The direct superior approach (DSA) is a modification of the posterior approach (PA) that preserves the iliotibial band and short external rotators except for the piriformis or conjoined tendon during total hip arthroplasty (THA). The objective of this study was to compare postoperative pain, early functional rehabilitation, functional outcomes, implant positioning, implant migration, and complications in patients undergoing the DSA versus PA for THA. This study included 80 patients with symptomatic hip arthritis undergoing primary THA. Patients were prospectively randomised to receive either the DSA or PA for THA, surgery was undertaken using identical implant designs in both groups, and all patients received a standardized postoperative rehabilitation programme. Predefined study outcomes were recorded by blinded observers at regular intervals for two-years after THA. Radiosteriometric analysis (RSA) was used to assess implant migration. There were no statistical differences between the DSA and PA in postoperative pain scores (p=0.312), opiate analgesia consumption (p=0.067), and time to hospital discharge (p=0.416). At two years follow-up, both groups had comparable Oxford hip scores (p=0.476); Harris hip scores (p=0.293); Hip disability and osteoarthritis outcome scores (p=0.543); University of California at Los Angeles scores (p=0.609); Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (p=0.833); and European Quality of Life questionnaire with 5 dimensions scores (p=0.418). Radiographic analysis revealed no difference between the two treatment groups for overall accuracy of acetabular cup positioning (p=0.687) and femoral stem alignment (p=0.564). RSA revealed no difference in femoral component migration (p=0.145) between the groups at two years follow-up. There were no differences between patients undergoing the DSA versus PA for THA with respect to postoperative pain scores, functional rehabilitation, patient-reported outcome measurements, accuracy of implant positioning, and implant migration at two years follow-up. Both treatment groups had excellent outcomes that remained comparable at all follow-up intervals.
Achieving accurate implant positioning and restoring native hip biomechanics are key surgeon-controlled technical objectives in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The primary objective of this study was to compare the reproducibility of the planned preoperative centre of hip rotation (COR) in patients undergoing robotic arm-assisted THA versus conventional THA. This prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) included 60 patients with symptomatic hip osteoarthritis undergoing conventional THA (CO THA) versus robotic arm-assisted THA (RO THA). Patients in both arms underwent pre- and postoperative CT scans, and a patient-specific plan was created using the robotic software. The COR, combined offset, acetabular orientation, and leg length discrepancy were measured on the pre- and postoperative CT scanogram at six weeks following surgery.Aims
Methods
This study reports the ten-year wear rates, incidence of osteolysis, clinical outcomes, and complications of a multicentre randomized controlled trial comparing oxidized zirconium (OxZr) versus cobalt-chrome (CoCr) femoral heads with ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) and highly cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) liners in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Patients undergoing primary THA were recruited from four institutions and prospectively allocated to the following treatment groups: Group A, CoCr femoral head with XLPE liner; Group B, OxZr femoral head with XLPE liner; and Group C, OxZr femoral head with UHMWPE liner. All study patients and assessors recording outcomes were blinded to the treatment groups. The outcomes of 262 study patients were analyzed at ten years’ follow-up.Aims
Methods
This study reports the ten-year polyethylene liner wear rates, incidence of osteolysis, clinical outcomes and complications of a three-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing Cobalt-Chrome (CoCr) and Oxidised Zirconium (OxZr) femoral heads with ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) versus highly cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) liners in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Patients undergoing THA from four institutions were prospectively randomised into three groups. Group A received a CoCr femoral head and XLPE liner; Group B received an OxZr femoral head and XLPE liner; and Group C received an OxZr femoral head and UHMWPE liner. Blinded observers recorded predefined outcomes in 262 study patients at regular intervals for ten years following THA. At ten years follow-up, increased linear wear rates were recorded in group C compared to group A (0.133 ± 0.21 mm/yr vs 0.031 ± 0.07 mm/yr respectively, p<0.001) and group B (0.133 ± 0.21 mm/yr vs 0.022 ± 0.05 mm/yr respectively, p<0.001). Patients in group C were associated with increased risk of osteolysis and aseptic loosening requiring revision surgery compared with group A (7/133 vs 0/133 respectively, p=0.007) and group B (7/133 vs 0/135 respectively, p=0.007). There was a non-significant trend towards increased liner wear rates in group A compared to group B (0.031 ± 0.07 mm/yr vs 0.022 ± 0.05 mm/yr respectively, p=0.128). All three groups were statistically comparable preoperatively and at ten years follow-up when measuring normalised Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index(p=0.410), short-form-36 (p = 0.465 mental, p = 0.713 physical), and pain scale scores (p=0.451). The use of UHMWPE was associated with progressively increased annual liner wear rates after THA. At ten years follow-up, this translated to UHMWPE leading to an increased incidence of osteolysis and aseptic loosening requiring revision THA, compared with XLPE. Femoral heads composed of OxZr were associated with a non-significant trend towards reduced wear rates compared to CoCr, but this did not translate to any differences in osteolysis, functional outcomes, or revision surgery between the two treatments groups.
This study reports the ten-year outcomes of a three-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing Cobalt-Chrome (CoCr) and Oxidised Zirconium (OxZr) femoral heads with ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) versus highly cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) liners in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Patients undergoing THA from four institutions were prospectively randomised into three groups. Group A received a CoCr femoral head and XLPE liner; Group B received an OxZr femoral head and XLPE liner; and Group C received an OxZr femoral head and UHMWPE liner. The outcomes of 262 study patients were analysed at ten years follow-up. At ten years, increased linear wear rates were recorded in group C compared to group A (0.133 ± 0.21 mm/yr vs 0.031 ± 0.07 mm/yr respectively, p<0.001) and group B (0.133 ± 0.21 mm/yr vs 0.022 ± 0.05 mm/yr respectively, p<0.001). Patients in group C had increased risk of osteolysis and aseptic loosening requiring revision surgery compared with group A (7/133 vs 0/133 respectively, p=0.007) and group B (7/133 vs 0/135 respectively, p=0.007). There was a non- significant trend towards increased liner wear rates in group A compared to group B (0.031 ± 0.07 mm/yr vs 0.022 ± 0.05 mm/yr respectively, p=0.128). All three groups were statistically comparable preoperatively and at ten years follow-up from a clinical score perspective. The use of UHMWPE was associated with progressively increased annual liner wear rates. At ten years follow-up, this translated to an increased incidence of osteolysis and aseptic loosening requiring revision, compared with XLPE. Femoral heads composed of OxZr were associated with a non-significant trend towards reduced wear rates compared to CoCr, but this did not translate to any differences in osteolysis, functional outcomes, or revision surgery between the two treatments groups.
Oxidised zirconium (OxZi) has been developed
as an alternative bearing surface for femoral heads in total hip arthroplasty
(THA). This study has investigated polyethylene wear, functional
outcomes and complications, comparing OxZi and cobalt–chrome (CoCr)
as part of a three-arm, multicentre randomised controlled trial.
Patients undergoing THA from four institutions were prospectively
randomised into three groups. Group A received a CoCr femoral head
and highly cross-linked polyethylene (XLPE) liner; Group B received
an OxZi femoral head and XLPE liner; Group C received an OxZi femoral
head and ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) liner.
At five years, 368 patients had no statistically significant differences
in short-form-36 (p = 0.176 mental, p = 0.756 physical), Western
Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (p = 0.847),
pain scores
(p = 0.458) or complications. The mean rate of linear wear was 0.028
mm/year (standard deviation ( Cite this article:
The aim of this study was to evaluate the ten-year
clinical and functional outcome of hip resurfacing and to compare it
with that of cementless hip arthroplasty in patients under the age
of 55 years. Between 1999 and 2002, 80 patients were enrolled into the study:
24 were randomised (11 to hip resurfacing, 13 to total hip arthroplasty),
18 refused hip resurfacing and chose cementless total hip arthroplasty
with a 32 mm bearing, and 38 insisted on resurfacing. The mean follow-up
for all patients was 12.1 years (10 to 14). Patients were assessed clinically and radiologically at one year,
five years and ten years. Outcome measures included EuroQol EQ5D,
Oxford, Harris hip, University of California Los Angeles and University
College Hospital functional scores. No differences were seen between the two groups in the Oxford
or Harris hip scores or in the quality of life scores. Despite a
similar aspiration to activity pre-operatively, a higher proportion
of patients with a hip resurfacing were running and involved in
sport and heavy manual labour after ten years. We found significantly higher function scores in patients who
had undergone hip resurfacing than in those with a cementless hip
arthroplasty at ten years. This suggests a functional advantage
for hip resurfacing. There were no other attendant problems. Cite this article: