The management of femoral bone loss is challenging during revision hip arthroplasty. In patients with Paprosky grade IIIB and IV defects, obtaining fixation and rotational stability using traditional surgical constructs is difficult. The use of a custom-made internal proximal femoral replacement prostheses has been proposed as a solution in patients, with severe femoral bone stock loss. However, there is a paucity in the literature on their use and long-term outcomes. We report on the clinical and radiological results of our cohort. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent internal proximal femoral replacement for revision hip arthroplasty between April 1996 and April 2019. All patients had at least 2 years of follow-up time. 160 patients underwent limb salvage at our institution using internal proximal femoral replacement. The mean follow-up was 79.7 months (S.D 41.3). Indications for revision included periprosthetic fractures, aseptic loosening, and deep infection. The mean Oxford hip score increased from 13.8 (0–22) to 31.5 (18–43) (paired t-test, p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier prosthesis survival analysis with revision as the endpoint was 87% at 5 years. None required revision of the femoral stem. There were four dislocations (5%) and there was failure to eradicate the deep infection in four. This technique allows instant distal fixation, allowing for early mobilisation. Long-term clinical and radiological outcomes are encouraging and the complication rates are acceptable for this patient group.
Custom acetabular components have become an established method of treating massive acetabular bone defects in hip arthroplasty. Complication rates, however, remain high and migration of the cup is still reported. Ischial screw fixation (IF) has been demonstrated to improve mechanical stability for non-custom, revision arthroplasty cup fixation. We hypothesise that ischial fixation through the flange of a custom acetabular component aids in anti-rotational stability and prevention of cup migration. Electronic patient records were used to identify a consecutive series of 49 custom implants in 46 patients from 2016 to 2022 in a unit specializing in complex joint reconstruction. IF was defined as a minimum of one screw inserted into the ischium passing through a hole in a flange on the custom cup. The mean follow-up time was 30 months. IF was used in 36 cups. There was no IF in 13 cups. No difference was found between groups in age (68.9 vs. 66.3, P = 0.48), BMI (32.3 vs. 28.2, P = 0.11) or number of consecutively implanted cups (3.2 vs. 3.6, P = 0.43). Aseptic loosening with massive bone loss was the primary indication for revision. There existed no difference in Paprosky grade between the groups (P = 0.1). 14.2% of hips underwent revision and 22.4% had at least one dislocation event. No ischial fixation was associated with a higher risk of cup migration (6/13 vs. 2/36, X2 = 11.5, P = 0.0007). Cup migration was associated with an increased risk for all cause revision (4/8 vs. 3/38, X2 = 9.96, P = 0.0016, but not with dislocation (3/8 vs. 8/41, X2 = 1.2, P = 0.26). The results suggest that failure to achieve adequate ischial fixation, with screws passing through the flange of the custom component into the ischium, increases the risk of cup migration, which, in turn, is a risk factor for revision.
The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (Smith & Nephew London, UK) is the most popular hip resurfacing (HR) in the UK. However, it is now subject to two Medical Device Alerts (MDA) from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). A cross-sectional survey of primary metal-on-metal hip procedures recorded on the National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland (NJR) until 5th November 2013 was performed. Cost-analysis was based on an algorithm for surveillance of HR at a tertiary referral centre and followed previous MHRA guidance. NIHR NHS Treatment costs were used. The local protocol encompassed: patient outcome scoring (Oxford hip score), blood metal ion measurement (cobalt, chromium), cross-sectional imaging (MRI) and discussion at an internet-enabled multidisciplinary team meeting (iMDT) in addition to routine hip surveillance.Introduction
Patients/Materials & Methods
THR is one of the most frequently performed operations nationally. A large number of prostheses are available, and the procedure is therefore associated with variation in practice and outcomes. NICE guidelines aim to standardise best practice, and are informed by separate, independent bodies, such as the NJR and ODEP, which monitor data about the implants used and their performance. This study aims to determine whether clinical practice and component use has changed since the publication of NJR data. NJR reports from 2006–2014 were analysed, with record made of the different prostheses used in THR, noting ODEP ratings of components used. Analysis was also performed by component type (i.e. cemented and cementless stems and cups), and combinations of components, according to their frequency of use in a given year. The Kruksal-Wallis test was used for statistical analysis.Introduction
Methods
Surgical simulation and ‘virtual’ surgical tools are becoming recognised as essential aids for speciality training in Trauma & Orthopaedics, as evidenced by the BOA T&O Simulation Curriculum 20131,2. The current generation of hip arthroplasty simulators, including cadaveric workshops, offers the trainee limited exposure to reproducible real life bony pathology. We developed and implemented a novel training course using pathological dry bone models generated from real patient cases to support senior orthopaedic trainees and new consultants in developing knowledge and hands on skills in complex total hip arthroplasty. A two-day programme for 20 delegates was held at a specialist centre for hip arthroplasty. Three complex femoral and three complex acetabular cases were identified from patients seen at our centre. 3D models were printed from CT scans and dry bone models produced (using a mold-casting process), enabling each delegate to have a copy of each case at a cost of around £30 per case per delegate (Figure 1). The faculty was led by 4 senior Consultant revision hip surgeons. A computerised digitising arm was used to measure cup positioning and femoral stem version giving candidates immediate objective feedback (Figure 2). Candidate experience and satisfaction with the course and models was evaluated with a standardised post-course questionnaire.Introduction
Patient/Materials & Methods
Uncertainties in the management of patients with MOM hip implants continue to be a problem for all surgeons. Guidelines vary and do not fully define or quantify thresholds. We aimed to assess the differences in decision-making amongst an international community of six specialist orthopaedic institutions. Five international tertiary referral orthopaedic units (one UK, two USA, and two European) were invited to participate. Each unit organised an MDT panel consisting of 2 or more hip surgeons and a musculoskeletal radiologist. All units discussed the same 10 patients. A full clinical dataset was provided including blood test and all imaging. Differences in the interpretation of findings, management decision and rationale for decisions were compared between institutions.Introduction
Methods
