Distal femoral replacement is an operation long considered as salvage operation for neoplastic conditions. Outcomes of this procedure for difficult knee revisions with bone loss of distal femur have been sparsely reported. We present the early results of complex revision knee arthroplasty using distal femoral replacement implant, performed for severe osteolysis and bone loss. Retrospective review of clinic and radiological results of 25 consecutive patients operated at single centre between January 2010 and December 2014. All patients had single type of implant. All data was collected till the latest follow up. Re-revision for any reason was considered as primary end point. Mean age at surgery was 72.2 years (range 51 – 85 years). Average number of previous knee replacements was 2.28 (range 1 to 6). Most common indications were infection, aseptic loosening and peri-prosthetic fracture. Average follow up was 24.5 months (range: 3–63 months). 1 patient died 8 months post-op due to unrelated reasons. Re-revision rate was 2/25 (8%) during this period. One was re-revised for aseptic loosening and one was revised for peri-prosthetic fracture of femur. Two other peri-prosthetic fractures were managed by open reduction and internal fixation. All 3 peri-prosthetic fractures occurred with low energy trauma. It is noteworthy that there was no hinge or mechanical failures of the implant. Peri-prosthetic fracture in 12% of patients in this series is of concern. There are no similar studies to compare this data with. The length of the stem, type of fixation of the stem, weight of the distal femoral component of implant can be postulated as factors contributing to risk of peri-prosthetic fracture

Constrained implants with intra-medullary fixation are expedient for complex TKA. Constraint is associated with loosening, but can correction of deformity mitigate risk of loosening?. Primary TKA's with a non-linked constrained prosthesis from 2010-2018 were identified. Indications were ligamentous instability or intra-medullary fixation to bypass stress risers. All included fully cemented 30mm stem extensions on tibia and femur. If soft tissue stability was achieved, a posterior stabilized (PS) tibial insert was selected. Pre and post TKA full length radiographs showed. i. hip-knee-ankle angles (HKAA). ii. Kennedy Zone (KZ) where hip to ankle vector crosses knee joint. 77 TKA's in 68 patients, average age 69.3 years (41-89.5) with OA (65%) post-trauma (24.5%) and inflammatory arthropathy (10.5%). Pre-op radiographs (62 knees) showed varus in 37.0%. (HKAA: 4. o. -29. o. ), valgus in 59.6% (HKAA range 8. o. -41. o. ) and 2 knees in neutral. 13 cases deceased within 2 years were excluded. Six with 2 year follow up pending have not been revised. Mean follow-up is 6.1 yrs (2.4-11.9yrs). Long post-op radiographs showed 34 (57.6%) in central KZ (HKKA 180. o. +/- 2. o. ). . Thirteen (22.0%) were in mechanical varus (HKAA 3. o. -15. o. ) and 12 (20.3%) in mechanical valgus: HKAA (171. o. -178. o. ). Three failed with infection; 2 after ORIF and one with BMI>50. The greatest post op varus suffered peri-prosthetic fracture. There was no aseptic loosening or instability. Only full-length radiographs accurately measure alignment and very few similar studies exist. No cases failed by loosening or instability, but PPF followed persistent malalignment. Infection complicated prior ORIF and elevated BMI. This does not endorse indiscriminate use of mechanically constrained knee prostheses. Lower demand patients with complex arthropathy, especially severe deformity, benefit from fully cemented, non-linked constrained prostheses, with intra-medullary fixation. Hinges are not necessarily indicated, and rotational constraint does not lead to loosening

Dual mobility (DM) is an established bearing option in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). The traditional mono-block DM designs have limited ability for additional fixation, whereas the modular DM designs allow additional screw fixation but limit internal diameter and have the potential to generate metal debris. We report the early results of a CoCrMo alloy mono-block implant manufactured by additive technology with a highly porous ingrowth surface to enhance primary fixation and osseointegration. Prospective follow-up of the Duplex. TM. implant first inserted in March 2016 enrolled into Beyond Compliance (BC). Primary outcome measure was all-cause revision and secondary outcomes dislocation, peri-prosthetic fracture (PPF) and Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Patients were risk stratified and all considered to be high risk for instability. Complications were identified via hospital records, clinical coding linkage using national database and via BC website. 159 implants in 154 patients with a mean age 74.0 years and a maximum F/U of 7 years. Survivorship for all-cause revision 99.4% (95% CI 96.2–99.8). One femoral only revision. Mean gain in OHS 27.4. Dislocation rate 0.6% with a single event. Patients with a cemented Polished taper stem (PTS) had a Type B PPF rate of 2.1% requiring revision/fixation. Compared to conventional THA this cohort was significantly older (74.0 vs 68.3 years), more co-morbidity (ASA 3 46.5% vs 14.4%) and more non-OA indications (32.4% vs 8.5%). Every patient had at least one risk factor for falling and >50% of cohort had 4 or more risk factors using NICE tool. We believe our results demonstrate that risk stratification successfully aids implant selection to prevent dislocation in high-risk patients. This novel design has provided excellent early results in a challenging cohort where individuals are very different to the “average” THA patient. NJR data on DM has reported an increase in revision for PPF. A “perfect storm” maybe created using DM in high-risk falls risk population. This re-enforces the need to consider all patient and implant factors when deciding bearing selection

Introduction. Early complication post total knee replacement reported to be higher in obese patient in general. Also the outcome of cruciate retaining and PS knee has been fully discussed before and there was no major difference in the outcome. However, the purpose of this paper is to find out if early complication postTKR such as fracture and instability is more common in PS implant than in CR knee. This is a retrospective study comparing two groups of obese patients. The first using PS implant and the other using CR implant. These two groups were matched for age, body mass and severity of deformity. We clearly showed that there is significant increase in peri-prosthetic fracture and instability in the group that use PS implant. Materials & Methods. At our institution we have been using Persona implant which has the option of using PS insert or a CR. The decision to proceed with CR or PS mainly depends on the availability of the implant and also the ability to well balance the knee in patients. In most patients we try to proceed with CR implant. However, the flow of implant sometime sometimes limit us from using CR or the imbalance in the ligament force us to process with PS implant. We have reviewed a chart of over 200 patients in each group of obese patient they were done within the last three years. All cases had a minimum follow up of 6 months. Those groups were matched for body mass, age and severity of deformity. After matching the groups we documented knee score, blood loss, post – operative pain and complications. All surgeries were performed by the same surgeon. Results. We had 7 cases of per-prosthetic fracture in the PS group and non in the CR implant. We had 3 revisions in the PS group for instability and MCL insufficiency. We had non in the CR implant. Infection, wound complication, blood loss, knee score and patient satisfaction were same in both groups. Discussion. Our study clearly show that the decrease incidence of peri-prosthetic fracture in the CR implant which could be easily explained by the fact that a good cortical bone is resected in order to make room for the PS spine. Also, the fact that resecting the posterior cruciate ligament might cause more stress on the implant versus the CR. Instability also were more common in the PS group. We believe this has to do with the fact that the PCL serve as a secondary constraint to the MCL. The presence of the PCL help maintain the stability in case of incidental injury to the MCL during surgery which was reported to be higher in obese patients. Practically the same in both group shows there is no apparent advantage of either implant. Conclusion. There is clear advantage of decreasing the early postoperative complications in obese patient using CR knee and we strongly recommend using CR implant in obese patients in order to reduce the incidence of peri-prosthetic fracture and the revision for instability

The choice of stem length in total hip revision with impaction bone grafting of femur is essentially based upon the grade of cavitation of femur and surgeon's preference. The standard length stem has been often critiqued for the apprehension of peri-prosthetic fracture. Our study highlights the importance of proximal bone stock rather than distal cavitation in determining the length of femoral stem. 168 total hip revisions of 162 patients with impaction bone grafting and cemented standard C-stem (done with standardized technique) between 1995 and 2008 at a tertiary referral centre were included. Revisions for infection and segmental bone defects were excluded. Serial radiographs were retrospectively analysed by two people independently, using Endoklinik classification, Gruen zones and more and outcomes were analysed. Mean follow-up of the 168 revision hips was 10.5 years (range 5 – 19.1 years). 14 patients (8.3%) were re-revised, reasons being, persistent deep infection (1.8%), repeated dislocations (1.2%), cup loosening (4.8%) and stem loosening (1.2%). Only 1 patient (0.6%) was re-revised due to stem loosening alone. No peri-prosthetic fractures or stem breakage were identified. Use of standard stem length in hip revisions with impaction bone grafting doesn't increase the risk of peri-prosthetic fractures even during long term follow up period. This questions the principle of bypassing the distal cavitation of femur by 2 cortical diameters with the use of long stem. In our experience, a good proximal femur support aids in the performance of standard length cemented stems in revision for aseptic loosening irrespective of grade of distal cavitation for cavitory defects of femur treated with impaction bone grafting

With the ever increasing rate of total hip replacement and life span of these patients, there has been an upward trend towards the incidence of peri-prosthetic fractures. Previous studies does suggest the implant cost to as high as 30% of the total reimbursement in primary hip arthroplasty but this figure is much higher in periprosthetic fractures where long stem revisions are commonly used. A prospective comparative study analyzing the total cost of hospital stay for a cohort of 52 consecutive patients with peri-prosthetic fractures of long bones treated in two hospitals from October 2007 to march 2009 was conducted. Demographic data, fracture classification and method of surgical treatment along with the length of hospital stay were recorded in detail. The total cost calculated was then compared to the range of reimbursement price based on HRG (human Resource Group) coding. The implant cost was determined from the buying cost by each institution. 52 patients were available for review. Average age of the patients operated was 78.5 years. 69 percent of the peri-prosthetic fractures in our series were around the proximal femur. The average cost of stay was £ 16453 (£ 1425- 26345). The reimbursement to the hospital ranged from £ 1983 to £ 8735. Hospital source utilization for peri prosthetic fractures is quite high compared to the reimbursement being given to hospitals for treating such patients. This can be as low as £ 1500 as acute phase tariff to £ 9100 for elective revisions and the implant cost can vary from 50% to 200% of the total reimbursement cost. Current recording system for peri-prosthetic fracture is unclear resulting in discrepancy between resource utilization and reimbursement thus resulting in substantial financial losses for hospitals that perform these procedures

Peri-prosthetic fractures around implants in the proximal humerus can present substantial challenges. Most individuals who undergo upper limb arthroplasty tend to be osteopenic to begin with, and the anatomy of the proximal humerus does not provide an excess of bone to work with. Therefore, peri-prosthetic fractures pose difficulties to rotator cuff function and implant stability. There are multiple classification systems, but series are small and the classification does not always lead to treatment algorithms. Risk factors for humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty include endosteal notching, cortical perforation, varus malalignment, stem perforation, ipsilateral shoulder and elbow arthroplasties, and loose stems. Many of these risk factors are directly related to technical errors at the time of surgery. Poor exposure can lead to aberrant starting point and errors in reaming. Oversized prostheses can lead to cortical perforation or even stem perforation. Proper positioning of the patient on the table and surgical releases help avoid these technical errors. Peri-prosthetic fractures should be carefully evaluated radiographically for stability. Two important considerations: 1. Is the implant stable? 2. Is the fracture stable? Generally, if the implant is unstable, the implant must be revised. In the setting of a stable implant, many humeral fractures can be treated nonoperatively. Many fractures at or below the level of the tip of the implant can be treated as typical humeral fractures. Options for fixation include plates with cables or long stem prostheses which bypass the fracture. Displaced tuberosity fractures are treated with suture or wire fixation. Risk factors for a poor outcome include increased time to union, skin breakdown, and stiff shoulder

Introduction. Early complication post total knee replacement reported to be higher in obese patient in general. Also the outcome of cruciate retaining and PS knee has been fully discussed before and there was no major difference in the outcomes for all the patients overall regardless of their weight. However, the purpose of this paper is to find out if the CR knee has superiority over PS knee in terms of clinical and functional outcomes and if early complication postTKR such as fracture and instability is more common in PS implant than in CR knee. This is a retrospective study comparing two groups of obese patients. The first using PS implant and the other using CR implant. These two groups were matched for age, body mass and severity of deformity. Materials & Methods. At our institution we have been using Persona implant which has the option of using PS insert or a CR. The decision to proceed with CR or PS mainly depends on the availability of the implant and also the ability to well balance the knee in patients. In most patients we try to proceed with CR implant. However, the flow of implant sometime sometimes limit us from using CR or the imbalance in the ligament force us to process with PS implant. We have reviewed a chart of over 200 patients in each group of obese patient they were done within the last three years. All cases had a minimum follow up of 6 months. Those groups were matched for body mass, age and severity of deformity. After matching the groups we documented Knee Society Score (KSS), Knee Society Function Score (KSFS), blood loss, post – operative pain and complications. All surgeries were performed by the same surgeon. Results. Our study showed that the clinical scores (KSS) in both groups were very close while significant differences were observed in functional scores (KSFS) for the CR knee. We had 8 cases of per-prosthetic fracture in the PS group and one in the CR implant. We had 4 revisions in the PS group for instability and MCL insufficiency and non in the CR implant. Infection, wound complication, blood loss, and patient satisfaction were same in both groups. Discussion. This study suggests a significant difference in functional outcomes, especially walking, stair climbing and the use of walking aids, between CR and PS that favors CR implant which may be related to the CR knee retaining proprioception and ligaments tension with balance. In addition, PS knee have more varus-valgus and mid-flexion laxity than CR knee throughout the range of motion which appear clearly in obese patient. On the other hand, the study clearly shows that the decrease incidence of peri-prosthetic fracture in the CR implant which could be easily explained by the fact that a good cortical bone is resected in order to make room for the PS spine. Also, the fact that resecting the posterior cruciate ligament might cause more stress on the implant versus the CR. Instability also were more common in the PS group. We believe this has to do with the fact that the PCL serve as a secondary constraint to the MCL. The presence of the PCL help maintain the stability in case of incidental injury to the MCL during surgery which was reported to be higher in obese patients. Conclusion. There is clear advantage of improving the outcomes or knee scores and decreasing the early postoperative complications in obese patient using CR knee and we strongly recommend using CR implant in obese patients in order to restore functionality faster and reduce the incidence of peri-prosthetic fracture and the revision for instability

Displaced fractures of the neck of femur are routinely treated in the elderly by either cemented hemiarthoplasty, in the fit, or uncemented hemiarthroplasty, in the less fit. In Scotland the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) guidelines are followed to identify which patients should have a cemented prosthesis. This is based on cardiovascular status, and the age and fragility of the patient. An uncemented prosthesis should be a final operation. A peri-prosthetic fracture is considered a failure of treatment as the patient then has to undergo an operation with a far greater surgical insult. We looked at all neck of femur fractures over a period of Jan 2007 to June 2010. The number of the peri-prosthetic fractures for uncemented hip hemiarthroplasties was established and a case note review was carried out. There was 1397 neck of femur fractures. 546 hemiarthroplasties were carried out, of which 183 were cemented, and 363 uncemented. 14 patients (4% of uncemented hemiarthoplasties) had peri-prosthetic fractures. The case notes of these patients were analysed. We found there was a common link of significant cardiovascular risk, lack of falls assessment (only 14% of patients had a completed falls assessment and 35% sustained their fracture during an admission to hospital) and confusion (43% had a degree of dementia that caused significant confusion). Cemented implants should be considered in those who have failed falls assessment, or are confused; even if the cardiovascular risk is significant. This decision should be made in conjunction with a senior anaesthetist. This is being implemented in our unit and a prospective audit is being carried out over the same time period (July 2010 to Dec 2013) to assess the benefit

Introduction. The number of revision hip arthroplasty procedures is rising annually with 7852 such operations performed in the UK in 2010. These are expensive procedures due to pre-operative investigation, surgical implants and instrumentation, protracted hospital stay, and pharmacological costs. There is a paucity of robust literature on the costs associated with the common indications for this surgery. Objective. We aim to quantify the cost of revision hip arthroplasty by indication and identify any short-fall in relation to the national tariff. Methods. Clinical, demographic and economic data were obtained for 305 consecutive revision total hip replacements in 286 patients performed at a tertiary referral centre between 1998 and 2008. These operations were categorised by indication into: aseptic loosening, dislocation, deep infection and peri-prosthetic fracture. Clinical data included length of stay, operative time, estimated blood loss, prosthesis and instrumentation required. Financial data was collected on cost of implants, materials and augmentation utilised at time of surgery, operating room costs, recovery, inpatient stay, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, pharmacy, radiographs and laboratory studies. Statistical analysis was undertaken using the SPSS version 16 (SPSS Inc. Chicago, Il). Non-parametric bootstrap samples were used to obtain consistent 95% confidence intervals. Analysis of variance between groups was performed (p < 0.05). Results. The mean total cost of revision surgery in aseptic cases (n=194) was £11897 +/− 4629, septic revision (n=76) £21937 +/− 10965, peri-prosthetic fractures (n=24) £18185 +/− 9124, and in dislocations (n=11) £10893 +/− 5476. Conclusion. Revision procedures for deep infection and peri-prosthetic fracture were associated with significantly longer operative time, increased blood loss and a higher number of complications compared with revisions for aseptic loosening. Total inpatient stay was also significantly greater p< 0.001. Our study shows that financial costs vary significantly between revision subtypes which is not reflected by current National Health Service tariff rates

Peri-prosthetic distal femoral fractures around total knee replacement is a highly complex reconstructive challenge, particularly in the presence of bone comminution and poor bone quality in elderly patients. With the incidence of peri-prosthetic fractures ranging from 0.3% to 2.5%, this is becoming a common problem. Older patients with concomitant medical issues have a very limited tolerance for prolonged immobilisation. It is the author's practice to revise, rather that attempt to fix, peri-prosthetic fractures of the knee which are very close to the femoral or tibial implants, particularly when associated with osteoporosis and comminution. When compared to fracture fixation, distal femoral replacement has significantly shorter operative time, less blood loss, and shorter hospital stay. Patients have been shown to recover faster, have fewer complications, and left hospital sooner. The general assumption has been that the use of a distal femoral replacement prosthesis is cost prohibitive in revision total knee settings, however, initial differences in the price of the prosthesis are more than offset by a shortened hospital stay and a more rapid return to pre-fracture level of function

TER is a viable surgical option in patients with advanced RA with painful stiff elbows. We retrospectively analysed 22 TER performed in 21 patients over a 12 year period by a single surgeon, with a mean follow up of 64 months (10–145). Disability of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) scores were performed pre-operatively and post-operatively in patients through postal questionnaires. The mean age was 59.1 years (32–78). There were 12 women and 9 men. The mean pre-operative DASH score was 72.3 (45.0–91.7) and post-operatively improved to 46.8 (21.7–94.2). Complications included infection, peri-operative fracture, peri-prosthetic fracture and aseptic loosening. There were 6 revisions performed, 2 for peri-prosthetic fracture, 2 for infection, 1 for intra-operative fracture and 1 for symptomatic aseptic loosening. Four patients had died due to unrelated causes. The 10 year survival rate with symptomatic aseptic loosening as the end point was 93% and revisions for all reasons was 69%. Follow up radiographs (in those without revision) were reviewed and 10 had satisfactory positioning of the prosthesis, 5 had loosening of the humeral or radial component and 1 had inadequate cement mantle but was clinically asymptomatic. TER is a rewarding procedure in with advanced RA. Our results are comparable to other published studies

Introduction. Patients ≤ 55 years have a high primary TKA revision rate compared to patients >55 years. Guided motion knee devices are commonly used in younger patients yet outcomes remain unknown. Materials and Methods. In this sub-group analysis of a large multicenter study, 254 TKAs with a second-generation guided motion knee implant (Journey II Bi-Cruciate Stabilized Knee System, Smith & Nephew, Inc., Memphis) were performed between 2011–2017 in 202 patients ≤ 55 years at seven US and three European sites. Revision rates were compared with Australian Joint Registry (AOANJRR) 2017 data. Results. Average age 49.7 (range 18–54); 56.4% females; average BMI 34 kg/m. 2. ; 67.1% obese; patellae resurfaced in 98.4%. Average follow-up 4.2 years; longest follow-up six years; 27.5% followed-up for ≥ five years. Of eight revisions: total revision (one), tibial plate replacements (three), tibial insert exchanges (four). One tibial plate revision re-revised to total revision. Revision indications were mechanical loosening (n=2), infection (n=3), peri-prosthetic fracture (n=1), and instability (n=2). The Kaplan-Meier revision estimate was 3.4% (95% C.I. 1.7% to 6.7%) at five years compared to AOANJRR rate of 6.9%. There was no differential risk by sex. Discussion. Reasons for high TKA revision rates in younger patients remain unknown. Conclusion. The revision rate of the second-generation guided motion knee system is lower in younger patients compared to registry controls

Introduction/Aim. The NAVIO robotic-assisted TKA (RA-TKA) application received FDA clearance in May 2017. This semi-active robotic technique aims to improve the accuracy and precision of total knee arthroplasty. The addition of robotic-assisted technology, however, also introduces another potential source of surgery-related complications. This study evaluates the safety profile of NAVIO RA-TKA. Materials and Methods. Beginning in May 2017, the first 250 patients undergoing NAVIO RA-TKA were included in this study. All intra-operative complications were recorded, including: bleeding; neuro-vascular injury; peri-articular soft tissue injury; extensor mechanism complications; and intra-operative fracture. During the first 90 days following surgery, patients were monitored for any post-operative complications, including: superficial and deep surgical site infection; pin-tract infection; pin site fractures; peri-prosthetic fractures; axial or sagittal joint instability; axial mal-alignment; patello-femoral instability; DVT/PE; re-operation or re-admission due to surgical-related complications. Surgical technique and multi-modality pain management protocol was consistent for all patients in the study. A combined anesthetic technique was employed for all cases, including: low-dose spinal, adductor canal block and general anesthetic. Patients were mobilized per our institution's rapid recovery protocol. Results. No patients were lost to follow-up. During the study period, no intra-operative complications were recorded. Specifically, no complications related to the introduction of the high-speed burr associated with the NAVIO RA-TKA were noted. Within the 90-day follow-up period, there was one case of deep infection. One patient sustained a fall resulting in a peri-prosthetic femoral fracture, that occurred remote from the femoral pin tracts. No cases of axial or sagittal joint instability, axial mal-alignment, patello-femoral instability, pin site infections or fractures; or DVT/PE were identified. Four patients underwent manipulation under anesthesia. No other patients required a re-operation or re-admission due to surgical-related complications. Discussion/Conclusions. The initial experience with the NAVIO robotic assisted total knee arthroplasty has demonstrated excellent safety profile. Relative to known risks associated with total knee arthroplasty, no increased risk of peri-operative complications, re-operation or re-admission for surgical related complications was identified with the introduction of the NAVIO RA-TKA

With an increasing ageing population and a rise in the number of primary hip arthroplasty, peri-prosthetic fracture (PPF) reconstructive surgery is becoming more commonplace. The Swedish National Hip Registry reported that, in 2002, 5.1% of primary total hip replacements required revision due to PPF. Laboratory studies have indicated that age, bone quality and BMI all contribute to an increased risk of PPF. Osteolysis and aseptic loosening contribute to the formation of loosening zones as described by Gruen, with subsequent increased risk of fracture. The aim of the study was to identify significant risk factors for PPF in patients who have undergone primary total hip replacement (THR). Logbooks of three Consultant hip surgeons were filtered for patients who had THR-PPF fixation subsequent to trauma. Risk factors evaluated included sex, age, bone density (Singhs index), loosening zones, Vancouver classification, prosthesis stem angle relative to the axis of the femur, and length of time from THR to fracture. A control group of uncomplicated primary THR patients was also scrutinised. Forty-six PPF were identified representing 2.59% of THR workload. The male: female ratios in both groups were not significantly different (1:1.27 and 1:1.14 respectively). Average age of PPF was 72.1, which was significantly older than the control group (54.7, p>0.05). The commonest type of PPF was Vancouver type B. Whilst stem position in the AP plane was similar in both groups, in lateral views the PPF stem angle demonstrated significant antero-grade leg position compared to the non-PPF group (p.0.05). The PPF group demonstrated a greater number of loosening zones in pre-fracture radiographs compared to the control group (2.59 and 1.39 respectively, p>0.05). Our workload from PPF reflects that seen in Europe. Age, stem position and the degree of stem loosening appear to contribute to the risk of a peri-prosthetic fracture

Peri-prosthetic fractures above a TKA are becoming increasingly more common, and typically occur at the junction of the anterior flange of the femoral component and the osteopenic metaphyseal distal femur. In the vast majority of cases, the TKA is well fixed and has been functioning well prior to fracture. For fractures above well-fixed components, internal fixation is preferred. Fixation options include retrograde nailing or lateral plating. Nails are typically considered in arthroplasties that allow intercondylar access (“open box PS” or CR implants) and have sufficient length of the distal fragment to allow multiple locking screws to be used. This situation is rare, as most distal fragments are quite short. If a nail is chosen, use of a long nail is preferred, since it allows the additional fixation and alignment that diaphyseal fill affords. Short nails should be discouraged since they can “toggle” in the meta-diaphysis and do not engage the diaphysis to improve coronal alignment. Plates can be used with any implant type and any length of distal fragment. The challenge with either fixation strategy is obtaining stable fixation of the distal fragment while maintaining length, alignment, and rotation. Fixation opportunities in the distal fragment can be limited due to obstacles caused by femoral component lugs, boxes, stems, cement mantles, and areas of stress shielding or osteolysis. Modern lateral locked plates can be inserted in a biologically friendly submuscular extra-periosteal fashion. The goal of fixation is to obtain as many long locked screws in the distal fragment as possible. High union rates have been reported with modern locked plating and nailing techniques, however, biplanar fluoroscopic vigilance is required to prevent malalignments, typically valgus, distraction, and distal fragment hyperextension. For certain fractures, distal femoral replacement (DFR) is a wise choice. The author reserves DFR for situations where internal fixation is likely to fail (severe distal osteolysis, severe osteopenia) or for cases where it has already failed (nonunion). Obviously, if the implant is loose, revision is indicated, and typically the distal bone loss is so severe that a distal femoral replacement is indicated. The author prefers cemented constructs and routinely adds antibiotics to the cement mixture. Careful attention to posterior dissection of the distal fragment is recommended to avoid neurovascular injury. Cementing the femoral component in the proper amount of external rotation is important to allow central patellar tracking. The available literature demonstrates excellent functional results with these reconstructions, however, complications are not uncommon. Infection and extensor mechanism complications are the most frequent complications and are best avoided. In summary, ORIF remains the treatment of choice for these fractures, however, for cases where ORIF is likely to fail, or has failed, DFR remains a predictable salvage option

As the number of patients who have undergone total hip arthroplasty rises, the number of patients who require surgery for a failed total hip arthroplasty is also increasing. It is estimated that 183,000 total hip replacements were performed in the United States in the year 2000 and that 31,000 of these (17%) were revision procedures. Reconstruction of the failed femoral component in revision total hip arthroplasty can be challenging from both a technical perspective and in preoperative planning. With multiple reconstructive options available, it is helpful to have a classification system which guides the surgeon in selecting the appropriate method of reconstruction. A classification of femoral deficiency has been developed and an algorithmic approach to femoral reconstruction is presented. An extensively coated, diaphyseal filling component reliably achieves successful fixation in the majority of revision femurs. The surgical technique is straightforward and we continue to use this type of device in the majority of our revision total hip arthroplasties. However, in the severely damaged femur (Type IIIB and Type IV), other reconstructive options may provide improved results. Based on our results, the following reconstructive algorithm is recommended for femoral reconstruction in revision total hip arthroplasty. Type I: In a Type I femur, there is minimal loss of cancellous bone with an intact diaphysis. Cemented or cementless fixation can be utilised. If cemented fixation is selected, great care must be taken in removing the neo-cortex often encountered to allow for appropriate cement intrusion into the remaining cancellous bone. Type II: In a Type II femur, there is extensive loss of the metaphyseal cancellous bone and thus, fixation with cement is unreliable. In this cohort of patients, successful fixation was achieved using a diaphyseal fitting, extensively porous coated implant. However, as the metaphysis is supportive, a cementless implant that achieves primary fixation in the metaphysis can be utilised. Type IIIA: In a Type IIIA femur, the metaphysis is non-supportive and an extensively coated stem of adequate length is utilised to ensure that more than 4cm of scratch fit is obtained in the diaphysis. Type IIIB: Based on the poor results obtained with a cylindrical, extensively porous coated implant (with 4 of 8 reconstructions failing), our present preference is a modular, cementless, tapered stem with flutes for obtaining rotational stability. Type IV: The isthmus is completely non-supportive and the femoral canal is widened. Cementless fixation cannot be reliably used in our experience, as it is difficult to obtain adequate initial implant stability that is required for osseointegration. Reconstruction can be performed with impaction grafting if the cortical tube of the proximal femur is intact. However, this technique can be technically difficult to perform, time consuming and costly given the amount of bone graft that is often required. Although implant subsidence and peri-prosthetic fractures have been associated with this technique, it can provide an excellent solution for the difficult revision femur where cementless fixation cannot be utilised. Alternatively, an allograft-prosthesis composite can be utilised for younger patients in an attempt to reconstitute bone stock and a proximal femoral replacing endoprosthesis used for more elderly patients

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has improved the lives of many patients with complex shoulder pathology including rotator cuff arthropathy, glenoid bone defects, post-traumatic arthritis and failed non-constrained total shoulder arthroplasty. However, this non-anatomic replacement has a very different complication profile than has been observed with non-constrained shoulder arthroplasty and the revision of RTSA can be extremely challenging. The purpose of this talk is to review some of the typical complications observed in RTSA including instability, infection, stress fractures, peri-prosthetic fractures and glenoid failures, and discuss the treatment options for dealing with these difficult problems

Scapular spine fracture is a serious complication of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) often caused by a fall on an outstretched arm or a forced movement to the shoulder. The incidence of scapular fractures occurring after RTSA is reported between 5.8% and 10.2%. These fractures have been classified into 3 discrete fracture patterns. Avulsion of the anterior acromion (Type I), Acromion fractures (Type II) and Scapular spine fractures (Type III). This discussion will review the incidence of these post-operative peri-prosthetic fractures of the scapula after reverse TSA and describe potential treatment options and prevention methods to avoid this complication

Peri-prosthetic fractures occurring in total shoulder arthroplasty represent surgical challenges both in decision making as well as surgical management. These fractures can involve both the humerus and scapula. In a few cases with minimal displacement conservative care may be employed. In most, however, surgical intervention is needed. Depending on the quality of the surrounding bone, the health of the patient, the stability of the existing implant, and the integrity of the surrounding soft tissues, options for management include open reduction and internal fixation, bone grafting, strut and cable fixation, or a combination of these techniques. In some cases revision arthroplasty is indicated. An approach to surgical decision-making, operative techniques and avoidance of complications will be discussed