Objectives: Dislocation is one of the common complications of total hip Arthroplasty. Posterolateral approach and small femoral heads have been shown to be high-risk factors for dislocation of the implanted total hip prosthesis. The use of a posterior capsulorraphy has also shown to decrease the rate of dislocation with a posterolateral approach. The objective of this study was to evaluate the early dislocation rate using size 22 mm head and a Posterolateral approach augmented with a posterior capsulorraphy.

Methods: Questionnaire and case notes review of 148 patients operated at one institution by 3 different senior surgeons from Aug’03 to Jan’05. A posterior capsulorraphy was performed in all the patients. The primary outcome measure was the dislocation of the prosthetic hip within the first year of surgery.

Results: 4 of the 148 patients (2.7%) had an episode of dislocation during the first year of surgery. 3 patients were treated conservatively and 1 required operative intervention in the form of PLAD. Radiographic analysis of this patient showed excessive anteversion of the socket(28⁰⁾.

Conclusions: Studies have consistently shown an increased rate of dislocation with a Posterolateral approach and use of a size 22mm head. A recently published study by Berry et.al has shown a 12.1% dislocation rate with the use of this approach and size 22mm head. However posterior capsulorraphy was not performed in patients in this study group. Our study shows that performing a posterior capsulorraphy can reduce early dislocation rates using Posterolateral approach and size 22 mm head. The dislocation rate (2.7%) is comparable to any other approach and the use of a larger head size.

These patients continue to be monitored to evaluate long term outcomes with this approach. (301 words)

We carried out a retrospective case-control study in 80 patients who underwent a revision total hip replacement. Group A (40 patients) received tranexamic acid and intra-operative cell salvage. Group B (40 patients) was a matched control group and did not receive this management. Each group was divided into four subgroups: revision of both components, revision of both components with bone grafting, revision of the acetabular component with or without bone graft, and revision of the femoral component with or without bone graft.

In group A the total number of units transfused was 52, compared with 139 in group B, representing a reduction in blood usage of 62.5%. The mean amount of blood transfused from cell salvage in each group was 858 ml (113 to 2100), 477 ml (0 to 2680), 228 ml (75 to 315) and 464 ml (120 to 1125), respectively. There was a significant difference in the amount of blood returned between the groups (p < 0.0001).

In group A, 22 patients needed transfusion and in group B, 37 (p < 0.0001). A cost analysis calculation showed a total revenue saving of £70 000 and a potential saving throughout our facility of £318 288 per year.

Our results show that a significant reduction in blood transfusion can be made using combined cell salvage and tranexamic acid in revision surgery of the hip.