

Introduction. In DDH cases often have high anteversion. They also often have high hip center. THA for those cases sometimes requires subtrochanteric derotational/shortening osteotomy. To achieve good results of the surgery, accurate preoperative planning based on biomechanics of the high anteversion cases, method for accurate application of the plan, and stable fixation are very important. At ISTA 2008, we have reported that the location of the anteversion exist several centimeters below the lesser trochanter. Independently from the extent of anteversion, femoral head, grater trochanter, and lesser trochanter are aligned in the same proportion. We have also reported in 2007, in improper high anteversion cases, many cases grow osteophytes posterior side of femoral head to reduce it functionally. In 2014, we reported about development of the stem for subtrochanteric osteotomy. (ModulusR)[Fig.1] In the present study, we established systematic planning way for estimate proper derotation and shortening and apply it for the surgery. Methods. Leg alignment during walking were well observed. According to the CT, 3D geometry of the femur, anteversion in hip joint and its compensation by the osteophyte, and knee rotation were measured. It was divided into proximal part and distal part at several centimeter below the lesser trochanter. Adequate hip local anteversion was determined by local original anteversion – compensation if IR-ER can be done. Keeping that anteversion for the proximal part, distal part was rotated as knee towards front. Thus derotation angle was decided. Using 3D CAD (Magics®) proper size of Modulus R was selected and overlapping with canal was extracted then its center of gravity was calculated. This level is decided as the height of osteotomy to obtain equal fixation to both proximal and distal part.[Fig.2] If the derotation angle is less than 15 degree, modular neck adjustment was selected first. By trial reduction and motion test, according to the instability osteotomy was performed. In the high hip center cases, original hip center was reconstructed. Shortening length was determined not to make leg elongation more than 3cm. ModulusR were used for the replacement and fixation of the osteotomy. Results. Eight cases were operated with this procedures. Standard Modulus was used in one case. In the case rotational fixation was well obtained but proximal stress shielding happened. ModulusR was used in other seven cases. In one ModulusR case vertical clack; which was fixed by metal band; happened in proximal part by the repeated rotational adjustment. But in all ModulusR cases, weight baring could be started in 1 week and good union was observed. Every patient feels knee direction became better than before.[Fig.3,4]. Discussion. In intraoperative stability test, much better stability was obtained after derotational osteotomy was done than the adjustment only by modular neck direction. Reducing anteversion by osteotomy was supposed to have advantage. Limitation of this paper is that the adequate hip local anteversion was estimated from femoral geometry and osteophytes and knee direction during walking. Future improvement would to use 2D-3D matching while walking to determine accurate hip local anteversion

I prefer monolithic, cylindrical, fully porous coated femoral components for most femoral revisions. Our institutional database holds information on 1000 femoral revisions using extensively porous-coated stems. To date, 27 stems have been rerevised (14 for loosening, 4 for infection, 7 for stem fracture, 2 at time of periprosthetic femoral fracture). Using femoral rerevision for any reason as an end point, the survivorship is 99 ± 0.8% (95% confidence interval) at 2 years, 97 ± 1.3% at 5 years, 95.6 ± 1.8% at 10 years, and 94.5 ± 2.2% at 15 years. Similar to Moreland and Paprosky, we have identified prerevision bone stock as a factor affecting femoral fixation. Among the 777 femoral revisions graded for femoral bone loss, 59% of the femurs were graded as having no cortical damage before the revision, 29% had cortical damage extending no more than 10 cm below the lesser trochanter, and 12% had cortical damage that extended more than 10 cm below the lesser trochanter. When the cortical damage involved bone more than 10 cm below the lesser trochanter, the survivorship, using femoral rerevision for any reason or definite radiographic loosening as an end point, was reduced significantly, as compared with femoral revisions with less cortical damage. In addition to patients with Paprosky type 3B and 4 femoral defects there are rare patients with femoral canals smaller than 13.5 mm or larger than 26 mm that are not well suited to this technique. Eight and 10” stems 13.5 or smaller should be used with caution if there is no proximal bone support for fear of breaking. Patients with canals larger than 18 mm may be better suited for a titanium tapered stem with flutes. While a monolithic stem is slightly more difficult for a surgeon to insert than a modular femoral stem there is little worry about taper junction failure

Intraoperative fractures during primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) can occur on either the acetabular or the femoral side. A range of risk factors including smaller incision surgery, uncemented components, prior surgery, female sex, osteoporosis, and inflammatory arthritis have been identified. Acetabular fractures are rare but when they do occur often are underrecognised. It is not uncommon for intraoperative acetabular fractures to be discovered only postoperatively. Intraoperative acetabular fractures are associated with cementless implants and a number of identified anatomic risk factors. Factors related to surgical technique, including excessive under-reaming, excessive medialization with aggressive reaming, and implant designs such as an elliptical cup design are associated with higher risk. Treatment of acetabular fractures is dependent on whether they are diagnosed intraoperatively or postoperatively. When discovered intraoperatively, supplemental fixation should be added in the form of additional screw fixation, placing a pelvic plate, or using an acetabular reconstruction cage and morselised allografts. Acetabular reamings, obtained during preparation of the acetabulum, can be used for local bone graft. The goal should be stability of both the fracture and acetabular cup. Postoperatively, weight bearing and mobilization protocols may require modification, with many surgeons choosing a period of toe-touch weight-bearing in such cases. Acetabular fractures found postoperatively require the surgeon to make a judgement on the relative stability of the implant and the fracture to determine if immediate revision surgery or protected weight-bearing alone is appropriate. On the femoral side intraoperative fractures can occur around the greater trochanter, the calcar, or in the diaphysis. Fractures of the greater trochanter are problematic because of their tendency to displace due to the attachment of the abductors and the strong force they apply. Tension band wiring techniques will work for many greater trochanteric fractures while a trochanteric plate may be occasionally called for. With either form of fixation strong consideration should be given to 6–8 weeks of protected weight bearing postoperatively. Short longitudinal cracks in the medial calcar region are not rare with uncemented implants. Calcar fractures that do not extend below the lesser trochanter can often be managed with a single cerclage cable. Calcar fractures extending below the lesser trochanter should be scrutinised with additional intraoperative xrays; longer longitudinal cracks can be managed with 2 cables while more complex fractures that exit the diaphysis demand a change to a distally fixed implant and formal fracture reduction. Distal diaphyseal fractures are relatively uncommon in the primary setting, but not rare in the revision setting. When recognised intraoperatively, distal diaphyseal fractures can be treated effectively with cerclage cables. Distal diaphyseal longitudinal cracks noted postoperatively do not typically mandate a return to the OR and instead can be managed with 8 weeks of protected weight bearing

Objectives. The shape of proximal femur is important for the selection of implant in total hip arthroplasty (THA). There are few reports about the shape of proximal femur. We analyzed preoperative and postoperative conditions of the proximal femurs of patients before and after total hip arthroplasty with computed tomography (CT) and evaluated the compatibility to the cementless stem. Materials and Methods. We analyzed 65 hips of 63 patients (10 males and 53 females) who had THA between January 2008 and December 2010 in our hospital. We approximated the center of the femoral head as the center of the inscribed sphere in the femoral head. We defined the axis of proximal femur with the line between the centers of the circles located at 45 mm distal from lesser trochanter (LT) and at 90 mm proximal from LT. We measured the neck-shaft angle of femur, offset of femoral head, and diameter of bone-marrow cavity. After operation, we measured the distance between the stem surface and the edge of the femoral cortex (SF) at 10 mm proximal from LT to evaluate the compatibility of CT. We used PerFix HA cementless stem (Kyocera medical co., Osaka). Results. The mean diameter of femoral head was 46.1 mm, neck-shaft angle was 128.9 degrees, horizontal offset was 33.5 mm, and vertical offset was 41.6 mm. The mean diameters of bone-marrow cavity were 20.8 mm at 10 mm proximal level from LT, 14.2 mm at 20 mm distal level from LT and 9.9 mm at 100 mm distal level from LT. The medial shape was curved within 40 mm distal point from lesser trochanter. The mean of SF was 3.4 mm (0–5.1mm) and SF values of 43 hips were less than 2.0 mm. The mean of CFI was 3.6. Discussions and Conclusions. Several reports described about the shape of proximal femur on X-ray. However, it is inaccurate if we do not correct for the influence of anteversion angle of femur. For cementless stem, it is important to fit the medial area to the surface and the compatibility depends on the flare of the proximal femur

The design of hip replacements is based on the morphology of the proximal femur. Populations living in hard water regions have higher levels of serum calcium and magnesium which promote bone mineralization. A case control study was performed comparing proximal femoral morphology in patients living in soft and hard water regions to determine whether the effect of water hardness had an implication in the future design of hip-prostheses. The proximal femoral morphology of 2 groups of 70 aged and sex matched patients living in hard and soft water regions at mean age 72.24 (range, 50 to 87 years) were measured using an antero-posterior radiograph of the non-operated hip with magnification adjusted. The medullary canal diameter at the level of the lesser trochanter was significantly wider in patients living in the hard water region (mean width 1.9 mm wider; p=0.003). No difference was found at the isthmus, Dorr index, or cortical bone ratio. In conclusion proximal femoral morphology does differ: a wider medullary canal at the level of the lesser trochanter in hard water regions. This size difference is relatively small and is unlikely therefore to affect the mechanics of the current femoral stem prostheses components

The femur begins to bow anteriorly at the 200 mm level, but may bow earlier in smaller people. If the stem to be used is less than 200 mm, a straight stem can be used. If the stem is longer than 200 mm, it will perforate the anterior femoral cortex. I know this because I did this on a few occasions more than 20 years ago. To use a long straight stem, there are two techniques. One can either do a diaphyseal osteotomy or one can do a Wagner split (extended trochanteric osteotomy). Both of these will put the knee in some degree of hyperextension, probably insignificant in the elderly, but it may be of significance in the young. In very young people, therefore, it may be preferable to use a bowed stem to avoid this degree of recurvatum. There are two different concepts of loading. Diaphyseal osteotomy implies a proximal loading has been sought. The Wagner split ignores the proximal femur and seeks conical fixation in the diaphysis. There will be very little bone-bone contact between what remains of the attached femur and the detached anterior cortex so that it is important to ensure that the blood supply to the anterior cortex remains intact, preferably by using Wagner's technique, using a quarter-inch osteotome inserted through the vastus to crack the medial cortex. Current modularity is of two types. Distal modularity was attempted many years ago and was never successful. Proximal modularity, as for example, the S-ROM stem, implies various sizes of sleeves fit onto the stem to get a proximal canal fill. In mid-stem modularity, the distal stem wedges into the cone. It has to be driven into where it jams and this can be somewhat unpredictable. For this reason, the solid Wagner stem has been replaced by the mid-stem modular. Once the distal femur is solidly embedded, the proximal body is then selected for height and version. The proximal body is unsupported in the mid-stem modular and initially, few fractures were noted at the taper junction. Cold rolling, shot peening and taper strengthening seem to have solved these problems. There are a variety of types of osteotomy, which can be used for different deformities. With a mid-stem modular system, generally, all that needs to be done is a Wagner-type split and fixation is sought in the mid-diaphysis by conical reaming. No matter what stem is used, distal stability is necessary. This is achieved by flutes, which engage the endosteal cortex. The flutes alone must have sufficient rotational stability to overcome the service loads on the hip of 22 Nm. I divide revision into three categories. In type one, the isthmus is intact, i.e. the bone below the lesser trochanter so that a primary stem can be used. In type two, the isthmus is damaged, i.e. the bone below the lesser trochanter, so a long revision stem is required. In a type three, there is more than 70 mm of missing proximal femur. The Wagner stem may be able to handle this on its own, but most other stems are better supported with a structural allograft cemented to the stem. The reported long term results of mid-stem modular revision implants are good as in most, over 90% survivorship. The introduction of modularity appears to have overcome initial disadvantage of the Wagner stem, i.e. its unpredictability in terms of leg length

Purpose. CentPillar GB HA stem (stryker®) is developed as the stem fitting the Japanese femur, and now there is CentPillar TMZF HA stem (stryker®) as the improvement type of the stem by coating the PureFix HA with plasma spray. We observed the factors which influenced on the stem subsidence between the two-type stems. Materials and Methods. We intended for 26 hips 23 patients that we performed total hip arthroplasty (THA) during the period between January 2005 and June 2009 and were able to follow up more than three years. 10 males 11 hips and 13 females 15 hips, the mean age at the time of surgery was 56.5 (range, 29–74) years old, and primary diseases were osteoarthritis (OA) in 17 hips, Idiopathic Osteonecrosis of Femoral Head (ION) in six hips, and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in three hips. 16 hips were treated with the CentPillar GB HA stem (G group), and 10 hips were performed with the CentPillar TMZF HA stem (T group). The examination items are the stem size, the canal fill ratio of the stem (the top of lesser trochanter, the bottom of lesser trochanter, the distal portion of the stem) and the stem alignment (on anteroposterior radiograph and Lauenstein view). Results. The mean stem subsidence was 1.75 mm (range, 0–8.9 mm) in the G group, and 0.87 mm (range, 0–2.9 mm) in the T group. Although there was no significant difference, it accepted the tendency that the stem subsidence in the G group was larger than its in T group. The case in which the stem subsidence more than 2 mm was found at were 7 hips in the G group, whereas it was only one hip in the T group. The stem size, the canal fill ratio of the stem and the stem alignment were no meaningful effect on the stem subsidence. In F-test, the stem subsidence of the G group had significantly large dispersion compared with the T group (P<0.01). Discussion and Conclusion. Although there were no significant differences in the stem subsidence between the two groups, the variation of the stem subsidence was significantly small in the T group. We examined the factor which affected the stem subsidence, but neither item recognized meaningful relation, and the influence such as differences of the surface processing was considered. In fact, the strength of the TMZF HA stem improved for the GB HA stem with TMZF titanium alloy, the contact area with the bone spread by coating the PureFix HA with plasma spray, the elasticity of TMZF became closer to the bone, and the strong proximal fixation were enabled. In THA with the GB HA stem, variation of the stem subsidence was significantly large, so considerable attention for the excessive stem subsidence was required

Introduction. The debate regarding the importance of preserving the blood supply to the femoral head (FH) and neck during hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) is ongoing. Several surgeons continue to advocate for the preservation of the blood supply to the resurfaced heads for both the current HRA techniques and more biologic approaches for FH resurfacing. Despite alternative blood-preserving approaches for HRA, many surgeons continue to use the posterior approach (PA) due to personal preference and comfort. It is commonly accepted that the PA inevitably damages the deep branch of the medial femoral circumflex artery (MFCA). This study seeks to evaluate and measure the anatomical course of the ascending and deep branch of the MFCA to better describe the area in danger during the posterior approach. Methods. In 20 fresh-frozen cadaveric hips, we cannulated the MFCA and injected a urethane compound. The Kocher-Langenbeck approach was used in all specimens. The deep branch of the MFCA was identified at the proximal border of the QF and measurements were taken. The QF was incised medially and elevated laterally, maintaining the relationship of the ascending branch and QF, and distances from the lesser trochanter were measured. The deep branch was dissected and followed to its capsular insertion to assess the course and relation to the obturatur externus (OE) tendon and the conjoint tendon (CT) of the short external rotators. Results. Gross dissection revealed that the transition point from transverse to ascending branch of the MFCA at the anterior surface of the QF was at an average distance of 2.2 cm (range 2–2.3 cm) proximal and 1.2 cm (range 0.5–1.9 cm) medial to the lesser trochanter. The ascending branch runs caudally within fat tissue that divides the QF and OE at an average distance of 1.5 cm (range 0.7–2.3 cm) from the QF greater trochanter insertion. At the superior border of the QF, the MFCA continues as the deep branch posterior to the OE tendon at an average distance of 1.3 cm (range 0.6–1.9 cm) from the OE femoral insertion. The deep branch was noted to enter the capsule at an average distance of 0.3 cm (range 0–0.5 cm) from the distal border of the CT and 1.2 cm (range 0.6–1.9 cm) from the CT femoral insertion. Discussion and Conclusion. The ascending branch of the MFCA runs in the anterior surface of the QF at a distance of 1.5 cm from the femoral insertion. When the QF myotomy is performed, commonly 0.5–0.8 cm from the insertion to the femur, the vessel get disrupted or stays medial to the myotomy and can stretch/disrupt when the femur is dislocated and translated anteriorly. Tenotomies of the OE and CT should stay at least 1.5 cm from the femoral insertion to preserve the deep branch of the MFCA. This study provides unreported topographic anatomy of the ascending and deep branch of the MFCA, which can help develop an improved blood-preserving posterior approach for HRA

The most common classification of periprosthetic femoral fractures is the Vancouver classification. The classification has been validated by multiple centers. Fractures are distinguished by location, stability of the femoral component, and bone quality. Although postoperative and intraoperative fractures are classified using the same three regions, the treatment algorithm is slightly different. Type A fractures involve the greater and lesser trochanter. Fractures around the stem or just distal to the stem are Type B and subcategorised depending on stem stability and bone quality. Type C fractures are well distal to the stem and are treated independent of the stem with standard fixation techniques. The majority of fractures are either B1 (stable stem) or B2 (unstable stem). The stem is retained and ORIF of the fracture performed for B1 fractures. B2 and B3 fractures require stem revision with primary stem fixation distal to the fracture. Intraoperative fractures use the same A, B, C regions but are subtyped 1–3 as cortical perforations, nondisplaced, and displaced unstable fractures, respectively. With the exception of A1 intraoperative fractures all other intraoperative fractures require surgical treatment. A recent publication utilizing a New York state registry highlighted the patient risk of mortality associated with periprosthetic hip fractures. One month, 6 month and 1 year mortality was 3.2%, 3.8% and 9.7%, respectively. The mortality risk was lower for periprosthetic fractures treated with ORIF at 1 and 6 months compared to fractures requiring revision total hip

Introduction. Traditionally, conventional radiographs of the hip are used to assist surgeons during the preoperative planning process, and these processes generally involve two-dimensional X-ray images with implant templates. Unfortunately, while this technique has been used for many years, it is very manual and can lead to inaccurate fits, such as “good” fits in the frontal view but misalignment in the sagittal view. In order to overcome such shortcomings, it is necessary to fully describe the morphology of the femur in three dimensions, therefore allowing the surgeon to successfully view and fit the components from all possible angles. Objective. The objective of this study was to efficiently describe the morphology of the proximal femur based on existing anatomical landmarks for use in surgical planning and/or forward solution modeling. Methods. Seven parameters are needed to fully define femoral morphology: head diameter, head center, neck shaft axis, femoral canal, proximal shaft axis, offset, and neck shaft angle. A previous algorithm has been developed in-house to automatically locate anatomical landmarks of patient specific bone models. Once the bone model has been aligned and scaled based on these landmarks, the femoral head diameter and center are calculated by iteratively fitting a sphere to the corresponding femoral head point cloud. An iterative cylindrical fitting algorithm is used to describe the neck shaft axis. The femoral canal is determined using three steps: 1) the femur is sliced at 10mm increments below the lesser trochanter, 2) the femoral canal boundary is determined at each slice, and 3) the largest circle is fit within each slice's canal boundary. The proximal shaft axis is described by fitting a line to the canal circle center locations. Offset is defined as the distance from the head center to the proximal shaft axis. Finally, the neck shaft angle is the angle between the neck shaft axis and the proximal shaft axis. Results. The goal pertaining to femoral component morphology is to provide meaningful information that can be used to determine how the femoral stem fits within the canal. Regardless of differences in bone sizes and geometries, the algorithm has proven to be successful in describing the femoral morphology of a patient-specific bone model. Discussion. These results lay the groundwork for an automatic stem fitting algorithm, which is described in a subsequent abstract. The morphology knowledge of the femoral head, femoral neck, femoral canal, and various axes can be coupled with known THA component parameters (such as offset, neck length, neck shaft angle, etc.) to allow our algorithms to predict the “best selection” and “best fit” for the femoral stem. This can also be applied to the acetabulum and can then be used as a surgical planning tool as well as a parameter when modeling postoperative predictions. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Introduction. Instability continues to be the number one reason for revision in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Commonly, impingement precedes dislocation, inducing a levering out the prosthetic head from the liner. Impingement can be prosthetic, bony or soft tissue, depending on component positioning and anatomy. The aim of this virtual study was to investigate whether bony or prosthetic impingement occurred first in well positioned THAs, with the hip placed in deep flexion and hyperextension. Methods. Twenty-three patients requiring THA were planned for a TriFit/Trinity ceramic-on-poly cementless construct using the OPS. TM. dynamic planning software (Corin, UK). The cups were sized to best fit the anatomy, medialised to sit on the acetabular fossa and orientated at 45° inclination and 25° anteversion when standing. Femoral components and head lengths were then positioned to reproduce the native anteversion and match the contralateral leg length and offset. The planned constructs were flexed and internally rotated until anterior impingement occurred in deep flexion [Fig. 1]. The type (bony or prosthetic), and location, of impingement was then recorded. Similarly, the hips were extended and externally rotated until posterior impingement occurred, and the type and location of impingement recorded [Fig. 2]. Patients with minimal pre-operative osteophyte were selected as a best-case scenario for bony impingement. Results. 6/23 (26%) patients were planned with only a 32mm articulation (<50mm cup size), with the remaining 17 patients all planned with both 32mm and 36mm articulations (≥50mm cup size). Anterior impingement was 26% prosthetic and 74% bony with the 32mm articulations, and 100% bony with the 36mm articulations. Bony impingement in deep flexion was exclusively anterior neck on anterior inferior iliac spine. Posterior impingement was 57% prosthetic and 43% bony with the 32mm articulations, and 41% prosthetic and 59% bony with the 36mm articulations. Bony impingement in hyperextension was exclusively lesser trochanter (LT) on ischium. Of the patients planned with both 32mm and 36mm articulations, there was a 14% increase in prosthetic impingement when a 32mm head was planned (35% and 21% respectively). Discussion. Impingement in THA usually precedes dislocation and should be avoided with appropriate component positioning. We found that in hyperextension, prosthetic and bony impingement were equally common. In deep flexion, impingement was almost exclusively bony. Further studies should investigate the effects of stem version, cup orientation, liner design, cup depth, native offset and retained osteophytes on the type of impingement in THA. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Introduction. The success of cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) depends on the primary stability of the components. One of the biomechanical factors that comes into play is the mechanical quality of the bone. To our knowledge, there are no reported studies in the literature analyzing the impact of the preoperative bone mineral density on the outcomes of cementless THA. The goal of the study was to analyze the clinical results at 2 year follow-up according to the preoperative cancellous bone mineral density (BD). Our hypothesis was that the clinical outcomes were correlated to the BD. Material and methods. From January to June 2013, a prospective study included patients who underwent a cementless THA using a proximally shortly fixed anatomic stem. A 3D preoperative CTscan-based planning was performed according to the routine protocol using the Hip-Plan software in order to determine the hip reconstruction goals as well as the implants size and position. The Hounsfield bone density (BD) of the metaphyseal cancellous bone was computed in a volume (of 1 mm thick and of 1cm² surface) at the level of the calcar 10 mm above the top of the lesser trochanter and laterally to the medial cortical (Figure 1). Intra-and inter-observer repeatability measurements were performed. Patients were clinically assessed at 2 years follow-up using self-administered auto-questionnaires corresponding to the Harris and the Oxford scores. A Multivariate statistical analysis assessed correlations between clinical scores, age, gender, body mass index, and BD. Results. 50 patients were included consisting of 29 men and 21 women, with an average age of 62 ± 12 years and an average BMI of 25.8. The average preoperative BD was 69.4 ± 54 HU. At 2 years follow-up, the hip function scores were significantly correlated with the preoperative BD (0.42, p = 0.002) and the age (0.39, p = 0.005). However, there was no significant correlation between BD and BMI. Discussion Bone density appears to be an important parameter to consider when planning THA. This highlights also the importance of preoperative image calibration. Conclusion. The functional outcomes after cementless THA are correlated with preoperative cancellous bone density. Bone density needs to be integrated into THA 3D planning

Using an institutional database we have identified over 1000 femoral revisions using extensively porous-coated stems. Using femoral re-revision for any reason as an endpoint, the survivorship is 99 ± 0.8% (95% confidence interval) at 2 years, 97 ± 1.3% at 5 years, 95.6 ± 1.8% at 10 years, and 94.5 ± 2.2% at 15 years. Similar to Moreland and Paprosky, we have identified pre-revision bone stock as a factor affecting femoral fixation. When the cortical damage involved bone more than 10cm below the lesser trochanter, the survivorship, using femoral re-revision for any reason or definite radiographic loosening as an endpoint, was reduced significantly, as compared with femoral revisions with less cortical damage. In addition to patients with Paprosky Type 3B and 4 femoral defects, there are rare patients with femoral canals smaller than 13.5mm or larger than 26mm that are not well suited to this technique. Eight and 10 inch stems 13.5 or smaller should be used with caution if there is no proximal bone support for fear of breaking. Patients with canals larger than 18mm may be better suited for a titanium tapered stem with flutes. While a monolithic stem is slightly more difficult for a surgeon to insert than a modular femoral stem there is little worry about taper junction failure

The Failed Femoral Neck Fracture. For the young patient: Attempt to preserve patient's own femoral head. Clinical results reasonably good even if there are patches of avascular necrosis. Preferred methods of salvage: valgus-producing intertrochanteric femoral osteotomy: puts the nonunion under compression. Other treatment option: Meyer's vascularised pedicle graft. For the older patient: Most reliable treatment is prosthetic replacement. Decision to use hemiarthroplasty (such as bipolar) or THA based on quality of articular cartilage, perceived risk of instability problem. In most patients THA provides higher likelihood of excellent pain relief. Specific technical issues: (1) hardware removal: usually remove after hip has first been dislocated (to reduce risk of femur fracture); (2) Hip stability: consider methods to reduce dislocation risk: larger diameter heads/dual mobility/anteriorly-based approaches; (3) Acetabular bone quality: poor because it is not sclerotic from previous arthritis; caution when impacting a pressfit cup; low threshold to augment fixation with screws; don't overdo reaming; just expose the bleeding subchondral bone. A reasonable alternative is a cemented cup. The Failed Intertrochanteric Hip Fracture. For the young patient: Attempt to salvage hip joint with nonunion takedown, autogenous bone grafting and internal fixation. For the older patient: Decision to preserve patient's own hip with internal fixation versus salvage with hip arthroplasty should be individualised based on patient circumstances, fracture pattern, bone quality. THA is an effective salvage procedure for this problem in older patients. If prosthetic replacement is chosen special considerations include:. THA vs. hemiarthroplasty: hemiarthroplasty better stability; THA more reliable pain relief. Removal of hardware: be prepared to remove broken screws in intramedullary canal. Management of bone loss: bone loss to level of lesser trochanter common. Often requires a calcar replacement implant. Proximal calcar build-up size dictated by bone loss. Length of stem: desirable to bypass screw holes from previous fixation, if possible. Stem fixation: cemented or uncemented fixation depending on surgeon preference, bone quality. If uncemented, consider diaphyseal fixation. Greater trochanter: often a separate piece, be prepared to fix with wires or cable grip. Residual trochanteric healing, hardware problems not rare after THA