Aims

Two-stage exchange revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) performed in case of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has been considered for many years as being the gold standard for the treatment of chronic infection. However, over the past decade, there have been concerns about its safety and its effectiveness. The purposes of our study were to investigate our practice, collecting the overall spacer complications, and then to analyze their risk factors.

Aims

Whether patient-reported pain differs among surgical approaches in total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains unclear. This study’s purposes were to determine differences in pain based on surgical approach (direct anterior (DA) vs posterolateral (PL)) and PL approach incision length.

Aims. Joint-preserving surgery of the hip (JPSH) has evolved considerably and now includes a number of procedures, including arthroscopy, surgical dislocation, and redirectional osteotomies of the femur and acetabulum. There are a number of different factors which lead to failure of JPSH. Consequently, it is of interest to assess the various modes of failure in order to continue to identify best practice and the indications for these procedures. . Patients and Methods. Using a retrospective observational study design, we reviewed 1013 patients who had undergone JPSH by a single surgeon between 2005 and 2015. There were 509 men and 504 women with a mean age of 39 years (16 to 78). Of the 1013 operations, 783 were arthroscopies, 122 surgical dislocations, and 108 peri-acetabular osteotomies (PAO). We analysed the overall failure rates and modes of failure. Re-operations were categorised into four groups: Mode 1 was arthritis progression or organ failure leading to total hip arthroplasty (THA); Mode 2 was an Incorrect diagnosis/procedure; Mode 3 resulted from malcorrection of femur (type A), acetabulum (type B), or labrum (type C) and Mode 4 resulted from an unintended consequence of the initial surgical intervention. Results. At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, there had been 104 re-operations (10.2%) with a mean patient age of 35.5 years (17 to 64). There were 64 Mode 1 failures (6.3%) at a mean of 3.2 years following JPSH with a mean patient age of 46.8 years (18 to 64). There were 17 Mode 2 failures (1.7%) at a mean of 2.2 years post-JPSH with a mean patient age of 28.9 years (17 to 42) (2% scopes; 1% surgical dislocations). There were 19 Mode 3 failures (1.9%) at a mean of 2.0 years post-JPSH, with a mean patient age of 29.9 years (18 to 51) (2% scopes; 2% surgical dislocations; 5% PAO). There were 4 Mode 4 failures (0.4%) at a mean of 1.8 years post-JPSH with a mean patient age of 31.5 years (15 to 43). Using the modified Dindo-Clavien classification system, the overall complication rate among JPSHs was 4.2%. Conclusion. While defining the overall re-operation and complication rates, it is important to define the safety and effectiveness of JPSH. Standardisation of the modes of failure may help identify the best practice. Application of these modes to large clinical series, such as registries, will assist in further establishing how to improve the efficacy of JPSH. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:303–9

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.