Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most dreaded complications after arthroplasty surgery; thus numerous approaches have been undertaken to equip metal surfaces with antibacterial properties. Due to its antimicrobial effects, silver is a promising coating for metallic surfaces, and several types of silver-coated arthroplasty implants are in clinical use today. However, silver can also exert toxic effects on eukaryotic cells both in the immediate vicinity of the coated implants and systemically. In most clinically-used implants, silver coatings are applied on bulk components that are not in direct contact with bone, such as in partial or total long bone arthroplasties used in tumour or complex revision surgery. These implants differ considerably in the coating method, total silver content, and silver release rates. Safety issues, such as the occurrence of argyria, have been a cause for concern, and the efficacy of silver coatings in terms of preventing PJI is also controversial. The application of silver coatings is uncommon on parts of implants intended for cementless fixation in host bone, but this option might be highly desirable since the modification of implant surfaces in order to improve osteoconductivity can also increase bacterial adhesion. Therefore, an optimal silver content that inhibits bacterial colonization while maintaining osteoconductivity is crucial if silver were to be applied as a coating on parts intended for bone contact. This review summarizes the different methods used to apply silver coatings to arthroplasty components, with a focus on the amount and duration of silver release from the different coatings; the available experience with silver-coated implants that are in clinical use today; and future strategies to balance the effects of silver on bacteria and eukaryotic cells, and to develop silver-coated titanium components suitable for bone ingrowth.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(3):423–429.

Failure of bone repair is a challenging problem in the management of fractures. There is a limited supply of autologous bone grafts for treating nonunions, with associated morbidity after harvesting. There is need for a better source of cells for repair. Mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) hold promise for healing of bone because of their capacity to differentiate into osteoblasts and their availability from a wide variety of sources. Our review aims to evaluate the available clinical evidence and recent progress in strategies which attempt to use autologous and heterologous MSCs in clinical practice, including genetically-modified MSCs and those grown on scaffolds. We have compared various procedures for isolating and expanding a sufficient number of MSCs for use in a clinical setting.

There are now a number of clinical studies which have shown that implantation of MSCs is an effective, safe and durable method for aiding the repair and regeneration of bone.

The survivorship of contemporary resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip using metal-on-metal bearings is better than that of first generation designs, but short-term failures still occur. The most common reasons for failure are fracture of the femoral neck, loosening of the component, osteonecrosis of the femoral head, reaction to metal debris and malpositioning of the component. In 2008 the Australian National Joint Registry reported an inverse relationship between the size of the head component and the risk of revision in resurfacing hip arthroplasty. Hips with a femoral component size of ≤ 44 mm have a fivefold increased risk of revision than those with femoral components of ≥ 55 mm irrespective of gender. We have reviewed the literature to explore this observation and to identify possible reasons including the design of the implant, loading of the femoral neck, the orientation of the component, the production of wear debris and the effects of metal ions, penetration of cement and vascularity of the femoral head. Our conclusion is that although multifactorial, the most important contributors to failure in resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip are likely to be the design and geometry of the component and the orientation of the acetabular component.

Articular cartilage repair remains a challenge to surgeons and basic scientists. The field of tissue engineering allows the simultaneous use of material scaffolds, cells and signalling molecules to attempt to modulate the regenerative tissue. This review summarises the research that has been undertaken to date using this approach, with a particular emphasis on those techniques that have been introduced into clinical practice, via in vitro and preclinical studies.

We undertook a review of the literature relating to the two basic stem designs in use in cemented hip replacement, namely loaded tapers or force-closed femoral stems, and the composite beam or shape-closed designs. The associated stem fixation theory as understood from in vitro studies and finite element modelling were examined with reference to the survivorship results for each of the concepts of fixation. It is clear that both design principles are capable of producing successful long-term results, providing that their specific requirements of stem metallurgy, shape and surface finish, preparation of the bone and handling of the cement are observed