Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 3 of 3
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 97-B, Issue 6 | Pages 729 - 733
1 Jun 2015
Thomas SRYW

Successful management of late presenting hip dislocation in childhood is judged by the outcome not just at skeletal maturity but well beyond into adulthood and late middle age. This review considers different methods of treatment and looks critically at the handful of studies reporting long-term follow-up after successful reduction.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:729–33.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 96-B, Issue 3 | Pages 406 - 413
1 Mar 2014
Tarassoli P Gargan MF Atherton WG Thomas SRYW

The medial approach for the treatment of children with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) in whom closed reduction has failed requires minimal access with negligible blood loss. In the United Kingdom, there is a preference for these children to be treated using an anterolateral approach after the appearance of the ossific nucleus. In this study we compared these two protocols, primarily for the risk of osteonecrosis.

Data were gathered prospectively for protocols involving the medial approach (26 hips in 22 children) and the anterolateral approach (22 hips in 21 children) in children aged <  24 months at the time of surgery. Osteonecrosis of the femoral head was assessed with validated scores. The acetabular index (AI) and centre–edge angle (CEA) were also measured.

The mean age of the children at the time of surgery was 11 months (3 to 24) for the medial approach group and 18 months (12 to 24) for the anterolateral group, and the combined mean follow-up was 70 months (26 to 228). Osteonecrosis of the femoral head was evident or asphericity predicted in three of 26 hips (12%) in the medial approach group and four of 22 (18%) in the anterolateral group (p = 0.52). The mean improvement in AI was 8.8° (4° to 12°) and 7.9° (6° to 10°), respectively, at two years post-operatively (p = 0.18). There was no significant difference in CEA values of affected hips between the two groups.

Children treated using an early medial approach did not have a higher risk of developing osteonecrosis at early to mid-term follow-up than those treated using a delayed anterolateral approach. The rates of acetabular remodelling were similar for both protocols.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:406–13.


Orthopaedic Proceedings
Vol. 85-B, Issue SUPP_I | Pages 64 - 65
1 Jan 2003
Thomas SRYW Shukla D Latham PD
Full Access

12 patients requiring revision of a cemented Furlong total hip replacement had advanced corrosion of their titanium femoral stems. Thigh pain unlike that of loosening was a characteristic feature of presentation an average 38 months after implantation (range 20–58 months). Radiographs demonstrated fusiform periosteal thickening of the middle and distal thirds of the femur around the prosthetic stem with variable amounts of osteolysis around the tip. None of the femoral stems showed evidence of loosening and in 9 cases revision was solely for recurrent atypical pain.

The titanium stems were retrieved at an average 80 months (range 60–113). All were well-fixed but showed signs of advanced corrosion distally with blackened stems, loss of surface metal and thick white deposits. Two stems were examined with scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-ray analysis. Micromotion abrasions were identified proximally with loss of all alloy constituents. Distally, there was selective loss of titanium in a pattern suggestive of crevice corrosion. This may be accelerated by a galvanic effect if a cobalt chromium head is mixed with a titanium stem.

After revision to an all stainless steel femoral stem and head, early follow-up demonstrates resolution of both symptoms and radiological abnormalities at an average 13 months (range 3–33) from revision.

Conclusion: Once stem debonding has set up crevice conditions around a femoralimplant, the cement layer prevents repassivation (oxidation) of the metal surface upon which titanium depends for its stability. We therefore caution against the use of a titanium alloy stem with cementation, the conclusion of at least one other similar series. We also believe that the combination of cobalt chromium and titanium alloys is unsafe as, contrary to some of the published work on the subject, depassivated titanium is prone to galvanic attack in this situation.