During revision THR, the surgery is often difficult and compromised due to lack of patient's bone especially in the pelvis. Any extra bone in the acetabulum is expected to be of advantage to the patient and the surgeon. The aim of this study was to see if preservation of medial acetabular osteophyte in uncemented total hip replacement had any adverse effect on the prosthesis survival or patient satisfaction.

Conventional acetabular preparation involves reaming down to the true floor. This not only medialises the centre of rotation of the hip but also reduces the acetabular offset. In contrast the main surgeon preserved the acetabular offset by preserving some osteophytic bone between the true floor of the acetabulum and the acetabular cup. This is achieved by reaming the acetabular cavity conservatively while achieving secure primary fixation of the prosthesis. We report the outcome of a single surgeon series of such cases. The endpoint was assessed as the need for revision of the acetabular cup.

A total of 106 consecutive patients were identified who underwent uncemented THR from 2005 to 2010. The medial osteophyte was measured on immediate post-operative x-rays, from the “teardrop” to the nearest point of the acetabular cup, by 3 surgeons (one consultant and 2 registrars). The patients were contacted for a telephone interview and their clinical notes, including x-rays, were reviewed.

Outcome was available for 79 patients. 74 patients were available for follow-up and 5 patients died unrelated to THR. Average follow-up was for 8.3 years (range 5.5–10.8). Average age was 62 years. The average medial osteophyte was 1.98 mm (range 0–14mm). One patient had late infection and one had dislocation. There was not a single failure of the acetabular component. The patient satisfaction was high at 8.8 out of 10.

Preservation of medial osteophyte in the acetabulum whilst doing uncemented THR has the advantage of retaining the patient's own bone stock which can be of great advantage to the surgeon as well as the patient should revision THR be required in future. Our study has shown that this can be achieved without compromising the survival of the prosthesis or the patient satisfaction.

This technique may increase the range of motion of the hip by reducing the risk of bony or soft tissue impingement, and also reduce the risk of dislocation. Furthermore, not recreating the native centre of rotation of the hip does not seem to have any adverse effect for the patients, who are very happy with the outcome. We recommend that whilst doing uncemented THR, the acetabulum should not be reamed to the true floor as has been the conventional teaching, but attempt should be made to preserve some medial osteophyte where possible, at the same ensuring that good primary fixation of the cup is achieved. This is to give the patient and surgeon the advantage of extra available bone should revision surgery be required in the future.

This case series highlights the use of the Ganz approach and surgical dislocation for excision of fibrous dysplasia of the femoral neck, pigmented villonodular synovitis and synovial chrondromatosis of the hip, which has never been described for use with all three tumours together. These are rare benign tumours, which were found incidentally and required excision.

We demonstrate that it is possible to obtain excellent exposure of the femoral neck, head and acetabulum allowing easy inspection, exploration and debridement of these three tumours of the hip.

Hip resurfacing has generally been used in younger patients with early osteoarthritis of the hip. There has been considerable recent interest in this over the past few years. We conducted a prospective randomised trial comparing 2 hip resurfacing implants, Durom and ASR looking at radiological and clinical outcomes.

Forty-nine patients (78% male) with hip osteoarthritis which met the criteria for hip resurfacing were randomised to receive either a Durom or ASR resurfacing implant. These patients have so far been followed up for a minimum of one year. The groups were comparable in age (p=0.124) and gender (p=0.675). The average age in the ASR group was 54.04 years and in the Durom group it was 51.25.

Radiological views were scrutinised immediately post op and at final follow up so far to look at cup inclination, stem-shaft angle, and acetabular osseointegration.

Clinical outcomes were compared using the Oxford hip scores, WOMAC scores and SF12 scores.

At minimum follow up of 1 year the mean post operative Oxford hip score was not significantly different between the Durom (45.32, SD 3.93) and ASR (43.44, SD 8.44). The mean post operative WOMAC score was also not significantly different between the Durom (52.56, SD 6.06) and ASR (49.63, SD 2.23). There was no difference between the groups with regards to signs of osseointegration from radiological assessment (p=0.368). There were 3 periprosthetic femoral neck fractures (5.7%) and one revision for pain.

We conclude from this trial that there is no difference in the clinical or radiological findings between the Durom and ASR implants.

The outcome of periacetabular osteotomy in dysplastic hips is dependent on the absence of preoperative osteoarthritis [OA]. The purpose of this study was to analyze whether Tonnis grading is a reliable predictor of OA in patients with hip dysplasia.

Thirty patients were identified who had undergone hip arthroscopy surgery to assess their suitability for periacetabular osteotomy. Radiographs were assessed for anterior centre edge angle, lateral centre edge angle, Tonnis angle and Tonnis grade for OA changes. The radiographic grading of OA was compared with arthroscopic findings.

The objective was to compare vastus lateralis muscle splitting verses muscle sparing surgical approach to proximal femur for fixation of intertrochanteric fracture.

Of the 16 patients in this prospective randomised double blind study 8 were randomised to vastus lateralis muscle splitting and rest to muscle sparing group. Main outcome measurement was assessment of status of vastus lateralis muscle at 2 and 6 weeks using nerve conduction study. Preoperative demographics were identical for both the groups.

There was no statistically significant difference between the groups with regards to velocity, latency, and amplitude. The postoperative haemoglobin drop, heamatocrit, position of the dynamic hip screw and mobility status were identical.

Both clinical and neurophysiological outcome suggest that damage done to vastus lateralis either by splitting or elevating appears to be identical.