The June 2023 Research Roundup. 360. looks at: Characterizing recurrent
Aims. Periprosthetic joint
Aims. Despite numerous studies focusing on periprosthetic joint
Aims. Musculoskeletal
Aims. This work aimed at answering the following research questions: 1) What is the rate of mechanical complications, nonunion and
Aims. Uncemented implants are now commonly used at reimplantation of a two-stage revision total hip arthoplasty (THA) following periprosthetic joint
Aims. We aimed to report the mid- to long-term rates of septic and aseptic failure after two-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint
The April 2023 Spine Roundup. 360. looks at: Percutaneous transforaminal endoscopic discectomy versus microendoscopic discectomy; Spine surgical site
The October 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup. 360. looks at: Does the primary surgical approach matter when choosing the approach for revision total hip arthroplasty?; Time to achieve the minimal clinically important difference in primary total hip arthroplasty: comparison of anterior and posterior surgical approaches; To scope or not to scope: arthroscopy as an adjunct to PAO does not provide better clinical outcomes at one year than PAO alone; Re-exploring horizons in hip resurfacing: two-year results of a ceramic-on-ceramic hip resurfacing; Association between tranexamic acid and decreased periprosthetic joint
Aims. This study evaluated the definitions developed by the European Bone and Joint
Aims. The number of revision arthroplasties being performed in the elderly is expected to rise, including revision for
Aims. Periprosthetic joint
Aims. 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. Methods. 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). Results. At mean follow-up of 5.9 years, there were no periprosthetic fractures. Clearance of
Aims. There is a paucity of long-term studies analyzing risk factors for failure after single-stage revision for periprosthetic joint
Aims. Periprosthetic hip-joint
Aims. Pelvic discontinuity is a challenging acetabular defect without a consensus on surgical management. Cup-cage reconstruction is an increasingly used treatment strategy. The present study evaluated implant survival, clinical and radiological outcomes, and complications associated with the cup-cage construct. Methods. We included 53 cup-cage construct (51 patients) implants used for hip revision procedures for pelvic discontinuity between January 2003 and January 2022 in this retrospective review. Mean age at surgery was 71.8 years (50.0 to 92.0; SD 10.3), 43/53 (81.1%) were female, and mean follow-up was 6.4 years (0.02 to 20.0; SD 4.6). Patients were implanted with a Trabecular Metal Revision Shell with either a ZCA cage (n = 12) or a TMARS cage (n = 40, all Zimmer Biomet). Pelvic discontinuity was diagnosed on preoperative radiographs and/or intraoperatively. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed, with failure defined as revision of the cup-cage reconstruction. Results. The five-year all-cause survival for cup-cage reconstruction was 73.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 61.4 to 85.4), while the ten- and 15-year survival was 63.7% (95% CI 46.8 to 80.6). Survival due to aseptic loosening was 93.4% (95% CI 86.2 to 100.0) at five, ten, and 15 years. The rate of revision for aseptic loosening,
Aims. Biofilm-related
Aims. There are limited long-term studies reporting on outcomes of the Zimmer Modular Revision (ZMR) stem, and concerns remain regarding failure. Our primary aim was to determine long-term survival free from all-cause revision and stem-related failure for this modular revision stem in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Secondary aims included evaluating radiological and functional outcomes. Methods. We retrospectively identified all patients in our institutional database who underwent revision THA using the ZMR system from January 2000 to December 2007. We included 106 patients (108 hips) with a mean follow-up of 14.5 years (2.3 to 22.3). Mean patient age was 69.2 years (37.0 to 89.4), and 51.9% were female (n = 55). Indications for index revision included aseptic loosening (73.1%),
Aims. We compared the risks of re-revision and mortality between two-stage revision surgery and single-stage revision surgery among patients with infected primary knee arthroplasty. Methods. Patients with a periprosthetic joint
Aims. Two-stage exchange revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) performed in case of periprosthetic joint