Introduction

The prosthetic impingement occurs if the range of motion of the hip exceeds implant mobility or in case of component malorientation. This retrieval study was designed to assess the frequency and the risk factors of this phenomenon.

Purpose of the study: Hip resurfacing (HR) is becoming popular again with the advent the the metal-on-metal bearing. This type of surgery is proposed for young, often very active, patients for whom restoration of optimal hip joint range of motion constitutes and important objective. The purpose of this work was to analyse anterior translation of the femoral component to optimise joint range of motion (particularly flexion).

Material and method: From September 2007 to May 2008, 68 hip resurfacing prostheses were implanted in 66 patients aged on average 45 years (range 19–61). All procedures were performed by the same operator using a posterorlateral approach and the same surgical technique. Anterior head-neck offset was a constant objective. The Postel-Merle-d’Aubigné and Harris scores as well as the Devane classification and the WOMAC and the SF-12 were noted. Joint range of motion was noted preoperatively and at last follow-up by and independent operator. Anterior head-neck offset was measured radiographically on the Dunn view using an original technique and calibrated by the Imagika software according to the known diameter of the implants.

Results: All clinical scores as well as the activity level and the subjective scores improved significantly. There were no revisions. The mean anterior head-neck offset was 4.5 mm (range 2–9). Significant correction was observed for gain in postoperative flexion and increased offset (p< 0.005). The group of patients who had an anterior offset considered to be significant (> 4 mm) exhibited significantly better flexion than the group of patients with a small anterior offset.

Discussion: Hip resurfacing has a poor head-neck ratio, depending on the patient’s anatomy, which compares unfavourable with conventional hip prostheses (THA). Nevertheless, the joint range of motion after resurfacing, as observed in our study and in the literature, does not show any decline compared with THA. The greater gain in flexion is an important factor to take into consideration, especially in a young active athletic subject. Each millimetre of gain in anterior offset produces a significant increase in flexion. This offset can be improved by the surgical technique (implanting the femoral component tangentially to the posterior cortical), but also by the design of the resurfacing prosthesis (thick femoral component, increased cement sheath). After hip resurfacing, anterior offset appears to be an essential biomechanical factor for restoration of joint motion.

Purpose of the study: Drilling along yields disappointing results for osteonecrosis of the femoral head due to the high failure rate despite prolonged rest and also because of the risk of fracture. To prevent these problems, we have developed a new drilling technique which was evaluated prospectively.

Material and methods: The procedure performed percutaneously uses a lateral cortical orifice measuring 5mm, non-concentrated autologous bone marrow was injected after drilling. Osteoinductive protein (BMP7) was associated in random fashion (groups BMP+ and BMP−). Ficat stage 1 and 2 necrosis was included. Outcome was the rate or revision for prosthesis.

Results: Forty hips (36 patients) were included and assessed at mean four years (range 2–6). The necrosis was related to: alcoholism (n=5), cortisone (n=25), barotraumas (n=2), metabolic disease (n=4), idiopathic condition (n=4). Group BMP- (drilling+bone marrow) included 24 hips and group BMP+ (drilling+bone marrow+BMP7) 16 hips. The groups were comparable regarding necrosis stage (15% stage 3, 65% stage 2, 20% stage 1) and mean Koo index (27 BMP+ vs 34 BMP-; NS). There were no infections and no fractures despite immediate and complete weight-bearing. The revision rate for prosthesis was higher in the BMP- group (67%) than in the BMP+ group (43%) but the difference did not reach significance (p=0.10). The failure rate was not affected by the severity of the necrosis in the BMP+ group: all stage 3 hips were revised in the BMP- group versus none in the BMP+ group. The only variable predictive of revision for prosthesis was the Koo index (p=0.02).

Discussion: Adjunction of BMP did not improve significantly the success rate of drilling with bone marrow adjunction but adding BMP appeared to limit the unfavourable impact of server necrosis observed in the BMP- group. To reach a statistical power of 80%, 40 cases would be needed in each arm. This threshold has not yet been reached. It can be noted however that the proposed method does ensures early weight bearing without the risk of complications. Similarly, since it is a percutaneous procedure, later arthroplasty is not compromised. The principle confounding factor, the richness of the bone marrow, was not assessed, motivating a new randomized trial with measurement of CFU-F.

Introduction: The prosthetic impingement occurs if the range of motion of the hip exceeds implant mobility or in case of component malorientation. This phenomenon is rarely studied in the literature and most data have come from sporadic cases. This study was designed to assess the frequency and the risk factors of this phenomenon.

Material: The frequency and the severity of the impingement were calculated from a continuous series of 413 cups retrievals. These cups were examined macroscopically twice by two independent observers. The cam effect was noted as: absent, grade 1 (visible at gross inspection but measuring < 1 mm), grade 2 (notch measuring 1–3 mm), grade 3 (notch measuring > 3 mm). The risk factors were analyzed for 298 retrievals that had complete clinical charts.

Results: Among the 413 cups explants, the frequency of impingement was 51.3 percent (grade 3 in 12% and grade 2 in 24%). The impingement was the reason for removal in only 1.7 percent (only for hard bearings), meaning that impingement was mainly an unexpected event (98.3 percent). The impingement was more frequent when revisions were performed because of instability (80 percent; odd-ratio 4.2 (1.1–16.2)) than for loosening (52%) osteolysis (59%) or infection (38%) (p =.002). Likewise, impingement was more frequent when the sum of hip motion exceeded 200 degrees (sum of motion in the 6 degrees of freedom of the hip) (66% versus 45% if the sum was below 200°). The other risk factors were: use of heads with skirts (78% versus 55%), liner with an elevated rim (73% versus 55%), and head-neck ratio below 2.

Discusssion and conclusion: This study underlines the impingement is common when assessing cup retrievals (over 50 percent). One should be aware of impingement when performing hip replacement in patients having a high range of motion. This situation may require prostheses with a high head-neck ratio, as well as use of computer-assisted surgery. One should avoid liners with elevated rim as well as heads with skirts to prevent dislocation, particularly when other risk factors are detected.