Total hip replacement (THR) is a very common
procedure undertaken in up to 285 000 Americans each year. Patient
satisfaction with THR is very high, with improvements in general
health, quality of life, and function while at the same time very
cost effective. Although the majority of patients have a high degree
of satisfaction with their THR, 27% experience some discomfort,
and up to 6% experience severe chronic pain. Although it can be
difficult to diagnose the cause of the pain in these patients, this
clinical issue should be approached systematically and thoroughly.
A detailed history and clinical examination can often provide the
correct diagnosis and guide the appropriate selection of investigations, which
will then serve to confirm the clinical diagnosis made. Cite this article:
The December 2013 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: Enhanced recovery works; Acetabular placement; Exercise better than rest in osteoarthritis patients; if Birmingham hip resurfacing is immune from pseudotumour; HIV and arthroplasty; Labral tears revisited; Prophylactic surgery for FAI; and Ceramics and impaction grafting
We have reviewed 42 patients who had revision of metal-on-metal resurfacing procedures, mostly because of problems with the acetabular component. The revisions were carried out a mean of 26.2 months (1 to 76) after the initial operation and most of the patients (30) were female. Malpositioning of the acetabular component resulted in 27 revisions, mostly because of excessive abduction (mean 69.9°; 56° to 98°) or insufficient or excessive anteversion. Seven patients had more than one reason for revision. The mean increase in the diameter of the component was 1.8 mm (0 to 4) when exchange was needed. Malpositioning of the components was associated with metallosis and a high level of serum ions. The results of revision of the femoral component to a component with a modular head were excellent, but four patients had dislocation after revision and four required a further revision.
Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing is commonly performed for osteoarthritis in young active patients. We have observed cystic or solid masses, which we have called inflammatory pseudotumours, arising around these devices. They may cause soft-tissue destruction with severe symptoms and a poor outcome after revision surgery. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of and risk factors for pseudotumours that are serious enough to require revision surgery. Since 1999, 1419 metal-on-metal hip resurfacings have been implanted by our group in 1224 patients; 1.8% of the patients had a revision for pseudotumour. In this series the Kaplan-Meier cumulative revision rate for pseudotumour increased progressively with time. At eight years, in all patients, it was 4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 5.8). Factors significantly associated with an increase in revision rate were female gender (p <
0.001), age under 40 (p = 0.003), small components (p = 0.003), and dysplasia (p = 0.019), whereas implant type was not (p = 0.156). These factors were inter-related, however, and on fitting a Cox proportional hazard model only gender (p = 0.002) and age (p = 0.024) had a significant independent influence on revision rate; size nearly reached significance (p = 0.08). Subdividing the cohort according to significant factors, we found that the revision rate for pseudotumours in men was 0.5% (95% CI 0 to 1.1) at eight years wheras in women over 40 years old it was 6% (95% CI 2.3 to 10.1) at eight years and in women under 40 years it was 13.1% at six years (95% CI 0 to 27) (p <
0.001). We recommend that resurfacings are undertaken with caution in women, particularly those under 40 years of age but they remain a good option in young men. Further work is required to understand the aetiology of pseudotumours so that this complication can be avoided.
The August 2013 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: are we getting it right first time?; tantalum augments in revision hip surgery; lower wear in dual mobility?; changing faces changes outcomes; synovial fluid aspiration in MOM hips; taper disease: the new epidemic of hip surgery; the super-obese and THR; and whether well fixed stems can remain in infected hips
We present the early clinical and radiological results of Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) resurfacings in 214 hips (192 patients) with a mean follow-up of 43 months (30 to 57). The mean age of the patients was 56 years (28 to 74) and 85 hips (40%) were in 78 women. The mean Harris hip score improved from 52 (11 to 81) to 95 (27 to 100) at two years and the mean University of California, Los Angeles activity score from 3.9 (1 to 10) to 7.4 (2 to 10) in the same period. Narrowing of the neck (to a maximum of 9%) was noted in 124 of 209 hips (60%). There were 12 revisions (5.6%) involving four (1.9%) early fractures of the femoral neck and two (0.9%) episodes of collapse of the femoral head secondary to avascular necrosis. Six patients (2.8%) had failure related to metal wear debris. The overall survival for our series was 93% (95% confidence interval 80 to 98) and 89% (95% confidence interval 82 to 96) for hips with acetabular components smaller than 56 mm in diameter. The ASR implant has a lower diametrical clearance and a subhemispherical acetabular component when compared with other more frequently implanted metal-on-metal hip resurfacings. These changes may contribute to the higher failure rate than in other series, compared with other designs. Given our poor results with the small components we are no longer implanting the smaller size.
The June 2013 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: failure in metal-on-metal arthroplasty; minimal hip approaches; whether bisphosphonates improve femoral bone stock following arthroplasty; whether more fat means more operative time; surgical infection; vascularised fibular graft for osteonecrosis; subclinical SUFE; and dentists, hips and antibiotics.
Metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty gained significant
favor in the first decade of the millennium. However, the past several
years have seen increasing reports of failure, pseudotumor and other
adverse reactions. This study presents the results of a single center’s
15-year experience with metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty as
strong evidence that metal-on-metal is going, going, gone.
Large-head metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip replacements
(THR) have given rise to concern. Comparative studies of small-head
MoM THRs over a longer follow-up period are lacking. Our objective
was to compare the incidence of complications such as infection,
dislocation, revision, adverse local tissue reactions, mortality
and radiological and clinical outcomes in small-head (28 mm) MoM
and ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP) THRs up to 12 years post-operatively. A prospective cohort study included 3341 THRs in 2714 patients.
The mean age was 69.1 years (range 24 to 98) and 1848 (55.3%) were
performed in women, with a mean follow-up of 115 months (18 to 201).
There were 883 MoM and 2458 CoP bearings. Crude incidence rates
(cases/1000 person-years) were: infection 1.3 In conclusion, we found similar results for small-head MoM and
CoP bearings up to ten years post-operatively, but after ten years
MoM THRs had a higher risk of all-cause revision. Furthermore, the
presence of an adverse response to metal debris seen in the small-head
MOM group at revision is a cause for concern. Cite this article:
We summarise and highlight the safety concerns
within the field of trauma and orthopaedic surgery with particular
emphasis placed on current controversies and reforms within the United
Kingdom National Health Service.
We report the long-term survival and functional
outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) in patients aged <
50 years at operation, and explore the factors affecting survival.
Between 1997 and 2006, a total of 447 BHRs were implanted in 393
patients (mean age 41.5 years (14.9 to 49.9)) by one designing surgeon.
The mean follow-up was 10.1 years (5.2 to 14.7), with no loss to
follow-up. In all, 16 hips (3.6%) in 15 patients were revised, giving
an overall cumulative survival of 96.3% (95% confidence interval
(CI) 93.7 to 98.3) at ten years and 94.1% (95% CI 84.9 to 97.3)
at 14 years. Using aseptic revision as the endpoint, the survival
for men with primary osteoarthritis (n = 195) was 100% (95% CI 100
to 100) at both ten years and 14 years, and in women with primary
osteoarthritis (n = 109) it was 96.1% (95% CI 90.1 to 99.9) at ten
years and 91.2% (95% CI 68.6 to 98.7) at 14 years. Female gender
(p = 0.047) and decreasing femoral head size (p = 0.044) were significantly
associated with an increased risk of revision. The median Oxford
hip score (OHS, modified as a percentage with 100% indicating worst
outcome) at last follow-up was 4.2% (46 of 48; interquartile range
(IQR) 0% to 24%) and the median University of California, Los Angeles
(UCLA) score was 6.0 (IQR 5 to 8). Men had significantly better
OHS (p = 0.02) and UCLA scores (p = 0.01) than women. The BHR provides
excellent survival and functional results in men into the second
decade, with good results achieved in appropriately selected women. Cite this article:
Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is commonly
associated with early hip arthritis. We reviewed our series of 1300
hip resurfacing procedures. More than 90% of our male patients,
with an average age of 53 years, had cam impingement lesions. In
this condition, there are anterior femoral neck osteophytes, and
a retroverted femoral head on a normally anteverted neck. It is
postulated that FAI results in collision of the anterior neck of
the femur against the rim of the acetabulum, causing damage to the
acetabular labrum and articular cartilage, resulting in osteoarthritis.
Early treatment of FAI involves arthroscopic or open removal of
bone from the anterior femoral neck, as well as repair or removal
of labral tears. However, once osteoarthritis has developed, hip
replacement or hip resurfacing is indicated. Hip resurfacing can
re-orient the head and re-shape the neck. This helps to restore
normal biomechanics to the hip, eliminate FAI, and improve range
of motion. Since many younger men with hip arthritis have FAI, and
are also considered the best candidates for hip resurfacing, it
is evident that resurfacing has a role in these patients.
We reviewed the literature on the currently available
choices of bearing surface in total hip replacement (THR). We present
a detailed description of the properties of articulating surfaces
review the understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of
existing bearing couples. Recent technological developments in the
field of polyethylene and ceramics have altered the risk of fracture
and the rate of wear, although the use of metal-on-metal bearings has
largely fallen out of favour, owing to concerns about reactions
to metal debris. As expected, all bearing surface combinations have
advantages and disadvantages. A patient-based approach is recommended,
balancing the risks of different options against an individual’s
functional demands. Cite this article:
The practice of removing a well-fixed cementless
femoral component is associated with high morbidity. Ceramic bearing
couples are low wearing and their use minimises the risk of subsequent
further revision due to the production of wear debris. A total of
165 revision hip replacements were performed, in which a polyethylene-lined acetabular
component was revised to a new acetabular component with a ceramic
liner, while retaining the well-fixed femoral component. A titanium
sleeve was placed over the used femoral trunnion, to which a ceramic
head was added. There were 100 alumina and 65 Delta bearing couples
inserted. The mean Harris hip score improved significantly from 71.3 (9.0
to 100.0) pre-operatively to 91.0 (41.0 to 100.0) at a mean follow
up of 4.8 years (2.1 to 12.5) (p <
0.001). No patients reported
squeaking of the hip. There were two fractures of the ceramic head, both in alumina
bearings. No liners were seen to fracture. No fractures were observed
in components made of Delta ceramic. At 8.3 years post-operatively
the survival with any cause of failure as the endpoint was 96.6%
(95% confidence interval (CI) 85.7 to 99.3) for the acetabular component and
94.0% (95% CI 82.1 to 98.4) for the femoral component. The technique of revising the acetabular component in the presence
of a well-fixed femoral component with a ceramic head placed on
a titanium sleeve over the used trunnion is a useful adjunct in
revision hip practice. The use of Delta ceramic is recommended. Cite this article:
Symptomatic cobalt toxicity from a failed total
hip replacement is a rare but devastating complication. It has been reported
following revision of fractured ceramic components, as well as in
patients with failed metal-on-metal articulations. Potential clinical
findings include fatigue, weakness, hypothyroidism, cardiomyopathy,
polycythaemia, visual and hearing impairment, cognitive dysfunction,
and neuropathy. We report a case of an otherwise healthy 46-year-old
patient, who developed progressively worsening symptoms of cobalt
toxicity beginning approximately six months following synovectomy
and revision of a fractured ceramic-on-ceramic total hip replacement
to a metal-on-polyethylene bearing. The whole blood cobalt levels
peaked at 6521 µg/l. The patient died from cobalt-induced cardiomyopathy.
Implant retrieval analysis confirmed a loss of 28.3 g mass of the
cobalt–chromium femoral head as a result of severe abrasive wear
by ceramic particles embedded in the revision polyethylene liner.
Autopsy findings were consistent with heavy metal-induced cardiomyopathy. We recommend using new ceramics at revision to minimise the risk
of wear-related cobalt toxicity following breakage of ceramic components. Cite this article:
Fracture of a ceramic component in total hip
replacement is a rare but potentially catastrophic complication.
The incidence is likely to increase as the use of ceramics becomes
more widespread. We describe such a case, which illustrates how
inadequate initial management will lead to further morbidity and
require additional surgery. We present the case as a warning that
fracture of a ceramic component should be revised to another ceramic-on-ceramic
articulation in order to minimise the risk of further catastrophic
wear.
The June 2012 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: whether metal-on-metal is really such a disaster; resurfacings with unexplained pain; large heads and high ion levels; hip arthroscopy for FAI; the inaccuracy of clinical tests for impingement; arthroscopic lengthening of iliopsoas; the OA hip; the injured hamstring – football’s most common injury; an algorithm for hip fracture surgery; and sparing piriformis at THR.
An international faculty of orthopaedic surgeons
presented their work on the current challenges in hip surgery at
the London Hip Meeting which was attended by over
400 delegates. The topics covered included femoroacetabular impingement, thromboembolic
phenomena associated with hip surgery, bearing surfaces (including metal-on-metal
articulations), outcomes of hip replacement surgery and revision
hip replacement. We present a concise report of the current opinions
on hip surgery from this meeting with appropriate references to
the current literature.
Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) can detect early
micromovement in unstable implant designs which are likely subsequently
to have a high failure rate. In 2010, the Articular Surface Replacement
(ASR) was withdrawn because of a high failure rate. In 19 ASR femoral
components, the mean micromovement over the first two years after implantation
was 0.107 mm ( We conclude that the ASR femoral component achieves initial stability
and that early migration is not the mode of failure for this resurfacing
arthroplasty.