Aims. This study reports mid-term outcomes after periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) exclusively in a borderline hip dysplasia (BHD) population to provide a contrast to published outcomes for arthroscopic surgery of the hip in BHD. Methods. We identified 42 hips in 40 patients treated between January 2009 and January 2016 with BHD defined as a lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) of ≥ 18° but < 25°. A minimum five-year follow-up was available. Patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) including Tegner score, subjective hip value (SHV), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) were assessed. The following morphological parameters were evaluated: LCEA, acetabular index (AI), α angle, Tönnis staging, acetabular retroversion, femoral version, femoroepiphyseal acetabular roof index (FEAR), iliocapsularis to rectus femoris ratio (IC/RF), and labral and ligamentum teres (LT) pathology. Results. The mean follow-up was 96 months (67 to 139). The SHV, mHHS, WOMAC, and Tegner scores significantly improved (p < 0.001) at last follow-up. According to SHV and mHHS, there were three hips (7%) with poor results (SHV < 70), three (7%) with a fair score (70 to 79), eight (19%) with good results (80 to 89), and 28 (67%) who scored excellent (> 90) at the last follow-up. There were 11 subsequent operations: nine implant removals due to local irritation, one resection of postoperative heterotopic ossification, and one hip arthroscopy for intra-articular adhesions. No hips were converted to total hip arthroplasty at last follow-up. The presence of preoperative labral lesions or LT lesions did not influence any PROMs at last follow-up. From the three hips that had poor PROMs, two have developed severe osteoarthritis (> Tönnis II), presumably due to surgical overcorrection (postoperative AI < -10°). Conclusion. PAO is reliable in treating BHD with favourable mid-term outcomes. Concomitant LT and labral lesions did not negatively influence outcomes in our cohort. Technical accuracy with avoidance of overcorrection is essential in achieving successful outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(7):735–742

Aims. The purpose of this study was to determine the lifetime risk of revision surgery for patients undergoing Charnley cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA), with 40-year follow up, using death as a competing risk. . Materials and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 2000 cemented Charnley THAs, with 51 living hips available at 40 years. . Results. The cumulative risk of revision or removal for any reason was 13% (95% confidence interval (CI) 12 to 15). Patients aged under 50 years at the time of surgery had a 35% (95% CI 28 to 42) risk of revision or removal for any reason (Hazard Ratio (HR) 3.6; 95% CI 2.5 to 5.2; p <  0.001), patients 50 to 59 years old had a 20% risk (95% CI 16 to 24) (HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.5 to 2.8; p < 0.0001), patients aged 60 to 69 years had a 9% risk (95% CI 7 to 11) (reference point), and patients ≥ 70 years old had a 5% risk (95% CI 4 to 7) (HR 0.96; 95% CI 0.6 to 1.5; p = 0.86) during their lifetime. Men had a higher risk of revision or removal for any reason (HR 2.1; 95% CI 1.7 to 2.7; p < 0.001). . Conclusion. With almost all the patients in this series followed up till either death or revision, we have been able to develop a ‘rule of thumb’ for lifetime likelihood of revision or implant removal for the Charnley THA: one in three for patients < 50 years, one in five for patients 50 to 59 years, one in ten for patients 60 to 69 years, and one in 20 for patients ≥ 70 years. The results provide a benchmark for comparison of outcomes, for the newer designs of THA. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1436–40

Aims

The number of revision arthroplasties being performed in the elderly is expected to rise, including revision for infection. The primary aim of this study was to measure the treatment success rate for octogenarians undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) compared to a younger cohort. Secondary outcomes were complications and mortality.

The custom triflange is a patient-specific implant for the treatment of severe bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Through a process of three-dimensional modelling and prototyping, a hydroxyapatite-coated component is created for acetabular reconstruction. There are seven level IV studies describing the clinical results of triflange components. The most common complications include dislocation and infection, although the rates of implant removal are low. Clinical results are promising given the challenging problem. We describe the design, manufacture and implantation process and review the clinical results, contrasting them to other methods of acetabular reconstruction in revision THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):68–72

Aims

There is a paucity of long-term studies analyzing risk factors for failure after single-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip arthroplasty (THA). We report the mid- to long-term septic and non-septic failure rate of single-stage revision for PJI after THA.

Aims

Aseptic loosening is a leading cause of uncemented arthroplasty failure, often accompanied by fibrotic tissue at the bone-implant interface. A biological target, neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs), was investigated as a crucial connection between the innate immune system’s response to injury, fibrotic tissue development, and proper bone healing. Prevalence of NETs in peri-implant fibrotic tissue from aseptic loosening patients was assessed. A murine model of osseointegration failure was used to test the hypothesis that inhibition (through Pad4^-/- mice that display defects in peptidyl arginine deiminase 4 (PAD4), an essential protein required for NETs) or resolution (via DNase 1 treatment, an enzyme that degrades the cytotoxic DNA matrix) of NETs can prevent osseointegration failure and formation of peri-implant fibrotic tissue.

Four uncemented Symax hip stems were extracted at three weeks and nine, 13 and 32 months, respectively, for reasons other than loosening. The reasons for implant removal were infection in two cases, recurrent dislocation in one and acetabular fracture in one. They were analysed to assess the effect and behaviour of an electrochemically deposited, completely resorbable biomimetic BONIT-hydroxyapatite (HA) coating (proximal part) and a DOTIZE surface treatment (distal part) using qualitative histology, quantitative histomorphometry and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Early and direct bone-implant bonding with signs of active remodelling of bone and the HA coating were demonstrated by histology and SEM. No loose BONIT-HA particles or delamination of the coating were observed, and there was no inflammation or fibrous interposition at the interface. Histomorphometry showed bone-implant contact varying between 26.5% at three weeks and 83.5% at 13 months at the HA-coated implant surface. The bone density in the area of investigation was between 24.6% at three weeks and 41.1% at 32 months. The DOTIZE surface treatment of the distal part of the stem completely prevented tissue and bone apposition in all cases, thereby optimising proximal stress transfer. The overall features of this implant, in terms of geometry and surface texture, suggest a mechanically stable design with a highly active biomimetic coating, resulting in rapid and extensive osseo-integration, exclusively in the metaphyseal part of the stem. Early remodelling of the HA coating does not seem to have a detrimental effect on short-term bone-implant coupling. There were no adverse effects identified from either the BONIT-HA coating or the DOTIZE surface treatment

Aims

Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PPF) are a serious complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA) and are becoming an increasingly common indication for revision arthroplasty with the ageing population. This study aimed to identify potential risk factors for PPF based on an analysis of registry data.

Aims

Femoral revision component subsidence has been identified as predicting early failure in revision hip surgery. This comparative cohort study assessed the potential risk factors of subsidence in two commonly used femoral implant designs.

Aims

The modified Dunn procedure has the potential to restore the anatomy in hips with severe slipped capital femoral epiphyses (SCFE). However, there is a risk of developing avascular necrosis of the femoral head (AVN). In this paper, we report on clinical outcome, radiological outcome, AVN rate and complications, and the cumulative survivorship at long-term follow-up in patients undergoing the modified Dunn procedure for severe SCFE.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biological fixation of a 3D printed porous implant, with and without different hydroxyapatite (HA) coatings, in a canine model.

Aims

The aims of this study were to determine the clinical and radiographic outcomes, implant survivorship, and complications of patients with a history of poliomyelitis undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) in affected limbs and unaffected limbs of this same population.

Aims

Single-stage revision is not widely pursued due to restrictive inclusion criteria. In this study, we evaluated the results of single-stage revision of chronically infected total hip arthroplasty (THA) using broad inclusion criteria and cementless implants.

Aims

The objective of this study was to investigate bone healing after internal fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures (FNFs) with the Dynamic Locking Blade Plate (DLBP) in a young patient population treated by various orthopaedic (trauma) surgeons.

Based on the first implementation of mixing antibiotics into bone cement in the 1970s, the Endo-Klinik has used one stage exchange for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in over 85% of cases. Looking carefully at current literature and guidelines for PJI treatment, there is no clear evidence that a two stage procedure has a higher success rate than a one-stage approach. A cemented one-stage exchange potentially offers certain advantages, mainly based on the need for only one operative procedure, reduced antibiotics and hospitalisation time. In order to fulfill a one-stage approach, there are obligatory pre-, peri- and post-operative details that need to be meticulously respected, and are described in detail. Essential pre-operative diagnostic testing is based on the joint aspiration with an exact identification of any bacteria. The presence of a positive bacterial culture and respective antibiogram are essential, to specify the antibiotics to be loaded to the bone cement, which allows a high local antibiotic elution directly at the surgical side. A specific antibiotic treatment plan is generated by a microbiologist. The surgical success relies on the complete removal of all pre-existing hardware, including cement and restrictors and an aggressive and complete debridement of any infected soft tissues and bone material. Post-operative systemic antibiotic administration is usually completed after only ten to 14 days.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:77–83.

Louis Pasteur once said that: “Fortune favours the prepared mind.” As one of the great scientists who contributed to the fight against infection, he emphasised the importance of being prepared at all times to recognise infection and deal with it. Despite the many scientific discoveries and technological advances, such as the advent of antibiotics and the use of sterile techniques, infection continues to be a problem that haunts orthopaedic surgeons and inflicts suffering on patients.

The medical community has implemented many practices with the intention of preventing infection and treating it effectively when it occurs. Although high-level evidence may support some of these practices, many are based on little to no scientific foundation. Thus, around the world, there is great variation in practices for the prevention and management of periprosthetic joint infection.

This paper summaries the instigation, conduct and findings of a recent International Consensus Meeting on Surgical Site and Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1450–2.

Advances in the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections of the hip have once more pushed prosthesis preserving techniques into the limelight. At the same time, the common infecting organisms are evolving to become more resistant to conventional antimicrobial agents. Whilst the epidemiology of resistant staphylococci is changing, a number of recent reports have advocated the use of irrigation and debridement and one-stage revision for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections due to resistant organisms. This review presents the available evidence for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections of the hip, concentrating in particular on methicillin resistant staphylococci.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):60–5.

Acetabular bone loss is a challenging problem facing the revision total hip replacement surgeon. Reconstruction of the acetabulum depends on the presence of anterosuperior and posteroinferior pelvic column support for component fixation and stability. The Paprosky classification is most commonly used when determining the location and degree of acetabular bone loss. Augments serve the function of either providing primary construct stability or supplementary fixation.

When a pelvic discontinuity is encountered we advocate the use of an acetabular distraction technique with a jumbo cup and modular porous metal acetabular augments for the treatment of severe acetabular bone loss and associated chronic pelvic discontinuity.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):36–42.

In the majority of patients with slipped upper femoral epiphysis only one hip is involved at primary diagnosis. However, the contralateral hip often becomes involved over time. There are no reliable factors predicting a contralateral slip. Whether or not the contralateral hip should undergo prophylactic fixation is a matter of controversy. We present a number of essential points that have to be considered both when choosing to fix the contralateral hip prophylactically as well as when refraining from surgery and instead following the patients with repeat radiographs.

Between 1980 and 2000, 63 support rings were used in the management of acetabular deficiency in a series of 60 patients, with a mean follow-up of 8.75 years (2 months to 23.8 years). There was a minimum five-year follow-up for successful reconstructions. The indication for revision surgery was aseptic loosening in 30 cases and infection in 33. All cases were Paprosky III defects; IIIA in 33 patients (52.4%) and IIIB in 30 (47.6%), including four with pelvic dissociation. A total of 26 patients (43.3%) have died since surgery, and 34 (56.7%) remain under clinical review. With acetabular revision for infection or aseptic loosening as the definition of failure, we report success in 53 (84%) of the reconstructions. A total of 12 failures (19%) required further surgery, four (6.3%) for aseptic loosening of the acetabular construct, six (9.5%) for recurrent infection and two (3.2%) for recurrent dislocation requiring captive components. Complications, seen in 11 patients (18.3%), included six femoral or sciatic neuropraxias which all resolved, one grade III heterotopic ossification, one on-table acetabular revision for instability, and three early post-operative dislocations managed by manipulation under anaesthesia, with no further instability.

We recommend support rings and morcellised bone graft for significant acetabular bone deficiency that cannot be reconstructed using mesh.