The aim of this study was to compare early functional and health
related quality of life outcomes (HRQoL) in patients who have undergone
total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a bone conserving short stem
femoral component and those in whom a conventional length uncemented
component was used. Outcome was assessed using a validated performance
based outcome instrument as well as patient reported outcome measures
(PROMs). We prospectively analysed 33 patients whose THA involved a contemporary
proximally porous coated tapered short stem femoral component and
53 patients with a standard conventional femoral component, at a
minimum follow-up of two years. The mean follow-up was 31.4 months
(24 to 39). Patients with poor proximal femoral bone quality were
excluded. The mean age of the patients was 66.6 years (59 to 77)
and the mean body mass index was 30.2 kg/m2 (24.1 to
41.0). Outcome was assessed using the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and
the University College Hospital (UCH) hip score which is a validated
performance based instrument. HRQoL was assessed using the EuroQol
5D (EQ-5D).Aims
Patients and Methods
We carried out a further study of the long-term results of the
cemented Exeter femoral component in patients under the age of 40
with a mean follow-up of 13.6 years (10 to 20). We reviewed our original cohort of 104 cemented Exeter stems
in 78 consecutive patients with a mean age of 31 years (16 to 39).
Only one patient was lost to radiological follow-up.Aims
Patients and Methods
The February 2014 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: length of stay; cementless metaphyseal fixation; mortality trends in over 400,000 total hip replacements; antibiotics in hip fracture surgery; blood supply to the femoral head after dislocation; resurfacing and THR in metal-on-metal replacement; diabetes and hip replacement; bone remodelling over two decades following hip replacement; and whether bisphosphonates affect acetabular fixation.
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.
The February 2014 Research Roundup360 looks at: blood supply to the femoral head after dislocation; diabetes and hip replacement; bone remodelling over two decades following hip replacement; sham surgery as good as arthroscopic meniscectomy; distraction in knee osteoarthritis; whether joint replacement prevent cardiac events; tranexamic acid and knee replacement haemostasis; cartilage colonisation in bipolar ankle grafts; CTs and proof of fusion; atorvastatin for muscle re-innervation after sciatic nerve transection; microfracture and short-term pain in cuff repair; promising early results from L-PRF augmented cuff repairs; and fatty degeneration in a rodent model.
We prospectively followed 191 consecutive collarless
polished tapered (CPT) femoral stems, implanted in 175 patients
who had a mean age at operation of 64.5 years (21 to 85). At a mean
follow-up of 15.9 years (14 to 17.5), 86 patients (95 hips) were
still alive. The fate of all original stems is known. The 16-year
survivorship with re-operation for any reason was 80.7% (95% confidence
interval 72 to 89.4). There was no loss to follow-up, with clinical
data available on all 95 hips and radiological assessment performed
on 90 hips (95%). At latest follow-up, the mean Harris hip score
was 78 (28 to 100) and the mean Oxford hip score was 36 (15 to 48).
Stems subsided within the cement mantle, with a mean subsidence
of 2.1 mm (0.4 to 19.2). Among the original cohort, only one stem
(0.5%) has been revised due to aseptic loosening. In total seven
stems were revised for any cause, of which four revisions were required
for infection following revision of the acetabular component. A
total of 21 patients (11%) required some sort of revision procedure;
all except three of these resulted from failure of the acetabular
component. Cemented acetabular components had a significantly lower
revision burden (three hips, 2.7%) than Harris Galante uncemented
components (17 hips, 21.8%) (p <
0.001). The CPT stem continues to provide excellent radiological and
clinical outcomes at 15 years following implantation. Its results
are consistent with other polished tapered stem designs.
Metallosis is a rare cause of failure after total knee replacement and has only previously been reported when there has been abnormal metal-on-metal contact. We describe 14 patients (15 knees) whose total knee replacement required revision for a new type of early failure caused by extensive metallosis. A modification of a cementless rotating platform implant, which had previously had excellent long-term survival, had been used in each case. The change was in the form of a new porous-beaded surface on the femoral component to induce cementless fixation, which had been used successfully in the fixation of acetabular and tibial components. This modification appeared to have resulted in metallosis due to abrasive two-body wear. The component has subsequently been recalled and is no longer in use. The presentation, investigation, and findings at revision are described and a possible aetiology and its implications are discussed.
The rate and mode of early failure in 463 Birmingham hip resurfacings in a two-centre, multisurgeon series were examined. Of the 463 patients two have died and three were lost to follow-up. The mean radiological and clinical follow-up was for 43 months (6 to 90). We have revised 13 resurfacings (2.8%) including seven for pain, three for fracture, two for dislocation and another for sepsis. Of these, nine had macroscopic and histological evidence of metallosis. The survival at five years was 95.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) 94.1 to 96.8) for revision for all causes and 96.9% (95% CI 95.5 to 98.3) for metallosis. The rate of metallosis related revision was 3.1% at five years. Risk factors for metallosis were female gender, a small femoral component, a high abduction angle and obesity. We do not advocate the use of the Birmingham Hip resurfacing procedure in patients with these risk factors.