Aims

We report on the outcome of the Exeter Contemporary flanged cemented all-polyethylene acetabular component with a mean follow-up of 12 years (10 to 13.9). This study reviewed 203 hips in 194 patients. 129 hips in 122 patients are still in situ; 66 hips in 64 patients were in patients who died before ten years, and eight hips (eight patients) were revised. Clinical outcome scores were available for 108 hips (104 patients) and radiographs for 103 hips (100 patients).

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.

This was a safety study where the hypothesis was that the newer-design CPCS femoral stem would demonstrate similar early clinical results and micromovement to the well-established Exeter stem. Both are collarless, tapered, polished cemented stems, the only difference being a slight lateral to medial taper with the CPCS stem. A total of 34 patients were enrolled in a single-blinded randomised controlled trial in which 17 patients received a dedicated radiostereometric CPCS stem and 17 a radiostereometric Exeter stem. No difference was found in any of the outcome measures pre-operatively or post-operatively between groups. At two years, the mean subsidence for the CPCS stem was nearly half that seen for the Exeter stem (0.77 mm (−0.943 to 1.77) and 1.25 mm (0.719 to 1.625), respectively; p = 0.032). In contrast, the mean internal rotation of the CPCS stem was approximately twice that of the Exeter (1.61° (−1.07° to 4.33°) and 0.59° (0.97° to 1.64°), respectively; p = 0.048). Other migration patterns were not significantly different between the stems. The subtle differences in designs may explain the different patterns of migration.

Comparable migration with the Exeter stem suggests that the CPCS design will perform well in the long term.

We prospectively studied 217 patients who underwent 234 Elite Plus total hip arthroplasties. At a mean of 6.4 (SD 0.7) years post-operatively, 39 patients had died and 22 were either lost to follow-up or had no radiographs available. Clinical (Oxford hip score) and radiological assessments were performed on 156 patients (168 hip arthroplasties) who had a mean age of 67.7 (SD 9.7) years at operation.

In the assessed group, 26 of 159 (16.4%) of femoral stems which had not already been revised and 19 of 159 (11.9%) of acetabular cups were definitely loose. In total, 52 of 168 (31%) of hips had either been revised or had definite evidence of loosening of a component. We could not establish any relationship between clinical and radiological outcomes.

Despite the fact that the clinical outcome and rate of revision for the Elite Plus appeared to meet international standards, our findings give us cause for concern. We believe that joint registries should include radiological surveillance in order to provide reliable information about medium-term outcomes for hip prostheses.