Dual mobility (DM) is an established bearing option in Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). The traditional mono-block DM designs have limited ability for additional fixation, whereas the modular DM designs allow additional screw fixation but limit internal diameter and have the potential to generate metal debris. We report the early results of a CoCrMo alloy mono-block implant manufactured by additive technology with a highly porous ingrowth surface to enhance primary fixation and osseointegration. Prospective follow-up of the DuplexTM implant first inserted in March 2016 enrolled into Beyond Compliance (BC). Primary outcome measure was all-cause revision and secondary outcomes dislocation, peri-prosthetic fracture (PPF) and Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Patients were risk stratified and all considered to be high risk for instability. Complications were identified via hospital records, clinical coding linkage using national database and via BC website. 159 implants in 154 patients with a mean age 74.0 years and a maximum F/U of 7 years. Survivorship for all-cause revision 99.4% (95% CI 96.2–99.8). One femoral only revision. Mean gain in OHS 27.4. Dislocation rate 0.6% with a single event. Patients with a cemented Polished taper stem (PTS) had a Type B PPF rate of 2.1% requiring revision/fixation. Compared to conventional THA this cohort was significantly older (74.0 vs 68.3 years), more co-morbidity (ASA 3 46.5% vs 14.4%) and more non-OA indications (32.4% vs 8.5%). Every patient had at least one risk factor for falling and >50% of cohort had 4 or more risk factors using NICE tool. We believe our results demonstrate that risk stratification successfully aids implant selection to prevent dislocation in high-risk patients. This novel design has provided excellent early results in a challenging cohort where individuals are very different to the “average” THA patient. NJR data on DM has reported an increase in revision for PPF. A “perfect storm” maybe created using DM in high-risk falls risk population. This re-enforces the need to consider all patient and implant factors when deciding bearing selection.
The COVID-19 pandemic drastically affected elective orthopaedic services globally as routine orthopaedic activity was largely halted to combat this global threat. Our institution (University College London Hospital, UK) previously showed that during the first peak, a large proportion of patients were hesitant to be listed for their elective lower limb procedure. The aim of this study is to assess if there is a patient perception change towards having elective surgery now that we have passed the peak of the second wave of the pandemic. This is a prospective study of 100 patients who were on the waiting list of a single surgeon for an elective hip or knee procedure. Baseline characteristics including age, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, COVID-19 risk, procedure type, and admission type were recorded. The primary outcome was patient consent to continue with their scheduled surgical procedure. Subgroup analysis was also conducted to define if any specific patient factors influenced decision to continue with surgeryAims
Methods
As the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic passes, the challenge shifts to safe resumption of routine medical services, including elective orthopaedic surgery. Protocols including pre-operative self-isolation, COVID-19 testing, and surgery at a non-COVID-19 site have been developed to minimize risk of transmission. Despite this, it is likely that many patients will want to delay surgery for fear of contracting COVID-19. The aim of this study is to identify the number of patients who still want to proceed with planned elective orthopaedic surgery in this current environment. This is a prospective, single surgeon study of 102 patients who were on the waiting list for an elective hip or knee procedure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Baseline characteristics including age, ASA grade, COVID-19 risk, procedure type, surgical priority, and admission type were recorded. The primary outcome was patient consent to continue with planned surgical care after resumption of elective orthopaedic services. Subgroup analysis was also performed to determine if any specific patient factors influenced the decision to proceed with surgery.Aims
Methods
