Introduction: Previous studies have suggested that bilateral total hip replacement (THR) is a safe and economically advantageous procedure. It has not become routine practice in many centres due to persisting concerns about complications and the patients’ ability to rehabilitate. In this study we compare one group of patients who underwent bilateral THR with another group who had only a unilateral procedure despite osteoarthritis in both hips. They were assessed for complications and functional outcome.

Methods: All data collected prospectively between 1998 and 2002. All patients had osteoarthritis and were recruited during the same time period . Group A comprised 49 patients who were listed for bilateral THR. Group B consisted of 215 patients listed for unilateral THR, with both hips symptomatic. Pain and function were assessed using the Harris Hip Score preoperatively and at 6 months post operatively. All intra and postoperative complications were recorded.

Results: There was no statistical difference between the groups for sex , pathology, body mass index or American Society of Anaesthetists (ASA) scores.

There is a difference in age between the two groups with the bilateral group being younger (p< 0.01).

Although group A had a higher death rate, it was not statistically significant. The deep infection and revision rate was similar for both groups. The average length of stay for group A was 13 days compared to 8 days for group B.There was a significant difference in the likelihood of blood transfusion with a transfusion rate of 78% in group A and 22% in group B (p< 0.001).

Conclusion: This study has demonstrated no significant increased risk of death, deep infection or need for revision with bilateral hip replacements. The increased likelihood of blood transfusion should be offset against the definite economic advantages and the good early outcome from performing bilateral total hip replacements.

Introduction

The scarf osteotomy is a z-osteotomy of the first metatarsal. This is a technically demanding procedure which allows early ambulation without cast and early return of function. This study was conducted to evaluate clinical results following this procedure in a district general hospital.

Method

We prospectively collected the data from 67 feet in 53 consecutive patients followed up for six months. Four patients were lost to follow up. We collected the AOFAS score preoperatively, and at three and six months. Hallux valgus angle, first-second intermetatarsal angle and sesamoid subluxation were measured from weight bearing radiographs taken preoperatively and at six weeks and six months.

Results

Total AOFAS score increased from 43.1 preoperatively to 85.0 at three months postoperatively (p< 0.0001, 95% CI of 44.5 to 35.5). The AOFAS scores at three and six months also showed significant difference (p< 0.0001, 95% CI of 4 to 10). All the components of AOFAS showed similar improvement postoperatively. The hallux valgus angle decreased from 30.1 to 9.9 degrees at six weeks post operatively (p< 0.0001, 95% CI of 22.21 to 18.27). The first-second intermetatarsal angle decreased from 12.6 to 6.4 at 6 weeks post operatively (p< 0.0001, 95% CI of 5.1 to 7.14). Sesamoid subluxation was reduced in the majority of cases. We had two fractures of the metatarsal head, three wound infections and six cases of transient neuropraxia of the cutaneous nerves.

Conclusion

With Scarf osteotomy, we achieved good correction of the hallux valgus deformity and significant improvement of AOFAS score. It is a versatile and reliable procedure in the management of hallux valgus.