Historical studies have reported incidences of taper corrosion in retrieved MoP hips of 20–50%. These studies relied on visual assessments, rather than using modern analytical techniques. The Northern Retrieval Registry was initiated to routinely analyse all retrieved hips. The volumetric wear rates of retrieved Exeter head tapers were measured using a coordinate measuring machine using validated methods and compared to the available results obtained from an ongoing study of failed MoM prostheses. Power analysis suggested that we would need at least fifty Exeter head tapers to provide significant results. Non-parametric tests were used to assess differences. We have previously identified head diameter/offset/taper angle and taper surface roughness as variables associated with taper wear. The effect of bearing material combination remains unquantified. These design variables were entered into a multiple regression model following log normalisation of taper wear.Introduction
Patients/Materials and Methods
The highly cross-linked polyethylene Exeter RimFit flanged cemented
acetabular component was introduced in the United Kingdom in 2010.
This study aimed to examine the rates of emergence of radiolucent
lines observed when the Rimfit acetabular component was implanted
at total hip arthroplasty (THA) using two different techniques: firstly,
the ‘rimcutter’ technique in which the flange sits on a pre-prepared
acetabular rim; and secondly, the ‘trimmed flange’ technique in
which the flange is trimmed and the acetabular component is seated
inside the rim of the acetabulum. The radiographs of 150 THAs (75 ‘rimcutter’, 75 ‘trimmed flange’)
involving this component were evaluated to assess for radiolucencies
at the cement/bone interface by three observers. Aims
Patients and Methods
Despite excellent results, the use of cemented
total hip replacement (THR) is declining. This retrospective cohort study
records survival time to revision following primary cemented THR
using the most common combination of components that accounted for
almost a quarter of all cemented THRs, exploring risk factors independently associated
with failure. All patients with osteoarthritis who had an Exeter
V40/Contemporary THR (Stryker) implanted before 31 December 2010
and recorded in the National Joint Registry for England and Wales
were included in the analysis. Cox’s proportional hazard models
were used to analyse the extent to which risk of revision was related
to patient, surgeon and implant covariates, with a significance
threshold of p <
0.01. A total of 34 721 THRs were included in
the study. The overall seven-year rate of revision for any reason
was 1.70% (99% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 2.12). In the final
adjusted model the risk of revision was significantly higher in
THRs with the Contemporary hooded component (hazard ratio (HR) 1.88,
p <
0.001) than with the flanged version, and in smaller head
sizes (<
28 mm) compared with 28 mm diameter heads (HR 1.50,
p = 0.005). The seven-year revision rate was 1.16% (99% CI 0.69
to 1.63) with a 28 mm diameter head and flanged component. The overall
risk of revision was independent of age, gender, American Society
of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, surgeon volume, surgical
approach, brand of cement/presence of antibiotic, femoral head material
(stainless steel/alumina) and stem taper size/offset. However, the
risk of revision for dislocation was significantly higher with a
‘plus’ offset head (HR 2.05, p = 0.003) and a hooded acetabular component
(HR 2.34, p <
0.001). In summary, we found that there were significant differences
in failure between different designs of acetabular component and
sizes of femoral head after adjustment for a range of covariates.
Although classic teaching holds that the least amount of constraint should be implanted, there is very little in the literature to substantiate this. This study attempts to quantify the influence of constraint and various indications upon functional outcome following aseptic first time revision knee arthroplasty. The null hypothesis was that the level of constraint and indication for surgery would not influence the functional outcome following revision knee replacement. A single centre prospective study was performed to examine the outcome for 175 consecutive total revision knee replacements performed between 2003 and 2008 with a minimum follow-up of two years. Patient reported outcome data was used to determine the influence of final level of component constraint and its relationship with primary indication for surgery.Purpose
Methods
We wished to quantify the influence of constraint and various principal indications upon functional outcome following aseptic first time revision knee arthroplasty. In this single centre, prospective study we have looked into the outcome of 175 total revision knee replacement performed between 2003 and 2008 at a minimum follow-up of 1 year. Data was refined to allow for examination exclusively of those cases where the level of constraint was increased from cruciate retaining or cruciate sacrificing knee replacement to either non linked constrained implant (condylar constrained) or linked constrained (rotating hinge) prosthesis.Introduction
Methods
