Previously, radiostereometric analysis following hip revision performed using impacted morsellised allograft bone and a cemented Exeter stem has shown continuous subsidence of the stem for up to five years. It is not known whether the subsidence continues thereafter. In our study, 17 of 25 consecutive osteo-arthritic patients with aseptically loose stems who underwent first-time revision using impacted morsellised allograft bone and a cemented Exeter stem were followed by yearly radiostereometric examinations for nine years. The mean subsidence at six weeks was 1.1 mm (0.1 to 2.3), from six weeks to one year 1.3 mm (0 to 2.6), from one to five years 0.7 mm (0 to 2.0), and from five to nine years 0.7 mm (0.1 to 3.1). That from six weeks to nine years was 2.7 mm (0 to 6.4) (95% confidence interval 2.0 to 3.5). The Charnley pain score significantly improved after revision, and was maintained at nine years, but walking ability deteriorated slightly as follow-up extended. Of the eight patients who were not followed for nine years, two had early subsidence exceeding 11 mm. Our findings show that in osteo-arthritic patients who undergo revision for aseptic loosening of the stem using impacted morsellised allograft bone and a cemented Exeter stem, migration of the stem continues over nine years at a slower rate after the first year, but without clinical deterioration or radiological loosening

Aims

The aim of this study is to report the long-term outcomes of instrumented femoral revisions with impaction allograft bone grafting (IBG) using the X-change femoral revision system at 30 years after introduction of the technique.

The aim of this randomised controlled study was to compare functional and radiological outcomes between modern cemented and uncemented hydroxyapatite coated stems after one year in patients treated surgically for a fracture of the femoral neck. A total of 141 patients aged > 65 years were included. Patients were randomised to be treated with a cemented Exeter stem or an uncemented Bimetric stem. The patients were reviewed at four and 12 months. The cemented group performed better than the uncemented group for the Harris hip score (78 vs 70.7, p = 0.004) at four months and for the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assesment Questionnaire dysfunction score at four (29.8 vs 39.2, p = 0.007) and 12 months (22.3 vs 34.9, p = 0.001). The mean EQ-5D index score was better in the cemented group at four (0.68 vs 0.53, p = 0.001) and 12 months (0.75 vs 0.58, p = < 0.001) follow-up. There were nine intra-operative fractures in the uncemented group and none in the cemented group. . In conclusion, our data do not support the use of an uncemented hydroxyapatite coated stem for the treatment of displaced fractures of the femoral neck in the elderly. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1475–80

We evaluated all cases involving the combined use of a subtrochanteric derotational femoral shortening osteotomy with a cemented Exeter stem performed at our institution. With severe developmental dysplasia of the hip an osteotomy is often necessary to achieve shortening and derotation of the proximal femur. Reduction can be maintained with a 3.5 mm compression plate while the implant is cemented into place. Such a plate was used to stabilise the osteotomy in all cases. Intramedullary autograft helps to prevent cement interposition at the osteotomy site and promotes healing. There were 15 female patients (18 hips) with a mean age of 51 years (33 to 75) who had a Crowe IV dysplasia of the hip and were followed up for a mean of 114 months (52 to 168). None was lost to follow-up. All clinical scores were collected prospectively. The Charnley modification of the Merle D’Aubigné-Postel scores for pain, function and range of movement showed a statistically significant improvement from a mean of 2.4 (1 to 4), 2.3 (1 to 4), 3.4 (1 to 6) to 5.2 (3 to 6), 4.4 (3 to 6), 5.2 (4 to 6), respectively. Three acetabular revisions were required for aseptic loosening; one required femoral revision for access. One osteotomy failed to unite at 14 months and was revised successfully. No other case required a femoral revision. No postoperative sciatic nerve palsy was observed. Cemented Exeter femoral components perform well in the treatment of Crowe IV dysplasia with this procedure

Aims

The objective of this study was to compare the two-year migration and clinical outcomes of a new cementless hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated titanium acetabular shell with its previous version, which shared the same geometrical design but a different manufacturing process for applying the titanium surface.

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.

We report the clinical and radiographic outcomes of 208 consecutive femoral revision arthroplasties performed in 202 patients (119 women, 83 men) between March 1991 and December 2007 using the X-change Femoral Revision System, fresh-frozen morcellised allograft and a cemented polished Exeter stem. All patients were followed prospectively. The mean age of the patients at revision was 65 years (30 to 86). At final review in December 2013 a total of 130 patients with 135 reconstructions (64.9%) were alive and had a non re-revised femoral component after a mean follow-up of 10.6 years (4.7 to 20.9). One patient was lost to follow-up at six years, and their data were included up to this point. Re-operation for any reason was performed in 33 hips (15.9%), in 13 of which the femoral component was re-revised (6.3%). The mean pre-operative Harris hip score was 52 (19 to 95) (n = 73) and improved to 80 (22 to 100) (n = 161) by the last follow-up. Kaplan–Meier survival with femoral re-revision for any reason as the endpoint was 94.9% (95% confidence intervals (CI) 90.2 to 97.4) at ten years; with femoral re-revision for aseptic loosening as the endpoint it was 99.4% (95% CI 95.7 to 99.9); with femoral re-operation for any reason as the endpoint it was 84.5% (95% CI 78.3 to 89.1); and with subsidence ≥ 5 mm it was 87.3% (95% CI 80.5 to 91.8). Femoral revision with the use of impaction allograft bone grafting and a cemented polished stem results in a satisfying survival rate at a mean of ten years’ follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:771–9

Aims

The aim of this study was to determine whether fixation, as opposed to revision arthroplasty, can be safely used to treat reducible Vancouver B type fractures in association with a cemented collarless polished tapered femoral stem (the Exeter).

Aims

Femoral impaction bone grafting was first developed in 1987 using morselised cancellous bone graft impacted into the femoral canal in combination with a cemented, tapered, polished stem. We describe the evolution of this technique and instrumentation since that time.

Aims

Advocates of debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) in hip periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) argue that a procedure not disturbing a sound prosthesis-bone interface is likely to lead to better survival and functional outcome compared with revision. This case-control study aims were to compare outcome of DAIRs for infected primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) with outcomes following primary THA and two-stage revision of infected primary THAs.

Many different lengths of stem are available for use in primary total hip replacement, and the morphology of the proximal femur varies greatly. The more recently developed shortened stems provide a distribution of stress which closely mimics that of the native femur. Shortening the femoral component potentially comes at the cost of decreased initial stability. Clinical studies on the performance of shortened cemented and cementless stems are promising, although long-term follow-up studies are lacking. We provide an overview of the current literature on the anatomical features of the proximal femur and the biomechanical aspects and clinical outcomes associated with the length of the femoral component in primary hip replacement, and suggest a classification system for the length of femoral stems.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:442-8.

We performed a case–control study to compare the rates of further surgery, revision and complications, operating time and survival in patients who were treated with either an uncemented hydroxyapatite-coated Corail bipolar femoral stem or a cemented Exeter stem for a displaced intracapsular fracture of the hip. The mean age of the patients in the uncemented group was 82.5 years (53 to 97) and in the cemented group was 82.7 years (51 to 99) We used propensity score matching, adjusting for age, gender and the presence or absence of dementia and comorbidities, to produce a matched cohort receiving an Exeter stem (n = 69) with which to compare the outcome of patients receiving a Corail stem (n = 69). The Corail had a significantly lower all-cause rate of further surgery (p = 0.016; odds ratio (OR) 0.18, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.84) and number of hips undergoing major further surgery (p = 0.029; OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.09). The mean operating time was significantly less for the Corail group than for the cemented Exeter group (59 min [12 to 136] vs 70 min [40 to 175], p = 0.001). The Corail group also had a lower risk of a peri-prosthetic fracture (p = 0.042; OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.42) . There was no difference in the mortality rate between the groups. There were significantly fewer complications in the uncemented group, suggesting that the use of this stem would result in a decreased rate of morbidity in these frail patients. Whether this relates to an improved functional outcome remains unknown.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:299–305.

Despite the worldwide usage of the cemented Contemporary acetabular component (Stryker), no published data are available regarding its use in patients aged < 50 years. We undertook a mid- to long-term follow-up study, including all consecutive patients aged < 50 years who underwent a primary total hip replacement using the Contemporary acetabular component with the Exeter cemented stem between January 1999 and January 2006. There were 152 hips in 126 patients, 61 men and 65 women, mean age at surgery 37.6 years (16 to 49 yrs). One patient was lost to follow-up.

Mean clinical follow-up of all implants was 7.6 years (0.9 to 12.0). All clinical questionnaire scores, including Harris hip score, Oxford hip score and several visual analogue scales, were found to have improved. The eight year survivorship of all acetabular components for the endpoints revision for any reason or revision for aseptic loosening was 94.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 89.2 to 97.2) and 96.4% (95% CI 91.6 to 98.5), respectively. Radiological follow-up was complete for 146 implants. The eight year survival for the endpoint radiological loosening was 93.1% (95% CI 86.2 to 96.6). Three surviving implants were considered radiologically loose but were asymptomatic. The presence of acetabular osteolysis (n = 17, 11.8%) and radiolucent lines (n = 20, 13.9%) in the 144 surviving cups indicates a need for continued observation in the second decade of follow-up in order to observe their influence on long-term survival.

The clinical and radiological data resulting in a ten-year survival rate > 90% in young patients support the use of the Contemporary acetabular component in this specific patient group.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1617–25.

Hip resurfacing is being performed more frequently in the United Kingdom. The possible benefits include more accurate restoration of leg length, femoral offset and femoral anteversion than occurs after total hip arthroplasty (THA).

We compared anteroposterior radiographs from 26 patients who had undergone hybrid THA (uncemented cup/cemented stem), with 28 who had undergone Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty (BHR). We measured the femoral offset, femoral length, acetabular offset and acetabular height with reference to the normal contralateral hip. The data were analysed by paired t-tests.

There was a significant reduction in femoral offset (p = 0.0004) and increase in length (p = 0.001) in the BHR group. In the THA group, there was a significant reduction in acetabular offset (p = 0.0003), but femoral offset and overall hip length were restored accurately. We conclude that hip resurfacing does not restore hip mechanics as accurately as THA.

There is little evidence on the cost effectiveness of different brands of hip prostheses. We compared lifetime cost effectiveness of frequently used brands within types of prosthesis including cemented (Exeter V40 Contemporary, Exeter V40 Duration and Exeter V40 Elite Plus Ogee), cementless (Corail Pinnacle, Accolade Trident, and Taperloc Exceed) and hybrid (Exeter V40 Trilogy, Exeter V40 Trident, and CPT Trilogy). We used data from three linked English national databases to estimate the lifetime risk of revision, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost.

For women with osteoarthritis aged 70 years, the Exeter V40 Elite Plus Ogee had the lowest risk of revision (5.9% revision risk, 9.0 QALYs) and the CPT Trilogy had the highest QALYs (10.9% revision risk, 9.3 QALYs). Compared with the Corail Pinnacle (9.3% revision risk, 9.22 QALYs), the most commonly used brand, and assuming a willingness-to-pay of £20 000 per QALY gain, the CPT Trilogy is most cost effective, with an incremental net monetary benefit of £876. Differences in cost effectiveness between the hybrid CPT Trilogy and Exeter V40 Trident and the cementless Corail Pinnacle and Taperloc Exceed were small, and a cautious interpretation is required, given the limitations of the available information.

However, it is unlikely that cemented brands are among the most cost effective. Similar patterns of results were observed for men and other ages. The gain in quality of life after total hip arthroplasty, rather than the risk of revision, was the main driver of cost effectiveness.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:762–70.

Resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip is being performed more frequently in the United Kingdom. The majority of these patients are younger than 55 years of age, and in this group the key benefits include conservation of femoral bone stock and the potential reduction in the rate of dislocation afforded by the larger resurfacing head. Early aseptic loosening is well recognised in patients younger than 55 years of age, and proponents of resurfacing believe that the improved wear characteristics of the metal-on-metal bearing may improve the long-term survival of this implant. There has been some concern, however, that resurfacing may not be conservative of acetabular bone.

We compared a series of 33 consecutive patients who had a hybrid total hip arthroplasty with an uncemented acetabular component and a cemented femoral implant, with 35 patients undergoing a Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. We compared the diameter of the implanted acetabulum in both groups and, because they were not directly comparable, we corrected for patient size by measuring the diameter of the contralateral femoral head. The data were analysed using unpaired t-tests and analysis of covariance.

There was a significantly larger acetabulum in the Birmingham arthroplasty group (mean diameter 56.6 mm vs 52.0 mm; p < 0.001). However, this group had a significantly larger femoral head diameter on the contralateral side (p = 0.03). Analysis of covariance revealed a significant difference between the mean size of the acetabular component implanted in the two operations. The greatest difference in the size of acetabulum was in those patients with a larger diameter of the femoral head. This study shows that more bone is removed from the acetabulum in hip resurfacing than during hybrid total hip arthroplasty, a difference which is most marked in larger patients.