Early total hip replacement (THR) for acetabular fractures offers accelerated rehabilitation, but a high risk of heterotopic ossification (HO) has been reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of HO, its associated risk factors and functional impact. A total of 40 patients with acetabular fractures treated with a THR weres retrospectively reviewed. The incidence and severity of HO were evaluated using the modified Brooker classification, and the functional outcome assessed. The overall incidence of HO was 38% (n = 15), with nine severe grade III cases. Patients who underwent surgery early after injury had a fourfold increased chance of developing HO. The mean blood loss and operating time were more than twice that of those whose surgery was delayed (p = 0.002 and p < 0.001, respectively). In those undergoing early THR, the incidence of grade III HO was eight times higher than in those in whom THR was delayed (p = 0.01). Only three of the seven patients with severe HO showed good or excellent Harris hip scores compared with eight of nine with class 0, I or II HO (p = 0.049). Associated musculoskeletal injuries, high-energy trauma and head injuries were associated with the development of grade III HO.

The incidence of HO was significantly higher in patients with a displaced acetabular fracture undergoing THR early compared with those undergoing THR later and this had an adverse effect on the functional outcome.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:95–100.

Following the recall of modular neck hip stems in July 2012, research into femoral modularity will intensify over the next few years. This review aims to provide surgeons with an up-to-date summary of the clinically relevant evidence. The development of femoral modularity, and a classification system, is described. The theoretical rationale for modularity is summarised and the clinical outcomes are explored. The review also examines the clinically relevant problems reported following the use of femoral stems with a modular neck.

Joint replacement registries in the United Kingdom and Australia have provided data on the failure rates of modular devices but cannot identify the mechanism of failure. This information is needed to determine whether modular neck femoral stems will be used in the future, and how we should monitor patients who already have them implanted.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1011–21.

Despite excellent results, the use of cemented total hip replacement (THR) is declining. This retrospective cohort study records survival time to revision following primary cemented THR using the most common combination of components that accounted for almost a quarter of all cemented THRs, exploring risk factors independently associated with failure. All patients with osteoarthritis who had an Exeter V40/Contemporary THR (Stryker) implanted before 31 December 2010 and recorded in the National Joint Registry for England and Wales were included in the analysis. Cox’s proportional hazard models were used to analyse the extent to which risk of revision was related to patient, surgeon and implant covariates, with a significance threshold of p < 0.01. A total of 34 721 THRs were included in the study. The overall seven-year rate of revision for any reason was 1.70% (99% confidence interval (CI) 1.28 to 2.12). In the final adjusted model the risk of revision was significantly higher in THRs with the Contemporary hooded component (hazard ratio (HR) 1.88, p < 0.001) than with the flanged version, and in smaller head sizes (< 28 mm) compared with 28 mm diameter heads (HR 1.50, p = 0.005). The seven-year revision rate was 1.16% (99% CI 0.69 to 1.63) with a 28 mm diameter head and flanged component. The overall risk of revision was independent of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, body mass index, surgeon volume, surgical approach, brand of cement/presence of antibiotic, femoral head material (stainless steel/alumina) and stem taper size/offset. However, the risk of revision for dislocation was significantly higher with a ‘plus’ offset head (HR 2.05, p = 0.003) and a hooded acetabular component (HR 2.34, p < 0.001).

In summary, we found that there were significant differences in failure between different designs of acetabular component and sizes of femoral head after adjustment for a range of covariates.

This review summarises the opinions and conclusions reached from a symposium on infected total knee replacement (TKR) held at the British Association of Surgery of the Knee (BASK) annual meeting in 2011. The National Joint Registry for England and Wales reported 5082 revision TKRs in 2010, of which 1157 (23%) were caused by infection. The diagnosis of infection beyond the acute post-operative stage relies on the identification of the causative organism by aspiration and analysis of material obtained at arthroscopy. Ideal treatment then involves a two-stage surgical procedure with extensive debridement and washout, followed by antibiotics. An articulating or non-articulating drug-eluting cement spacer is used prior to implantation of the revision prosthesis, guided by the serum level of inflammatory markers. The use of a single-stage revision is gaining popularity and we would advocate its use in certain patients where the causative organism is known, no sinuses are present, the patient is not immunocompromised, and there is no radiological evidence of component loosening or osteitis.

It is our opinion that single-stage revision produces high-quality reproducible results and will soon achieve the same widespread acceptance as it does in infected hip arthroplasty.

There are no recent studies comparing cable with wire for the fixation of osteotomies or fractures in total hip replacement (THR). Our objective was to evaluate the five-year clinical and radiological outcomes and complication rates of the two techniques. We undertook a review including all primary and revision THRs performed in one hospital between 1996 and 2005 using cable or wire fixation. Clinical and radiological evaluation was performed five years post-operatively. Cables were used in 51 THRs and wires in 126, and of these, 36 THRs with cable (71%) and 101 with wire (80%) were evaluated at follow-up. The five-year radiographs available for 33 cable and 91 wire THRs revealed rates of breakage of fixation of 12 of 33 (36%) and 42 of 91 (46%), respectively. With cable there was a significantly higher risk of metal debris (68% vs 9%; adjusted relative risk (RR) 6.6; 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.0 to 14.1), nonunion (36% vs 21%; adjusted RR 2.0; 95% CI 1.0 to 3.9) and osteolysis around the material, acetabulum or femur (61% vs 19%; adjusted RR 3.9; 95% CI 2.3 to 6.5). Cable breakage increased the risk of osteolysis to 83%. There was a trend towards foreign-body reaction and increased infection with cables. Clinical results did not differ between the groups.

In conclusion, we found a higher incidence of complications and a trend towards increased infection and foreign-body reaction with the use of cables.

We report the use of porous metal acetabular revision shells in the treatment of contained bone loss. The outcomes of 53 patients with ≤ 50% acetabular bleeding host bone contact were compared with a control group of 49 patients with > 50% to 85% bleeding host bone contact. All patients were treated with the same type of trabecular metal acetabular revision shell. The mean age at revision was 62.4 years (42 to 80) and the mean follow-up of both groups was 72.4 months (60 to 102). Clinical, radiological and functional outcomes were assessed. There were four (7.5%) mechanical failures in the ≤ 50% host bone contact group and no failures in the > 50% host bone contact group (p = 0.068). Out of both groups combined there were four infections (3.9%) and five recurrent dislocations (4.9%) with a stable acetabular component construct that were revised to a constrained liner. Given the complexity of the reconstructive challenge, porous metal revision acetabular shells show acceptable failure rates at five to ten years’ follow-up in the setting of significant contained bone defects. This favourable outcome might be due to the improved initial stability achieved by a high coefficient of friction between the acetabular implant and the host bone, and the high porosity, which affords good bone ingrowth.

This prospective randomised controlled double-blind trial compared two types of PFC Sigma total knee replacement (TKR), differing in three design features aimed at improving flexion. The outcome of a standard fixed-bearing posterior cruciate ligament-preserving design (FB-S) was compared with that of a high-flexion rotating-platform posterior-stabilised design (RP-F) at one year after TKR.

The study group of 77 patients with osteoarthritis of the knee comprised 37 men and 40 women, with a mean age of 69 years (44.9 to 84.9). The patients were randomly allocated either to the FB-S or the RP-F group and assessed pre-operatively and at one year post-operatively. The mean post-operative non-weight-bearing flexion was 107° (95% confidence interval (CI) 104° to 110°)) for the FB-S group and 113° (95% CI 109° to 117°) for the RP-F group, and this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.032). However, weight-bearing range of movement during both level walking and ascending a slope as measured during flexible electrogoniometry was a mean of 4° lower in the RP-F group than in the FB-S group, with 58° (95% CI 56° to 60°) versus 54° (95% CI 51° to 57°) for level walking (p = 0.019) and 56° (95% CI 54° to 58°) versus 52° (95% CI 48° to 56°) for ascending a slope (p = 0.044). Further, the mean post-operative pain score of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index was significantly higher in the RP-F group (2.5 (95% CI 1.5 to 3.5) versus 4.2 (95% CI 2.9 to 5.5), p = 0.043).

Although the RP-F group achieved higher non-weight-bearing knee flexion, patients in this group did not use this during activities of daily living and reported more pain one year after surgery.