With increasing burden of revision hip arthroplasty (THA), one of the major challenges is the management of proximal femoral bone loss associated with previous multiple surgeries. Proximal femoral arthroplasty (PFA) has already been popularized for tumour surgeries. Our aim was to describe the outcome of using PFA in these demanding non-neoplastic cases. A retrospective review of 25 patients who underwent PFA for non-neoplastic indications between January 2009 and December 2015 was undertaken. Their clinical and radiological outcome, complication rates, and survival were recorded. All patients had the Stanmore Implant – Modular Endo-prosthetic Tumour System (METS).Aims
Methods
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. We retrospectively reviewed all DAIRs, performed for confirmed
infected primary hip arthropasty (n = 82) at out institution, between
1997 and 2013. Data recorded included full patient information and
type of surgery. Outcome measures included complications, mortality,
implant survivorship and functional outcome. Outcome was compared with
two control groups matched for gender and age; a cohort of primary
THAs (n = 120) and a cohort of two-stage revisions for infection
(n = 66).Aims
Patients and Methods
A possible solution for the management of proximal femoral bone
loss is a modular femoral endoprosthesis (EPR). Although the outcome
of EPRs in tumour surgery has been well described, the outcome of
their use in revision hip surgery has received less attention. The
aim of this study was to describe the outcome of using EPR for non-neoplastic
indications. A retrospective review of 79 patients who underwent 80 EPRs for
non-neoplastic indications was performed, including the rates of
complication and survival and the mean Oxford Hip Scores (OHS),
at a mean of five years post-operatively. The mean age at the time
of surgery was 69 years (28 to 93) and the mean number of previous operations
on the hip was 2.4 (0 to 17). The most common indications for EPR
implantation were periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (n = 40),
periprosthetic fracture (n = 12) and failed osteosynthesis of a
proximal femoral fracture or complex trauma (n = 11).Objectives
Methods
Deep prosthetic joint infection remains an uncommon but serious complication of total hip replacement. We reviewed 24 patients with recalcitrant hip wounds following infected total hip replacement treated with either pedicled rectus femoris or vastus lateralis muscle flaps between 1998 and 2009. The mean age of the patients was 67.4 years (42 to 86) with ten men and 14 women. There had been a mean of four (1 to 8) previous attempts to close the wound. A total of 20 rectus femoris and five vastus lateralis flaps were used, with one of each type of flap failing and requiring further reconstruction. All patients had positive microbiology. At a mean follow-up of 47 months (9 to 128), 22 patients had a healed wound and two had a persistent sinus. The prosthesis had been retained in five patients. In the remainder it had been removed, and subsequently re-implanted in nine patients. Six patients continued to take antibiotics at final follow-up. This series demonstrates the effectiveness of pedicled muscle flaps in healing these infected wounds. The high number of previous debridements suggests that these flaps could have been used earlier.
Inflammatory pseudotumours occasionally occur after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and often lead to revision. Our aim was to determine the severity of this complication by assessing the outcome of revision in these circumstances and by comparing this with the outcome of other metal-on-metal hip resurfacing revisions as well as that of matched primary total hip replacements. We identified 53 hips which had undergone metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and required revision at a mean of 1.59 years (0.01 to 6.69) after operation. Of these, 16 were revised for pseudotumours, 21 for fracture and 16 for other reasons. These were matched by age, gender and diagnosis with 103 patients undergoing primary total hip replacement with the Exeter implant. At a mean follow-up of three years (0.8 to 7.2) the outcome of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing revision for pseudotumour was poor with a mean Oxford hip score of 20.9 ( The outcome of revision for pseudotumour is poor and consideration should be given to early revision to limit the extent of the soft-tissue destruction. The outcome of resurfacing revision for other causes is good.
We undertook a randomised controlled trial to compare the outcomes of skin adhesive and staples for skin closure in total hip replacement. The primary outcome was the cosmetic appearance of the scar at three months using a surgeon-rated visual analogue scale. In all, 90 patients were randomised to skin closure using either skin adhesive (n = 45) or staples (n = 45). Data on demographics, surgical details, infection and oozing were collected during the in-patient stay. Further data on complications, patient satisfaction and evaluation of cosmesis were collected at three-month follow-up, and a photograph of the scar was taken. An orthopaedic and a
