We have reviewed 25 cases of focal femoral osteolysis in radiographically stable, cemented femoral implants. In three hips retrieved at post-mortem from two patients, we have been able to make a detailed biomechanical and histological analysis. The interval between arthroplasty and the appearance of focal osteolysis on clinical radiographs ranged from 40 to 168 months, and in over 70% of the cases this did not appear until after five or more years. Few had significant pain and there was no relation to age, sex or original diagnosis. The most common site for osteolysis were Gruen zones 2 and 3 on the anteroposterior radiograph and zones 5 and 6 on the lateral radiograph. In 15 cases (60%), the area of osteolysis corresponded to either a defect in the cement mantle or an area of very thin cement. The rate of progression of these lesions was variable, but to date only one has progressed to gross loosening of the femoral component. The back-scatter scanning electron microscopic examination of serial sections and biomechanical testing of the post-mortem specimens demonstrated focal cement fracture around implants that were otherwise rigidly fixed. In eight cases from which tissue was available, histology showed a histiocytic reaction with evidence of particulate polymethylmethacrylate. We consider that this local fragmentation was the stimulus for local osteolysis in an otherwise stable cemented femoral component.
The removal of all prosthetic material and a
two-stage revision procedure is the established standard management of
an infected total hip replacement (THR). However, the removal of
well-fixed femoral cement is time-consuming and can result in significant
loss of bone stock and femoral shaft perforation or fracture. We
report our results of two-stage revision THR for treating infection,
with retention of the original
Aims. Femoral cement-in-cement revision is a well described technique to reduce morbidity and complications in hip revision surgery. Traditional techniques for septic revision of hip arthroplasty necessitate removal of all bone cement from the femur. In our two centres, we have been using a cement-in-cement technique, leaving the distal femoral bone cement in selected patients for septic hip revision surgery, both for single and the first of two-stage revision procedures. A prerequisite for adoption of this technique is that the surgeon considers the cement mantle to be intimately fixed to bone without an intervening membrane between cement and host bone. We aim to report our experience for this technique. Methods. We have analyzed patients undergoing this cement-in-cement technique for femoral revision in infection, and present a consecutive series of 89 patients. Follow-up was undertaken at a mean of 56.5 months (24.0 to 134.7) for the surviving cases. Results. Seven patients (7.9%) required further revision for infection. Ten patients died of causes unrelated to their infection before their two-year review (mean 5.9 months; 0.9 to 18.6). One patient was lost to follow-up at five months after surgery, and two patients died of causes unrelated to their hip shortly after their two-year review was due without attending. Of the remaining patients, 69 remained infection-free at final review. Radiological review confirms the mechanical success of the procedure as previously described in aseptic revision, and postoperative Oxford Hip Scores suggest satisfactory functional outcomes. Conclusion. In conclusion, we found that retaining a
Revision of a cemented hemiarthroplasty of the
hip may be a hazardous procedure with high rates of intra-operative complications.
Removing
Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term inducible
displacement of cemented tibial components ten years after total
knee arthroplasty (TKA). Patients and Methods. A total of 15 patients from a previously reported prospective
trial of fixation using radiostereometric analysis (RSA) were examined
at a mean of 11 years (10 to 11) postoperatively. Longitudinal supine
RSA examinations were acquired at one week, one year, and two years
postoperatively and at final follow-up. Weight-bearing RSA examinations
were also undertaken with the operated lower limb in neutral and
in maximum internal rotation positions. Maximum total point motion
(MTPM) was calculated for the longitudinal and inducible displacement examinations
(supine versus standing, standing versus internal
rotation, and supine versus standing with internal rotation). Results. All patients showed some inducible displacement. Two patients
with radiolucent lines had greater mean standing-supine MTPM displacement
(1.35; . sd. 0.38) compared with the remaining patients (0.68; . sd. 0.36).
These two patients also had a greater mean longitudinal MTPM at
ten years (0.64; . sd. 0.50) compared with the remaining patients
(0.39; . sd. 0.13 mm). Conclusion. Small inducible displacements in
Aims. Compared with primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), revision
surgery can be challenging. The cement-in-cement femoral revision
technique involves removing a femoral component from a well-fixed
femoral cement mantle and cementing a new stem into the original
mantle. This technique is widely used and when carried out for the
correct indications, is fast, relatively inexpensive and carries
a reduced short-term risk for the patient compared with the alternative
of removing
Periprosthetic femoral fractures are increasing in incidence, and typically occur in frail elderly patients. They are similar to pathological fractures in many ways. The aims of treatment are the same, including 'getting it right first time' with a single operation, which allows immediate unrestricted weightbearing, with a low risk of complications, and one that avoids the creation of stress risers locally that may predispose to further peri-implant fracture. The surgical approach to these fractures, the associated soft-tissue handling, and exposure of the fracture are key elements in minimizing the high rate of complications. This annotation describes the approaches to the femur that can be used to facilitate the surgical management of peri- and interprosthetic fractures of the femur at all levels using either modern methods of fixation or revision arthroplasty. Cite this article:
The removal of
The aim of this study was to compare open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) with revision surgery for the surgical management of Unified Classification System (UCS) type B periprosthetic femoral fractures around cemented polished taper-slip femoral components following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Data were collected for patients admitted to five UK centres. The primary outcome measure was the two-year reoperation rate. Secondary outcomes were time to surgery, transfusion requirements, critical care requirements, length of stay, two-year local complication rates, six-month systemic complication rates, and mortality rates. Comparisons were made by the form of treatment (ORIF vs revision) and UCS type (B1 vs B2/B3). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed with two-year reoperation for any reason as the endpoint.Aims
Methods
We aimed to compare the implant survival, complications, readmissions, and mortality of Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) treated with internal fixation with that of B1 PFFs treated with internal fixation and B2 fractures treated with revision arthroplasty. We retrospectively reviewed the data of 112 PFFs, of which 47 (42%) B1 and 27 (24%) B2 PFFs were treated with internal fixation, whereas 38 (34%) B2 fractures underwent revision arthroplasty. Decision to perform internal fixation for B2 PFFs was based on specific radiological (polished femoral components, intact bone-cement interface) and clinical criteria (low-demand patient). Median follow-up was 36.4 months (24 to 60). Implant survival and mortality over time were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method. Adverse events (measured with a modified Dindo-Clavien classification) and 90-day readmissions were additionally compared between groups.Aims
Methods
Cement-in-cement revision of the femoral component represents a widely practised technique for a variety of indications in revision total hip arthroplasty. In this study, we compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two polished tapered femoral components. From our prospectively collated database, we identified all patients undergoing cement-in-cement revision from January 2005 to January 2013 who had a minimum of two years' follow-up. All cases were performed by the senior author using either an Exeter short revision stem or the C-Stem AMT high offset No. 1 prosthesis. Patients were followed-up annually with clinical and radiological assessment.Aims
Methods
To establish our early clinical results of a new total knee arthroplasty (TKA) tibial component introduced in 2013 and compare it to other designs in use at our hospital during the same period. This is a retrospective study of 166 (154 patients) consecutive cemented, fixed bearing, posterior-stabilized (PS) TKAs (ATTUNE) at one hospital performed by five surgeons. These were compared with a reference cohort of 511 knees (470 patients) of other designs (seven manufacturers) performed at the same hospital by the same surgeons. There were no significant differences in age, sex, BMI, or follow-up times between the two cohorts. The primary outcome was revision performed or pending.Aims
Methods
Aims. Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) around cemented taper-slip femoral prostheses often result in a femoral component that is loose at the prosthesis-cement interface, but where the cement-bone interface remains well-fixed and bone stock is good. We aim to understand how best to classify and manage these fractures by using a modification of the Vancouver classification. Methods. We reviewed 87 PPFs. Each was a first episode of fracture around a cemented femoral component, where surgical management consisted of revision surgery. Data regarding initial injury, intraoperative findings, and management were prospectively collected. Patient records and serial radiographs were reviewed to determine fracture classification, whether the bone cement was well fixed (B2W) or loose (B2L), and time to fracture union following treatment. Results. In total, 47 B2W fractures (54.0%) and one B3 fracture (1.1%) had cement that remained well-fixed at the cement-bone interface. These cases were treated with cement-in-cement (CinC) revision arthroplasty. Overall, 43 fractures with follow-up united, and two patients sustained further fractures secondary to nonunion and required further revision surgery. A total of 19 B2L fractures (21.8%) and 19 B3 fractures (21.8%) had cement that was loose at the cement-bone interface. These cases were managed by revision arthroplasty with either cemented or uncemented femoral components, or proximal femoral arthroplasty. One case could not be classified. Conclusion. We endorse a modification of the original Vancouver system to include a subclassification of B2 fractures around cemented femoral prostheses to include B2W (where
In the 1990s, a bioactive bone cement (BABC) containing apatite-wollastonite glass-ceramic (AW-GC) powder and bisphenol-a-glycidyl methacrylate resin was developed at our hospital. In 1996, we used BABC to fix the acetabular component in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) in 20 patients as part of a clinical trial. The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term results of primary THA using BABC. A total of 20 patients (three men and 17 women) with a mean age of 57.4 years (40 to 71), a mean body weight of 52.3 kg (39 to 64), and a mean body mass index (BMI) of 23.0 kg/m2 (19.8 to 28.6) were evaluated clinically and radiologically. Survival analyses were undertaken, and wear analyses were carried out using a computer-aided method.Aims
Patients and Methods
We present the clinical and radiological results at a minimum
follow-up of five years for patients who have undergone multiple
cement-in-cement revisions of their femoral component at revision
total hip arthroplasty (THA). We reviewed the outcome on a consecutive series of 24 patients
(10 men, 14 women) (51 procedures) who underwent more than one cement-in-cement
revision of the same femoral component. The mean age of the patients was
67.5 years (36 to 92) at final follow-up. Function was assessed using the original Harris hip score (HHS),
Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the Merle D’Aubigné Postel score (MDP).Aims
Patients and Methods
In the initial development of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA),
the humeral component was usually fixed with cement. Cementless
components were subsequently introduced. The aim of this study was
to compare the long-term outcome of cemented and cementless humeral
components in arthroplasty of the shoulder. All patients who underwent primary arthroplasty of the shoulder
at our institution between 1970 and 2012 were included in the study.
There were 4636 patients with 1167 cemented humeral components and
3469 cementless components. Patients with the two types of fixation
were matched for nine different covariates using a propensity score
analysis. A total of 551 well-balanced pairs of patients with cemented
and cementless components were available after matching for comparison
of the outcomes. The clinical outcomes which were analysed included loosening
of the humeral component determined at revision surgery, periprosthetic
fractures, post-operative infection and operating time.Aims
Patients and Methods
Periprosthetic fracture (PF) after primary total hip arthroplasty
(THA) is an uncommon but potentially devastating complication. This
study aims to investigate the influence of cemented stem designs
on the risk of needing a revision for a PF. We analysed data on 257 202 primary THAs with cemented stems
and 390 linked first revisions for PF recorded in the National Joint
Registry (NJR) of England, Wales and Northern Ireland to determine
if a cemented femoral stem brand was associated with the risk of
having revision for a PF after primary THA. All cemented femoral
stem brands with more than 10 000 primary operations recorded in
the NJR were identified. The four most commonly used cemented femoral
stems were the Exeter V40 (n = 146 409), CPT (n = 24 300), C-Stem
(n = 15 113) and Charnley (n = 20 182). We compared the revision risk ratios due to PF amongst the stems
using a Poisson regression model adjusting for patient factors.
Compared with the Exeter V40, the age, gender and ASA grade adjusted
revision rate ratio was 3.89 for the cemented CPT stem (95% confidence
interval (CI) 3.07 to 4.93), 0.89 for the C-Stem (95% CI 0.57 to
1.41) and 0.41 for the Charnley stem (95% CI 0.24 to 0.70).Aims
Patients and Methods
An 81-year-old woman presented with a fracture
in the left femur. She had well-fixed bilateral hip replacements
and had received long-term bisphosphonate treatment. Prolonged bisphosphonate
use has been recently linked with atypical subtrochanteric and diaphyseal
femoral fractures. While the current definition of an atypical fracture
of the femur excludes peri-prosthetic fractures, this case suggests
that they do occur and should be considered in patients with severe
osteopenia. Union of the fracture followed cessation of bisphosphonates
and treatment with teriparatide. Thus, this case calls into question
whether prophylactic intramedullary nailing is sufficient alone
to treat early or completed atypical femoral fractures.
We reviewed 44 consecutive revision hip replacements in 38 patients performed using the cement-in-cement technique. All were performed for acetabular loosening in the presence of a well-fixed femoral component. The mean follow-up was 5.1 years (2 to 10.1). Radiological analysis at final follow-up indicated no loosening of the femoral component, except for one case with a continuous radiolucent line in all zones and peri-prosthetic fracture which required further revision. Peri-operative complications included nine proximal femoral fractures (20.4%) and perforation of the proximal femur in one hip. In five hips wiring or fixation with a braided suture was undertaken but no additional augmentation was required. There was an improvement in the mean Japanese Orthopaedic Association score from 55.5 (28 to 81) pre-operatively to 77.8 (40 to 95) at final follow-up (p <
0.001). Revision using a cement-in-cement technique allows increased exposure for acetabular revision and is effective in the medium term. Further follow-up is required to assess the long-term results in the light of in vitro studies which have questioned the quality of the cement-in-cement bond.
We report the effectiveness of revision of total
elbow replacement by re-cementing. Between 1982 and 2004, 53 elbows
in 52 patients were treated with re-cementing of a total elbow replacement
into part or all of the existing cement mantle or into the debrided
host-bone interface, without the use of structural bone augmentation
or a custom prosthesis. The original implant revision was still