Aims. Adverse spinal motion or balance (spine mobility) and adverse pelvic mobility, in combination, are often referred to as adverse spinopelvic mobility (SPM). A stiff lumbar spine, large posterior standing pelvic tilt, and severe sagittal spinal deformity have been identified as risk factors for increased hip instability. Adverse SPM can create functional malposition of the acetabular components and hence is an instability risk. Adverse pelvic mobility is often, but not always, associated with abnormal spinal motion parameters. Dislocation rates for dual-mobility articulations (DMAs) have been reported to be between 0% and 1.1%. The aim of this study was to determine the early survivorship from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) of patients with adverse SPM who received a DMA. Methods. A multicentre study was performed using data from 227 patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), enrolled consecutively. All the patients who had one or more adverse spine or pelvic mobility parameter had a DMA inserted at the time of their surgery. The mean age was 76 years (22 to 93) and 63% were female (n = 145). At a mean of 14 months (5 to 31) postoperatively, the AOANJRR was analyzed for follow-up information. Reasons for revision and types of revision were identified. Results. The AOANJRR reported two revisions: one due to infection, and the second due to femoral component loosening. No revisions for dislocation were reported. One patient died with the prosthesis in situ. Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 99.1% (95% confidence interval 98.3 to 100) at 14 months (number at risk 104). Conclusion. In our cohort of patients undergoing primary THA with one or more factor associated with adverse SPM, DM bearings conferred stability at two years’ follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):820–825

Aims

The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) arthroplasty has been used as a surgical treatment of coxarthrosis since 1997. We present 20-year results of 234 consecutive BHRs performed in our unit.

Aims

The Exeter V40 femoral stem is the most implanted stem in the National Joint Registry (NJR) for primary total hip arthroplasty (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 patient anatomy requires a smaller stem with a 44 mm offset. We aimed to investigate survival of this implant in comparison to others in the range when used in primary THAs recorded in the NJR.

Aims

The aim of our study was to investigate the effect of asymmetric crosslinked polyethylene liner use on the risk of revision of cementless and hybrid total hip arthroplasties (THAs).

Aims

Despite few good-quality studies on the subject, total hip arthroplasty (THA) is increasingly being performed for displaced intracapsular fractures of the neck of femur. We compared outcomes of all patients with displacement of these fractures treated surgically over a ten-year period in one institution.

Aims

The purpose of this study is to examine six types of bearing surfaces implanted at a single institution over three decades to determine whether the reasons for revision vary among the groups and how long it takes to identify differences in survival.

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.

Despite excellent results, the use of cemented total hip replacement (THR) is declining. This retrospective cohort study records survival time to revision following primary cemented THR using the most common combination of components that accounted for almost a quarter of all cemented THRs, exploring risk factors independently associated with failure. All patients with osteoarthritis who had an Exeter V40/Contemporary THR (Stryker) implanted before 31 December 2010 and recorded in the National Joint Registry for England and Wales were included in the analysis. Cox’s proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates, with a significance threshold of p < 0.01. A total of 34 721 THRs were included in the study. The overall seven-year rate of revision for any reason was 1.70% (99% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 2.12). In the final adjusted model the risk of revision was significantly higher in THRs with the Contemporary hooded component (hazard ratio (HR) 1.88, p < 0.001) than with the flanged version, and in smaller head sizes (< 28 mm) compared with 28 mm diameter heads (HR 1.50, p = 0.005). The seven-year revision rate was 1.16% (99% CI 0.69 to 1.63) with a 28 mm diameter head and flanged component. The overall risk of revision was independent of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, surgeon volume, surgical approach, brand of cement/presence of antibiotic, femoral head material (stainless steel/alumina) and stem taper size/offset. However, the risk of revision for dislocation was significantly higher with a ‘plus’ offset head (HR 2.05, p = 0.003) and a hooded acetabular component (HR 2.34, p < 0.001).

In summary, we found that there were significant differences in failure between different designs of acetabular component and sizes of femoral head after adjustment for a range of covariates.

Between 1999 and 2005, 10 264 patients who had undergone total hip replacement (THR) for subcapital fracture of the hip were compared with 76 520 in whom THR had been performed for other reasons. All the cases were identified through the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. The THRs performed as primary treatment for fracture were also compared with those done after failure of internal fixation.

After seven years the rate of revision was higher in THR after fracture (4.4% vs 2.9%). Dislocation and periprosthetic fracture were the most common causes of revision. The risk was higher in men than in women. The type of femoral component and the surgical approach influenced the risk. After correction for gender, type of component and the surgical approach the revision rates were similar in the primary and secondary fracture THR groups.

Total hip replacement is therefore a safe method for both the primary and secondary management of fracture of the hip.

The Norwegian Arthroplasty Register has shown that several designs of uncemented femoral stems give good or excellent survivorship. The overall findings for uncemented total hip replacement however, have been disappointing because of poor results with the use of metal-backed acetabular components. In this study, we exclusively investigated the medium-to long-term performance of primary uncemented metal-backed acetabular components.

A total of 9113 primary uncemented acetabular components were implanted in 7937 patients between 1987 and 2007. These were included in a prospective, population-based observational study. All the implants were modular and metal-backed with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene liners. The femoral heads were made of stainless steel, cobalt-chrome (CoCr) alloy or alumina ceramic. In all, seven different designs of acetabular component were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier survivorship method and Cox regression analysis.

Most acetabular components performed well up to seven years. When the endpoint was revision of the acetabular component because of aseptic loosening, the survival ranged between 87% and 100% at ten years. However, when the endpoint was revision for any reason, the survival estimates were 81% to 92% for the same implants at ten years. Aseptic loosening, wear, osteolysis and dislocation were the main reasons for the relatively poor overall performance of the acetabular components. Prostheses with alumina heads performed slightly better than those with stainless steel or CoCr alloy in subgroups.

Whereas most acetabular components performed well at seven years, the survivorship declined with longer follow-up. Fixation was generally good. None of the metal-backed uncemented acetabular components with ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene liners in our study had satisfactory long-term results because of high rates of wear, osteolysis, aseptic loosening and dislocation.

Dislocation is a common reason for revision following total hip replacement. This study investigated the relationship between the bearing surface and the risk of revision due to dislocation. It was based on 110 239 primary total hip replacements with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis collected by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry between September 1999 and December 2007. A total of 862 (0.78%) were revised because of dislocation. Ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces had a lower risk of requiring revision due to dislocation than did metal-on-polyethylene and ceramic-on-polyethylene surfaces, with a follow-up of up to seven years. However, ceramic-on-ceramic implants were more likely to have larger prosthetic heads and to have been implanted in younger patients. The size of the head of the femoral component and age are known to be independent predictors of dislocation. Therefore, the outcomes were stratified by the size of the head and age.

There is a significantly higher rate of revision for dislocation in ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces than in metal-on-polyethylene implants when smaller sizes (≤ 28 mm) of the head were used in younger patients (< 65 years) (hazard ratio = 1.53, p = 0.041) and also with larger (> 28 mm) and in older patients (≥ 65 years) (hazard ratio = 1.73, p = 0.016).

We have reviewed 42 patients who had revision of metal-on-metal resurfacing procedures, mostly because of problems with the acetabular component. The revisions were carried out a mean of 26.2 months (1 to 76) after the initial operation and most of the patients (30) were female.

Malpositioning of the acetabular component resulted in 27 revisions, mostly because of excessive abduction (mean 69.9°; 56° to 98°) or insufficient or excessive anteversion. Seven patients had more than one reason for revision. The mean increase in the diameter of the component was 1.8 mm (0 to 4) when exchange was needed.

Malpositioning of the components was associated with metallosis and a high level of serum ions. The results of revision of the femoral component to a component with a modular head were excellent, but four patients had dislocation after revision and four required a further revision.

Early failure associated with adverse reactions to metal debris is an emerging problem after hip resurfacing but the exact mechanism is unclear. We analysed our entire series of 660 metal-on-metal resurfacings (Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) and Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR)) and large-bearing ASR total hip replacements, to establish associations with metal debris-related failures. Clinical and radiological outcomes, metal ion levels, explant studies and lymphocyte transformation tests were performed. A total of 17 patients (3.4%) were identified (all ASR bearings) with adverse reactions to metal debris, for which revision was required. This group had significantly smaller components, significantly higher acetabular component anteversion, and significantly higher whole concentrations of blood and joint chromium and cobalt ions than asymptomatic patients did (all p < 0.001). Post-revision lymphocyte transformation tests on this group showed no reactivity to chromium or cobalt ions. Explants from these revisions had greater surface wear than retrievals for uncomplicated fractures. The absence of adverse reactions to metal debris in patients with well-positioned implants usually implies high component wear.

Surgeons must consider implant design, expected component size and acetabular component positioning in order to reduce early failures when performing large-bearing metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and replacement.

We have analysed from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register the long-term survivorship of the 12 most commonly-used cemented implants between 1980 and 2005 in patients aged 55 years or older with osteoarthritis.

Only two designs of femoral component, the Exeter Universal and the Müller Straight femoral component had a survivorship of over 95% at ten years with revision for aseptic loosening as the endpoint. At 15 years of the femoral and acetabular component combinations, only the Exeter Universal/Exeter All-poly implant had a survival rate of over 90% with revision for aseptic loosening as the endpoint. In the subgroup of patients aged between 55 and 64 years, survivorship overall was less than 90% at ten years.

The variation in the long-term rates of survival of different cemented hip implants was considerable in patients aged 55 years or older. In those aged between 55 and 64 years, none of the cemented prostheses studied yielded excellent long-term survival rates (≥ 90% at 15 years).