In metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacements or resurfacings, mechanical induced corrosion can lead to a local inflammatory response, pseudo tumours and elevated serum metal ions, requiring revision surgery.

The size and diametral clearance of Anatomic (ADM) and Modular (MDM) Dual Mobility bearings matches that of certain MOM components. Presenting the opportunity for revision with exchange of the metal head for ADM/MDM bearings without removal of the acetabular component if it is well-fixed and appropriately positioned.

Between 2012 and 2020, across two centres, 94 patients underwent revision of a MoM hip replacement or resurfacing. The mean age was 65.5 (33–87) years. In 53 patients (56.4%), the acetabular component was retained, and dual mobility bearings were used (DM); in 41 (43.6%) the acetabulum was revised (AR). DM was only considered where the acetabular component was satisfactorily positioned and well-integrated into bone, with no surface damage. Patients underwent clinical and radiographic follow-up to at least one-year (mean 42.4 (12–96) months).

One (1.1%) patient died before one-year, for reasons unrelated to the surgery. In the DM group, two (3.8%) patients underwent further surgery; one (1.9%) for dislocation and one (1.9%) for infection. In the AR group, four (12.2%) underwent further procedures; two (4.9%) for loosening of the acetabular component and two (4.9%) following dislocations. There were no other dislocations in either group. In the DM group, operative time (68.4 v 101.5 mins, p<0.001), postoperative drop in haemoglobin (16.6 v 27.8 g/L, p<0.001), and length of stay (1.8 v 2.4 days, p<0.001) were significantly lower. There was a significant reduction in serum metal ions postoperatively in both groups (p<0.001 both Cobalt and Chromium) although there was no difference between groups for this reduction (p=0.674 Cobalt; p=0.186 Chromium).

In selected patients with MoM hip arthroplasty, where the acetabular component is well-fixed, in a satisfactory position and there is no surface damage, the metal head can be exchanged for ADM/MDM bearings with retention of the acetabular prosthesis. Presenting significant benefits through a less invasive procedure, and a low risk of complications, including dislocation.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a preventable cause of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing elective hip arthroplasty surgery. The balance of post-operative VTE prophylaxis and risk of post-operative haemorrhage remains at the forefront of surgeon's mind. The National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) has altered their prophylaxis guidance in the setting of total hip arthroplasty (THA). The aim of this study was to present the VTE incidence in 8,890 patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty between January 1997 and March 2018 with Aspirin as the primary agent for pharmacological thromboprophylaxis.

Analysis of prospective data collection from consecutive patients undergoing THA was performed with the incidence of deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) occurring within 6 months of the index operation as the primary outcome measure. 90-day all-cause mortality of this cohort of patients was also analysed.

8890 patients were reviewed. This included 7235 primary, 224 complex primary and 1431 revision cases. The incidence of DVT was 0.64% after elective THA and the incidence of PE was 0.54%. There was no difference in the incidence between primary and revision cases. The 90-day all-cause mortality was 0.88%. Cardiovascular and respiratory disease were the main causes of death following surgery. Only 0.03% of deaths (n= 3) within 90 days of index surgery were due to VTE.

Our results support the use of aspirin as an effective form of prophylaxis against VTE following THA. It is not associated with an increased incidence in symptomatic DVT, PE or death compared to other published studies. The fact that it is inexpensive, readily available, requires no monitoring and does not pose an increased risk of bleeding are other attractive advantages of using aspirin for VTE prophylaxis.

Studies have shown that 10–30% patients do not achieve optimal function outcomes after total hip replacement (THR). High quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of techniques to improve functional outcomes after THR are lacking. We performed this study to evaluate the feasibility of a RCT comparing patient-reported functional outcomes after hybrid or fully cemented THR (ISRCTN11097021).

Patients were recruited from two centres and randomised to receive either a fully cemented or hybrid THR. Data collection included Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs), non-serious adverse events of special interest (AESI), serious adverse device effects (SADE) and NHS resource use. Qualitative interviews were undertaken to understand a) patient experiences of study processes and their reasons for taking part or not, and b) to understand surgeons’ perceptions of the study, factors affecting willingness to participate, and barriers to implementation of the future RCT findings.

The target of 40 patients were successfully recruited for the feasibility RCT; the ratio of successful recruitment to eligible patients was 0.61 across both sites. Treatment crossovers occurred in four patients, all related to bone quality. Four patients were withdrawn due to not undergoing surgery within the study window because of the pandemic. Follow-up was 100% and PROMs were completed by all patients at all time points. The feasibility of conducting a within-trial cost-utility analysis was demonstrated. Interviews were conducted with 27 patients and 16 surgeons. Patients and surgeons generally found the study procedures acceptable and workable. Some declined participation because they did not want treatment allocated at random, or because blinding was off-putting. Surgeons’ perceptions of equipoise varied, and implementation of findings from the future RCT would need to recognise the ‘craft’ nature of surgery and the issue of training.

We conclude that a full RCT with economic analysis will be both feasible and practicable, although mechanisms to safely implement potential changes to practice because of RCT findings may need consideration by the wider arthroplasty community.

The 2020 London International Hamstring Consensus meeting was convened to improve our understanding and treatment of hamstring injuries.

The multidisciplinary consensus panel included 14 International specialists on the management of hamstring injuries. The Delphi consensus process consisted of two rounds of surveys which were completed by 19 surgeons from a total of 106 participants. Consensus on individual statements was regarded as over 70% agreement between panel members.

The consensus group agreed that the indications for operative intervention included the following: gapping at the zone of injury (86.9%); high functional demands of the patient (86.7%); symptomatic displaced bony avulsions (74.7%); and proximal free tendon injuries with functional compromise refractory to non-operative treatment (71.4%). Panel members agreed that surgical intervention had the capacity to restore anatomy and function, while reducing the risk of injury recurrence (86.7%). The consensus group did not support the use of corticosteroids or endoscopic surgery without further evidence.

These guidelines will help to further standardise the treatment of hamstring injuries and facilitate decision-making in the surgical treatment of these injuries.

The MAKO Robotic arm is a haptic robotic system that can be used to optimise performance during total hip arthroplasty (THA). We present the outcome of the first 40 robotic cases performed in an NHS foundation trust along with the technique of performing robotic THA in our unit.

Forty consecutive patients undergoing robotic THA (rTHA) were compared to a case matched group of patients undergoing manual THA (m-THA). 2:1 blinded case matching was performed for age, sex, implants used (Trident uncemented socket and cemented Exeter stem, Stryker Mahwah, NJ, US) and surgeon grade. Comparisons were made for radiological positioning of implants, including leg length assessment, and patient reported functional outcome (PROMS). Pre- and post-operative radiographs were independently analysed by 2 authors.

All patients underwent THA for a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis. No significant difference between groups was identified for post-operative leg length discrepancy (LLD) although pre-operatively a significantly higher LLD was highlighted on the MAKO group, likely due to patient selection. Significantly lower post-operative socket version was identified in the MAKO cohort although no difference in post-operative cup inclination was noted. However, there was significantly larger variance in post-op LLD (p=0.024), cup version (p=0.004) and inclination (p=0.05) between groups indicating r-THA was significantly less variable (Levene's test for homogeneity of variance). There was no significant difference in the number of cases outside of Lewinnek's ‘safe’ zone for inclination (p=0.469), however, there were significantly more cases outside Lewinnek's ‘safe’ zone for version (12.5% vs 40.3%, p=0.002) in the m-THA group.

We report the commencement of performance of MAKO robotic THA in an NHS institution. No problems with surgery were reported during our learning curve. Robotic THA cases had less variability in terms of implant positioning suggesting that the MAKO robot allows more accurate, less variable implant positioning with fewer outliers. Longer term follow-up of more cases is needed to identify whether this improved implant positioning has an effect on outcomes, but the initial results seem promising.

The Exeter V40 femoral stem is the most implanted stem in the NJR for primary THA. In 2004, the 44/00/125 stem was released for use in “cement-in-cement” revision cases. It has however been used ‘off-label’ as a primary stem when, for example, patient anatomy requires a smaller stem with a 44mm offset. We aimed to investigate survival of this stem in comparison to others in the range when used in primary THAs recorded in the NJR.

Analyses were performed using a dataset based on that used for the 2020 NJR annual report. Our exposure was the stem; the outcome was all-cause construct revision. Crude analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier and adjusted using Cox models. The 44/00/125 stem was directly compared to other stems in the Exeter range.

We analysed 330,732 primary THAs using the Exeter V40 stem comprising 34.5% of the 958,869 THAs with complete information from the start of the NJR to 31 December 2018. The 44/00/125 stem was implanted in 2,158 primary THAs with 67.5% in female patients and a mean age of 67.8. The 10-year revision estimate for the 44/00/125 stem was 4.9% (95%CI 3.6, 6.8) and in constructs using an Exeter V40 stem was 2.8% (95%CI 2.7, 2.8). Controlling for age, sex and ASA demonstrated an increased overall hazard of revision for constructs using the 44/00/125 stem compared to constructs using other Exeter V40 femoral stems (HR 1.8 (95%CI 1.4, 2.3)).

Although the revision estimate is within the NICE 10-year benchmark, survivorship of constructs using the 44/00/125 stem appears to be lower than the rest of the Exeter V40 range. Attempts to control for age, sex and ASA will not take into account confounding by indication i.e. patients with more complex anatomy who may have a higher risk of revision. Surgeons and patients should be reassured by this but should be aware of the observed increased revision estimate and use the stem according to its indications.

Femoral cement-in-cement revision is a well described technique to reduce morbidity and complications in hip revision surgery. Traditional techniques for septic revision necessitate removal of all bone cement from the femur. In our two institutions, we have been using a cement-in-cement technique, leaving the distal femoral cement in selected cases for septic hip revision surgery.

Between February 2010 and September 2019, 89 patients with prosthetic hip infection underwent first or single stage procedures leaving the distal femoral cement in situ and performing a cement-in-cement revision. The mean patient age was 72.0 years (24–92). The median time from the last arthroplasty procedure was 29.0 months (1–294).

81 patients underwent revision using a cemented Exeter stem, 7 patients received an articulating spacer, and one patient underwent excision arthroplasty with the distal cement left in situ. Patients received clinical and radiographic follow-up with a mean of 42.8 months (range 11.0–120.1 months). Oxford hip scores were collected from each institution's existing databases.

9 patients (10.1%) died within one year of surgery. No deaths were directly related to joint infection or the surgery. One patient was lost to follow up before one year.

Of the remainder, 7 patients (8.9%) required further procedures for infection and were therefore considered to be treatment failures. 6 patients (7.6%) underwent planned second stage procedures with no recurrence of infection. 7 patients (8.9%) had further surgery for non-infective reasons. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of infection free survival at one year was 93.7% (95% CI 88.4 to 99.0%).

No patients underwent revision for stem loosening. Oxford hip scores were available at over one year postoperatively for 51 patients with a mean score of 30.6, and a mean gain of 11.9.

In our combined cohort of patients, cement-in-cement revision had an infection eradication rate of 91.1%. Patient selection is crucial, and the procedure can only be performed when there is a well-fixed cement mantle. However, when strict criteria are followed, this technique offers potential significant benefits to surgeons performing this challenging surgery, and more importantly the patients undergoing them.

FAI may cause pain or functional impairment for an individual, as well as potentially resulting in arthritis and degeneration of the hip joint. Results from recent randomised control trials demonstrate the superiority of surgery over physiotherapy in patients with FAI. However, there is paucity of evidence regarding which factors influence outcomes for FAI surgery, most notably on patient reported outcomes measures (PROMs).

Our study looks to explore factors influencing the outcomes for patients undergoing surgery for FAI utilising data from the Non-Arthroplasty Hip Registry.

This study is a retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively via the NAHR database. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria, who underwent surgery between January 2011 and September 2019 were identified and included in the study. Follow-up data was captured in September 2020 to allow a minimum of 12 months follow-up.

Patients consenting to data collection received questionnaires to determine EQ-5D Index and iHOT-12 scores preoperatively and at 6 months, 1, 2- and 5-year follow-up.

Changes in outcome scores were analysed for all patients and sub-analysis was performed looking at the influence of; FAI morphological subtype, age, and sex, on outcome scores.

Our cohort included 4,963 patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment for FAI. There was significant improvement from pre-operative PROMs when compared with those at 6 and 12 months.

Pre-operatively, and at 12-month follow-up, iHOT-12 scores were significantly better for the cam / mixed groups compared to the pincer group (p<0.01).

In multivariable regression analysis, pincer pathology and a high-grade chondral lesion were associated significantly poorer iHOT-12 improvement at 6 and 12 months (p<0.05)

Age (<40 vs >40) demonstrated no statistical significance when considering 12 months outcome scores.

This study demonstrates that hip arthroscopy is an effective treatment for patients with symptomatic FAI and shows statistically significant improvements at 12 months.

The findings of this study are relevant to orthopaedic surgeons who manage young adults with hip pathology. This will help them to; predict which patients may benefit from operative intervention, and better inform patients, when undertaking shared decision making.

Pelvic re-orientation osteotomy is a well-recognised treatment of young adults with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH).

The most commonly used technique is the periacetabular osteotomy (PAO), however, some surgeons favour a triple osteotomy. These techniques can also be utilised for acetabular retroversion leading to FAI.

Despite the published literature on these techniques, the authors note a scarcity of evidence looking at patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) for these procedures.

This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data utilising the UK NAHR. All patients who underwent pelvic osteotomy from January 2012 to November 2019 were identified from the NAHR database. Patients who consented to data collection received EQ-5D index and iHOT-12 questionnaires, with scores being collected pre-operatively and at 6, 12 and 24 months post-operatively.

Nine hundred and eleven (911) patients were identified with twenty-seven (27) undergoing a triple osteotomy, the remaining patients underwent PAO. Mean age was 30.6 (15–56) years and 90% of patients were female. Seventy-nine (79) (8.7%) of patients had the procedure for acetabular retroversion leading to FAI

Statistical analysis, of all patients, showed significant improvement (p<0.001) for; iHOT-12 scores (+28 at 6-months, +33.8 at 12-months and +29.9 at 24-months)

Similarly there was significant improvement (p<0.001) in EQ-5D index (+0.172 at 6-months, +0.187 at 12-months and +0.166 at 24-months)

Pre-operatively, and at each follow-up time-period, raw scores were significantly better in the DDH group compared to the FAI group (p<0.05); however, the improvement in scores was similar for both groups.

For both scoring measures, univariable and multivariable linear regression showed poorer pre-operative scores to be strongly significant predictors of greater post-operative improvement at 6 and 12 months (p<0.0001).

Total hip replacements (THRs) provide pain relief and improved function to thousands of patients suffering from end-stage osteoarthritis, every year. Over 800 different THR constructs were implanted in the UK in 2017. To ensure reliable implants are used, a NICE revision benchmark of 5% after 10 years exists. Given the 10-year cumulative mortality of patients under 55 years of age receiving THRs is only 5% and that a recent study suggests 25-year THR survival of 58%, we aim to produce revision estimates out to 30 years that may guide future long-term benchmarks.

The local database of the Princess Elizabeth Orthopaedic Centre (PEOC), Exeter, holds data on over 20,000 patients with nearly 30-years follow-up with contemporary prostheses. A previous study suggests that the results of this centre are generalisable if comparisons restricted to the same prostheses. Via flexible parametric survival analysis, we created an algorithm using this database, for revision of any part of the construct for any reason, controlling for age and gender. This algorithm was applied to 664,761 patients in the NJR who have undergone THR, producing a revision prediction for patients with the same prostheses as those used at this centre.

Using our algorithm, the 10-year predicted revision rate of THRs in the NJR was 2.2% (95% CI 1.8, 2.7) based on a 68-year-old female patient; well below the current NICE benchmark. Our predictions were validated by comparison to the maximum observed survival in the NJR (14.2 years) using restricted mean survival time (P=0.32). Our predicted cumulative revision estimate after 30 years is 6.5% (95% CI 4.5, 9.4). The low observed and predicted revision rate with the prosthesis combinations studied, suggest current benchmarks may be lowered and new ones introduced at 15 and 20 years to encourage the use of prostheses with high survival.

Joint replacement is a life-enhancing, cost-effective surgical intervention widely used to treat disabling joint pain mainly caused by osteoarthritis. Hip and knee joint replacements are common, highly successful operations bringing many patients relief from pain, and improve mobility.

Prosthetic joint infections (PJI) are often difficult to diagnose; diagnosis often relying on a combination of clinical findings, microbiological data and histological evaluation of periprosthetic tissue. The majority of recent studies demonstrate a higher sensitivity for the culture of sonication fluid (62–94%) than periprosthetic tissue (55–88%).

The Royal Devon & Exeter NHS Foundation Trust provided a specialist multidisciplinary team. We evaluated the use of sonication for identifying pathogens during revision hip and knee replacement in our unit with the intention of applying for further grants to study this technology in more detail; it was a diagnostic feasibility study. The target recruitment was 50 patients; 25 consecutive patients undergoing revision hip arthroplasty for any reason, and 25 undergoing revision knee arthroplasty for any reason. The majority of patients were identified in outpatient clinics.

Our results show that tissue culture remains more sensitive than sonication. The sensitivity for direct sonication was 75% compared with 80% for tissue culture; sensitivity of enriched sonication was 80 %, compared to the unit results for tissue culture of 83%. The combined sensitivity of tissue culture was better as a higher number of tissue specimens were obtained.

The different methodology might explain reported differences between this and other studies; however, our study does not support the use of sonication as the only tool in the diagnosis of PJI.

Introduction

Varus alignment of the femoral component in total hip arthroplasty (THA) is thought to be a risk factor for implant loosening and early revision surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the Exeter stem tolerates varus alignment and assess if this theoretical malalignment has an influence on clinical outcomes.

Introduction

Analysis of registry data shows that few units achieve results better than 99·98% control limits. Implant selection is considered a predictor of outcome variation in joint replacement. We analysed the outcomes of a unit with statistically “better than expected” results and compared to all other units within the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Isle of Man (NJR). We sought to determine whether improved implant survival following primary total hip replacement (THR) is a centre effect or mediated by implant selection.

Introduction

Rationing of orthopaedic services is increasingly being used by Care Commissioning Groups (CCG) within the United Kingdom to restrict the numbers of patients being referred for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). In Devon, only patients with an Oxford Hip Score (OHS) less than 20 are referred on for specialist Orthopaedic Review. The aim of this study was to look at long term outcomes after THA to see if this rationing has any rational base to justify its use

Cement-in-cement femoral revision is a proven technique in revision total hip arthroplasty, with excellent results when using standard sized Exeter stems. The Exeter 44/00 125 mm short revision stem was introduced in 2004 to facilitate cement-in-cement revision. The stem is 25mm shorter and has a slimmer body to allow greater flexibility to adjust depth of insertion and version of the stem. However, it is not known if this change in stem length and size effects its longer term performance. We therefore reviewed the clinical outcome and survival of the Exeter 44/00 short stem used for cement-in-cement revision in our unit, with a minimum of 5 years follow up.

166 cases were performed between 2004 and 2010. 103 hips were available for 5 year clinical and radiological follow up, with 91 hips surviving to final review in 2017. At 5 years, 43 hips had died, 13 were revised and 7 were too frail to attend clinical review. The fate of all 166 hips were known and included in the survival analysis.

Median clinical scores improved significantly. Sixteen hips required re-revision (infection 6, loose cup 3, periprosthetic fracture 3, instability 2, stem fracture with chronic infection 1 and pain 1). Kaplan-meier survival analysis revealed 100% survival for aseptic loosening, 96.8% survival for stem failure and 88.9% survival for all causes.

This is the largest series with the longest follow up of the Exeter 44/00 short revision stem. The stem performs equally well as standard Exeter stems with regards to aseptic loosening. The single stem fracture occurred secondary to bone loss in chronic infection, highlighting the importance of providing adequate proximal support for the stem. Periprosthetic fracture occurred in 2.4% of this series of revision cases.

Larger registry-based studies may provide additional information on the performance of this stem.

Standard practice in revision total hip replacement (THR) for periprosthetic fracture (PPF) is to remove all cement from the femoral canal prior to implantation of a new component. This can make the procedure time consuming and complex.

Since 1991 it has been our practice to preserve the old femoral cement where it remains well fixed to bone, even if the cement mantle is fractured, and to cement a new component into the old mantle.

We have reviewed the data of 48 consecutive patients, treated at our unit between 1991 and 2009, with a first PPF around a cemented primary THR stem where a cement in cement revision was performed. 8 hips were revised to a standard length stem, 39 hips to a long stem & 1 patient had the same stem reinserted. All fractures were reduced and held with cerclage wires or cables and four had supplementary plate fixation.

Full clinical and radiographic follow up was available in 38 patients & clinical or radiographic follow up in a further 6 patients. The other 4 patients. without follow up but whose outcome is known, have suffered no complications and are pain free. Of the remaining 44 patients, forty-two went on to union of the fracture and two have required further surgery for non-union. One patient has ongoing undiagnosed hip pain.

Our long term experience with cement in cement revision for periprosthetic femoral fractures shows that this is a viable technique with a low complication rate and high rate of union (95%) in what is generally regarded as a very difficult condition to treat.

Research into the treatment of Femoro-Acetabular Impingement (FAI) has focussed on surgical correction of structural abnormalities and tended to overlook the dynamic process of impingement. The role of Physiotherapy in addressing abnormal hip movement and any resulting effect on the symptoms of FAI remains untested. A pilot study was therefore instigated to evaluate the effect of physiotherapy on pain and function in patients with FAI.

30 adults aged between 18 and 50 years with a diagnosis of symptomatic FAI were recruited. 23 (77%) completed the study.

Intervention was 3 months of specialist physiotherapy focused on improving pelvic and proximal femoral control. The control group received routine care.

All functional outcomes improved in the Physiotherapy group and this included improvement beyond minimal clinically important difference and measurement error on the Hip Outcome Score.

There was marginal improvement in pain in both groups

Results suggest that physiotherapy treatment can improve function in adults with symptomatic FAI. Larger studies are needed to evaluate the role of conservative management in FAI.

Introduction

The Exeter Hip femoral component remains largely unchanged from the original design, introduced in 1970. It is a highly polished, modular, double tapered stem and has undergone various minor modifications to surface, modularity and most recently the taper; changed to the current V40^TM design in 2000.

The effect of any design modification cannot easily be foreseen and greater emphasis is now placed on ensuring appropriate monitoring for such implants.

Introduction

Revision of well cemented femoral components in revision THA can be technically challenging and time consuming. The cement in cement (CiC) technique addresses these issues. Results of femoral components which have undergone multiple CiC revisions have not previously been reported.

Introduction

There is sparse evidence regarding the survivorship beyond 20 years of both uncemented and cemented hip replacements in patients 50 years and under. We report a unique series reviewing 20–26 year follow-up of patients ≤50 years with cemented Exeter THR.