Background

Approximately half of all hip fractures are displaced intracapsular fractures. The standard treatment for these fractures is either hemiarthroplasty or total hip arthroplasty. The recent National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on hip fracture management recommends the use of ‘proven’ cemented stem arthroplasty with an Orthopaedic Device Evaluation Panel (ODEP) rating of at least 3B (97% survival at three years). The Thompsons prosthesis is currently lacking an ODEP rating despite over 50 years of clinical use, likely due to the paucity of implant survival data. Nationally, adherence to these guidelines is varied as there is debate as to which prosthesis optimises patient outcomes.

Aims. Debate continues about whether it is better to use a cemented or uncemented hemiarthroplasty to treat a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. The aim of this study was to attempt to resolve this issue for contemporary prostheses. Methods. A total of 400 patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip were randomized to receive either a cemented polished tapered stem hemiarthroplasty or an uncemented Furlong hydroxyapatite-coated hemiarthroplasty. Follow-up was conducted by a nurse blinded to the implant at set intervals for up to one year from surgery. Results. A total of 115 patients died in the year after surgery. There was a tendency towards a slightly higher mortality in those treated with the uncemented prosthesis after one year (64 vs 51; p = 0.18). For the survivors, there was no significant difference in pain score at any of the time intervals. Patients treated using the cemented hemiarthroplasty recovered mobility better than those treated with the uncemented hemiarthroplasty (mean decrease in mobility score at one year: 1.7 vs 1.1, SD 1.9; p = 0.008). There was a tendency to more periprosthetic fractures in the uncemented group (five vs two cases; p = 0.45), but overall the need for further surgery was similar in both groups (nine vs seven cases). There were four perioperative deaths in the cemented group. Conclusion. These results indicate that a contemporary cemented hemiarthroplasty gives better results than an uncemented hemiarthroplasty for patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. When the condition of the patient permits, a cemented hemiarthroplasty should be used. Cite this article: Bone Joint J. 2020;102-B(1):11–16

Aims

The aim of this study was to report the three-year follow-up for a series of 400 patients with a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip, who were randomized to be treated with either a cemented polished tapered hemiarthroplasty or an uncemented hydroxyapatite-coated hemiarthroplasty.

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe the demographic details of patients who sustain a femoral periprosthetic fracture (PPF), the epidemiology of PPFs, PPF characteristics, and the predictors of PPF types in the UK population.

Cemented total hip arthroplasty yields reliable results in short to medium term studies, but aseptic loosening remains a problem in long-term follow up, especially in young and active patients. Aseptic loosening has been related to wear, and in order to minimize wear various alternatives to the traditional metal on polyethylene have been proposed. Both ceramic on polyethylene (COP) and metal on metal (MOM) have been shown to produce less wear than metal on polyethylene (MOP). In order to study the effect of the bearing, we have utilized identical stems and cups while comparing the different bearings. Methods and material. 396 hips were randomized to MOP, COP or MOM using a cemented triple tapered polished stem (MS-30; Sulzer Orthopedics) with a cemented polyethylene cup (Weber; Sulzer, Orthopedics) and a 28 millimeter head. For the MOP and COP articulations, a all-polyethylene cup was used with a Protasul™ metal head or a Sulox™ alumina head, whereas a polyethylene cup with metal insert was used for the MOM articulations (Weber Polyethylene Cup with Metasul™ Insert) with a Metasul™ metal head. Harris Hip Score (HHS) and radiological evaluation was performed after two, five and seven years. Ethical approval was obtained. Results. HHS was available for 338 hips after seven years. The HHS in the MOP group (116 hips) was 93.7 (SD 9.0), 93.5 in the COP group (112 hips) (SD 8.8), and 91.0 (SD 13.4) in the MOM group (110 hips). Radiographic evaluation was available for 335 hips. Radiolucencies around the stem larger than one millimeter were found in five of 115 MOP hips, seven of 111 COP hips and in seven of 110 MOM hips. Periacetabular radiolucencies identified as larger than one millimeter were found in none of the 116 MOP hips, five of the 112 COP hips and in 19 of the 110 MOM hips. Ten revisions were performed. In the MOP group there were three revisions (infection, dislocation, pain); one in the COM group (infection), and six in the MOM group (three infections, two aseptic loosening and one septic loosening). Discussion. Clinically, the three bearing types perform equally well at seven years, and there are few signs of impending failure for the stem. However, there are an alarmingly high proportion of cups showing signs of loosening. Two hips have been revised in the MOM group for aseptic loosening as opposed to none in the two other groups, which adds to the concern. The MOM articulation used in this study should be monitored closely for signs of aseptic loosening

Aims

Deep surgical site infection (SSI) remains an unsolved problem after hip fracture. Debridement, antibiotic, and implant retention (DAIR) has become a mainstream treatment in elective periprosthetic joint infection; however, evidence for DAIR after infected hip hemiarthroplaty is limited.

Vancouver B fractures around a cemented polished tapered stem (CTPS) are often treated with revision arthroplasty. Results of osteosynthesis in these fractures are poor as per current literature. However, the available literature does not distinguish between fractures around CTPS from those around other stems. The aim of our study was to assess the clinical and radiological outcome of open reduction and internal fixation in Vancouver B fractures around CTPS using a broad non-locking plate. Patients treated with osteosynthesis between January 1997 and July 2011 were retrospectively reviewed. All underwent direct reduction and stabilisation using cerclage wires before definitive fixation with a broad DCP. Bicortical screw fixation was obtained in the proximal and distal fragments. We defined failure of treatment as revision for any cause. 101 patients (42 men and 59 women, mean age 79) were included. 70 had minimum follow-up of 6 months. 63 of these went on to clinical and radiological union. Three developed infected non-union. 7 had failure of fixation. Lack of anatomical reduction was the commonest predictor of failure followed by inadequate proximal fragment fixation and infection. 14 patients dropped at least 1 mobility grade from their preoperative status. This is the largest series of a very specific group of periprosthetic fractures treated with osteosynthesis. Patients who develop these fractures are often frail and “high risk” for major revision surgery. We recommend osteosynthesis for patients with Vancouver B periprosthetic fractures around CTPS provided these fractures can be anatomically reduced and adequately fixed

Introduction. Malalignment of some designs of stem is associated with an increased risk of aseptic loosening and revision. We investigated whether the alignment of the cemented polished, double-taper design adversely affected outcome, in a multicentre prospective study. Methods. A multicentre prospective study of 1189 total hip replacements was undertaken to investigate whether there is an association between surgical outcome and femoral stem alignment. All patients underwent a primary THR with the Exeter femoral stem (Stryker Howmedica Osteonics, Mahwah, NJ) and a variety of acetabular components. The primary outcome measure was the Oxford hip score (OHS) and change in OHS at five years. Secondary outcomes included rate of dislocation and revision. Radiographic evaluation of the femoral component was also undertaken. The long axis of the Exeter femoral component and the long axis of the femoral canal were located, and the angle at the point of intersection measured. The cementing quality was determined as defined by Barrack et al. Radiolucent lines at the cement-stem and cement-bone interface in the five year radiographs were defined using the zones described by Gruen et al. Subsidence was measured as the vertical dimension of the radiolucency craniolateral to the shoulder of the stem in Gruen zone 1 as described by Fowler et al. Cement fractures were recorded. Results. The incidence of varus (>5 ° to the femoral axis), and valgus (>5 °) malignment were 3.7% and 0.8% respectively. Pre-operative demographics and OHS were similar in all groups (p > 0.4). There was no significant difference in OHS or change in OHS between neutral and malaligned groups at 5 years (neutral, mean=40.1, change=23.1; varus, mean=40.1, change=23.7; valgus, mean=42.0, change=26.6; p=0.46 and p=0.45 respectively). There was no significant difference in dislocation rate between the groups (p=0.66). There was also no significant difference in revision rate (p=0.34). There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of femoral radiolucency, stem subsidence or cement fracture (p > 0.1). Conclusion. This study provides evidence that both varus and valgus implantation does not compromise the short to medium term clinical results of the cemented, polished, double-taper stems. Longer follow-up is required to establish the influence of stem alignment on the incidence of aseptic loosening and revision

Aims

Currently, periprosthetic fractures are excluded from the American Society for Bone and Mineral Research (ASBMR) definition of atypical femoral fracture (AFFs). This study aims to report on a series of periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) that otherwise meet the criteria for AFFs. Secondary aims were to identify predictors of periprosthetic atypical femoral fractures (PAFFs) and quantify the complications of treatment.

Aims

This study aimed to compare the change in health-related quality of life of patients receiving a traditional cemented monoblock Thompson hemiarthroplasty compared with a modern cemented modular polished-taper stemmed hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular hip fractures.