Modern metal-on-metal bearings produce less wear debris and osteolysis, but have the potential adverse effect of release of ions. Improved ceramic-on-ceramic bearings have the lowest wear of all, but the corrosion process has not been analysed.

Our aim was to measure the serum ion release (ng/ml) in 23 patients having stable hip prostheses with a ceramic-on-ceramic coupling (group A) and to compare it with the release in 42 patients with a metal-on-metal bearing (group B) in the medium term. Reference values were obtained from a population of 47 healthy subjects (group C). The concentrations of chromium, cobalt, aluminium and titanium were measured.

There was a significant increase of cobalt, chromium and aluminium levels (p < 0.05) in group B compared with groups A and C. Group A did not differ significantly from the control group. Despite the apparent advantage of a metal-on-metal coupling, especially in younger patients with a long life expectancy, a major concern arises regarding the extent and duration of ion exposure. For this reason, the low corrosion level in a ceramic-on-ceramic coupling could be advantageous.

We performed a randomised, radiostereometric study comparing two different bone cements, one of which has been sparsely clinically documented. Randomisation of 60 total hip replacements (57 patients) into two groups of 30 was undertaken. All the patients were operated on using a cemented Charnley total hip replacement, the only difference between groups being the bone cement used to secure the femoral component. The two cements used were Palamed G and Palacos R with gentamicin. The patients were followed up with repeated clinical and radiostereometric examinations for two years to assess the micromovement of the femoral component and the clinical outcome.

The mean subsidence was 0.18 mm and 0.21 mm, and the mean internal rotation was 1.7° and 2.0° at two years for the Palamed G and Palacos R with gentamicin bone cements, respectively. We found no statistically significant differences between the groups. Micromovement occurred between the femoral component and the cement, while the cement mantle was stable inside the bone. The Harris hip score improved from a mean of 38 points (14 to 54) and 36 (10 to 57) pre-operatively to a mean of 92 (77 to 100) and 91 (63 to 100) at two years in the Palamed G and Palacos R groups, respectively. No differences were found between the groups.

Both bone cements provided good initial fixation of the femoral component and good clinical results at two years.

We have prospectively studied the outcome of infections associated with implants which were retained and treated using a standardised antimicrobial protocol. Over a period of four years, we studied 24 consecutive patients who had symptoms of infection for less than one year, a stable implant, no sinus tract and a known pathogen which was susceptible to recommended antimicrobial agents. The infections involved hip prostheses (14), knee prostheses (5), an internal fixation device (4), and an ankle prosthesis (1).

Twenty patients had a successful outcome at a median follow-up of 3.7 years (1.8 to 4.7); four had failure of the implant after a median follow-up of 1.2 years (0.3 to 2.5). The probability of survival without failure of treatment was 96% at one year (95% confidence interval (CI) 88 to 100), 92% at two years (95% CI 80 to 100) and 86% at three years (95% CI 72 to 100).

Patients with a short-term infection but with a stable implant, no sinus tract and a known pathogen may be successfully treated by retention of the implant and the use of a standardised regimen of antimicrobial treatment.

Although the importance of sound statistical principles in the design and analysis of data has gained prominence in recent years, biostatistics, the application of statistics to the analysis of biological and medical data, is still a subject which is poorly understood and often mishandled. This review introduces, in the context of orthopaedic research, the terminology and the principles involved in simple data analysis, and outlines areas of medical statistics that have gained prominence in recent years. It also lists and provides an insight into some of the more common errors that occur in published orthopaedic journals and which are frequently encountered at the review stage in papers submitted to the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.