Aims. The optimal bearing surface design for medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of fixed-bearing (FB) and mobile-bearing (MB) UKAs from a single high-volume institution. Methods. Prospectively collected data were reviewed for all primary cemented medial UKAs performed by seven surgeons from January 2006 to December 2022. A total of 2,999 UKAs were identified, including 2,315 FB and 684 MB cases. The primary outcome measure was implant survival. Secondary outcomes included 90-day and cumulative complications, reoperations, component revisions, conversion arthroplasties, range of motion, and patient-reported outcome measures. Overall mean age at surgery was 65.7 years (32.9 to 94.3), 53.1% (1,593/2,999) of UKAs were implanted in female patients, and demographics between groups were similar (p > 0.05). The mean follow-up for all UKAs was 3.7 years (0.0 to 15.6). Results. Using revision for any reason as an endpoint, five-year survival for FB UKAs was 97.2% (95% CI 96.4 to 98.1) compared to 96.0% for MB (95% CI 94.1 to 97.9; p = 0.008). The FB group experienced fewer component revisions (14/2,315, 0.6% vs 12/684, 1.8%; p < 0.001) and conversion arthroplasties (38/2315, 1.6% vs 24/684, 3.5%; p < 0.001). A greater number of MB UKAs underwent revision due to osteoarthritis progression (FB = 21/2,315, 0.9% vs MB = 16/684, 2.3%; p = 0.003). In the MB group, 12 (1.8%) subjects experienced bearing dislocations which required revision surgery. There were 15 early periprosthetic tibia fractures (0.6%) in the FB group compared to 0 for MB (p = 0.035). Conclusion. In similar patient populations, FB UKAs demonstrated slightly higher survival than a commonly used MB design. Adverse event profiles differed by bearing type, with an increased risk of bearing dislocation and OA progression with MB designs, and early periprosthetic tibia fractures for FB designs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(9):916–923

Aims. Brace treatment is the cornerstone of managing developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), yet there is a lack of evidence-based treatment protocols, which results in wide variations in practice. To resolve this, we have developed a comprehensive nonoperative treatment protocol conforming to published consensus principles, with well-defined a priori criteria for inclusion and successful treatment. Methods. This was a single-centre, prospective, longitudinal cohort study of a consecutive series of infants with ultrasound-confirmed DDH who underwent a comprehensive nonoperative brace management protocol in a unified multidisciplinary clinic between January 2012 and December 2016 with five-year follow-up radiographs. The radiological outcomes were acetabular index-lateral edge (AI-L), acetabular index-sourcil (AI-S), centre-edge angle (CEA), acetabular depth ratio (ADR), International Hip Dysplasia Institute (IHDI) grade, and evidence of avascular necrosis (AVN). At five years, each hip was classified as normal (< 1 SD), borderline dysplastic (1 to 2 SDs), or dysplastic (> 2 SDs) based on validated radiological norm-referenced values. Results. Of 993 infants assessed clinically and sonographically, 21% (212 infants, 354 abnormal hips) had DDH and were included. Of these, 95% (202 infants, 335 hips) successfully completed bracing, and 5% (ten infants, 19 hips) failed bracing due to irreducible hip(s). The success rate of bracing for unilateral dislocations was 88% (45/51 infants) and for bilateral dislocations 83% (20/24 infants). The femoral nerve palsy rate was 1% (2/212 infants). At five-year follow-up (mean 63 months (SD 5.9; 49 to 83)) the prevalence of residual dysplasia after successful brace treatment was 1.6% (5/312 hips). All hips were IHDI grade I and none had AVN. Four children (4/186; 2%) subsequently underwent surgery for residual dysplasia. Conclusion. Our comprehensive protocol for nonoperative treatment of infant DDH has shown high rates of success and extremely low rates of residual dysplasia at a mean age of five years. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(8):935–942

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, infection, and dislocation was 3/53 (5.7%), 7/53 (13.2%), and 6/53 (11.3%), respectively. The mean leg length discrepancy improved (p < 0.001) preoperatively from a mean of 18.2 mm (0 to 80; SD 15.8) to 7.0 mm (0 to 35; SD 9.8) at latest follow-up. The horizontal and vertical hip centres improved (p < 0.001) preoperatively from a mean of 9.2 cm (5.6 to 17.5; SD 2.3) to 10.1 cm (6.2 to 13.4; SD 2.1) and 9.3 cm (4.7 to 15.8; SD 2.5) to 8.0 cm (3.7 to 12.3; SD 1.7), respectively. Conclusion. Cup-cage reconstruction provides acceptable outcomes in the management of pelvic discontinuity. One in four constructs undergo revision within five years, most commonly for periprosthetic joint infection, dislocation, or aseptic loosening. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):66–73

Aims. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has higher revision rates than total knee arthroplasty (TKA). As revision of UKA may be less technically demanding than revision TKA, UKA patients with poor functional outcomes may be more likely to be offered revision than TKA patients with similar outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare clinical thresholds for revisions between TKA and UKA using revision incidence and patient-reported outcomes, in a large, matched cohort at early, mid-, and late-term follow-up. Methods. Analyses were performed on propensity score-matched patient cohorts of TKAs and UKAs (2:1) registered in the New Zealand Joint Registry between 1 January 1999 and 31 December 2019 with an Oxford Knee Score (OKS) response at six months (n, TKA: 16,774; UKA: 8,387), five years (TKA: 6,718; UKA: 3,359), or ten years (TKA: 3,486; UKA: 1,743). Associations between OKS and revision within two years following the score were examined. Thresholds were compared using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Reasons for aseptic revision were compared using cumulative incidence with competing risk. Results. Fewer TKA patients with ‘poor’ outcomes (≤ 25) subsequently underwent revision compared with UKA at six months (5.1% vs 19.6%; p < 0.001), five years (4.3% vs 12.5%; p < 0.001), and ten years (6.4% vs 15.0%; p = 0.024). Compared with TKA, the relative risk for UKA was 2.5-times higher for ‘unknown’ reasons, bearing dislocations, and disease progression. Conclusion. Compared with TKA, more UKA patients with poor outcomes underwent revision from early to long-term follow-up, and were more likely to undergo revision for ‘unknown’ reasons, which suggest a lower clinical threshold for UKA. For UKA, revision risk was higher for bearing dislocations and disease progression. There is supporting evidence that the higher revision UKA rates are associated with lower clinical thresholds for revision and additional modes of failure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):269–276

Aims. Abduction bracing is commonly used to treat developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) following closed reduction and spica casting, with little evidence to support or refute this practice. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of abduction bracing after closed reduction in improving acetabular index (AI) and reducing secondary surgery for residual hip dysplasia. Methods. We performed a retrospective review of patients treated with closed reduction for DDH at a single tertiary referral centre. Demographic data were obtained including severity of dislocation based on the International Hip Dysplasia Institute (IHDI) classification, age at reduction, and casting duration. Patients were prescribed no abduction bracing, part-time, or full-time wear post-reduction and casting. AI measurements were obtained immediately upon cast removal and from two- and four-year follow-up radiographs. Results. A total of 243 hips underwent closed reduction and 82% (199/243) were treated with abduction bracing. There was no difference between those treated with or without bracing with regard to sex, age at reduction, severity of dislocation, spica duration, or immediate post-casting AI (all p > 0.05). There was no difference in hips treated with or without abduction brace with regard to AI at two years post-reduction (32.4° (SD 5.3°) vs 30.9° (SD 4.6°), respectively; p = 0.099) or at four years post-reduction (26.4° (SD 5.2°) vs 25.4° (SD 5.1°), respectively; p = 0.231). Multivariate analysis revealed only IHDI grade predicted AI at two years post-reduction (p = 0.004). There was no difference in overall rate of secondary surgery for residual dysplasia between hips treated with or without bracing (32% vs 39%, respectively; p = 0.372). However, there was an increased risk of early secondary surgery (< two years post-reduction) in the non-braced group (11.4% vs 2.5%; p = 0.019). Conclusion. Abduction bracing following closed reduction for DDH treatment is not associated with decreased residual dysplasia at two or four years post-reduction but may reduce rates of early secondary surgery. A prospective study is indicated to provide more definitive recommendations. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(12):1327–1332

Aims. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between reason for revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) and outcomes in terms of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Methods. We reviewed a prospective cohort of 647 patients undergoing full or partial rTHA at a single high-volume centre with a minimum of two years’ follow-up. The reasons for revision were classified as: infection; aseptic loosening; dislocation; structural failure; and painful THA for other reasons. PROMs (modified Oxford Hip Score (mOHS), EuroQol five-dimension three-level health questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L) score, and visual analogue scales for pain during rest and activity), complication rates, and failure rates were compared among the groups. Results. The indication for revision influenced PROMs improvement over time. This finding mainly reflected preoperative differences between the groups, but diminished between the first and second postoperative years. Preoperatively, patients revised due to infection and aseptic loosening had a lower mOHS than patients with other indications for revision. Pain scores at baseline were highest in patients being revised for dislocation. Infection and aseptic loosening groups showed marked changes over time in both mOHS and EQ-5D-3L. Overall complications and re-revision rates were 35.4% and 9.7% respectively, with no differences between the groups (p = 0.351 and p = 0.470, respectively). Conclusion. Good outcomes were generally obtained regardless of the reason for revision, with patients having the poorest preoperative scores exhibiting the greatest improvement in PROMs. Furthermore, overall complication and reoperation rates were in line with previous reports and did not differ between different indications for rTHA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):859–866

Aims. Despite multiple trials and case series on hip hemiarthroplasty designs, guidance is still lacking on which implant to use. One particularly deficient area is long-term outcomes. We present over 1,000 consecutive cemented Thompson’s hemiarthroplasties over a ten-year period, recording all accessible patient and implant outcomes. Methods. Patient identifiers for a consecutive cohort treated between 1 January 2003 and 31 December 2011 were linked to radiographs, surgical notes, clinic letters, and mortality data from a national dataset. This allowed charting of their postoperative course, complications, readmissions, returns to theatre, revisions, and deaths. We also identified all postoperative attendances at the Emergency and Outpatient Departments, and recorded any subsequent skeletal injuries. Results. In total, 1,312 Thompson’s hemiarthroplasties were analyzed (mean age at surgery 82.8 years); 125 complications were recorded, necessitating 82 returns to theatre. These included 14 patients undergoing aspiration or manipulation under anaesthesia, 68 reoperations (5.2%) for debridement and implant retention (n = 12), haematoma evacuation (n = 2), open reduction for dislocation (n = 1), fixation of periprosthetic fracture (n = 5), and 48 revised stems (3.7%), for infection (n = 13), dislocation (n = 12), aseptic loosening (n = 9), persistent pain (n = 6), periprosthetic fracture (n = 4), acetabular erosion (n = 3), and metastatic bone disease (n = 1). Their status at ten years is summarized as follows: 1,180 (89.9%) dead without revision, 34 (2.6%) dead having had revision, 84 (6.6%) alive with the stem unrevised, and 14 (1.1%) alive having had revision. Cumulative implant survivorship was 90.3% at ten years; patient survivorship was 7.4%. Conclusion. The Thompson’s stem demonstrates very low rates of complications requiring reoperation and revision, up to ten years after the index procedure. Fewer than one in ten patients live for ten years after fracture. This study supports the use of a cemented Thompson’s implant as a cost-effective option for frail hip fracture patients. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(9):710–715

Aims. Navigation devices are designed to improve a surgeon’s accuracy in positioning the acetabular and femoral components in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this study was to both evaluate the accuracy of an optical computer-assisted surgery (CAS) navigation system and determine whether preoperative spinopelvic mobility (categorized as hypermobile, normal, or stiff) increased the risk of acetabular component placement error. Methods. A total of 356 patients undergoing primary THA were prospectively enrolled from November 2016 to March 2018. Clinically relevant error using the CAS system was defined as a difference of > 5° between CAS and 3D radiological reconstruction measurements for acetabular component inclination and anteversion. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were conducted to determine whether hypermobile (. Δ. sacral slope(SS). stand-sit. > 30°), or stiff (. ∆. SS. stand-sit. < 10°) spinopelvic mobility contributed to increased error rates. Results. The paired absolute difference between CAS and postoperative imaging measurements was 2.3° (standard deviation (SD) 2.6°) for inclination and 3.1° (SD 4.2°) for anteversion. Using a target zone of 40° (± 10°) (inclination) and 20° (± 10°) (anteversion), postoperative standing radiographs measured 96% of acetabular components within the target zone for both inclination and anteversion. Multiple logistic regression analysis controlling for BMI and sex revealed that hypermobile spinopelvic mobility significantly increased error rates for anteversion (odds ratio (OR) 2.48, p = 0.009) and inclination (OR 2.44, p = 0.016), whereas stiff spinopelvic mobility increased error rates for anteversion (OR 1.97, p = 0.028). There were no dislocations at a minimum three-year follow-up. Conclusion. Despite high reliability in acetabular positioning for inclination in a large patient cohort using an optical CAS system, hypermobile and stiff spinopelvic mobility significantly increased the risk of clinically relevant errors. In patients with abnormal spinopelvic mobility, CAS systems should be adjusted for use to avoid acetabular component misalignment and subsequent risk for long-term dislocation. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(6):475–484

Aims. The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and radiological outcomes of an antiprotrusio acetabular cage (APC) when used in the surgical treatment of periacetabular bone metastases. Methods. This retrospective cohort study using a prospectively collected database involved 56 patients who underwent acetabular reconstruction for periacetabular bone metastases or haematological malignancy using a single APC between January 2009 and 2020. The mean follow-up was 20 months (1 to 143). The primary outcome measure was implant survival. Postoperative radiographs were analyzed for loosening and failure. Patient and implant survival were assessed using a competing risk analysis. Secondary parameters included primary malignancy, oncological treatment, surgical factors, length of stay in hospital, and postoperative complications. Results. A total of 33 patients (59%) died during the study period at a mean of 15 months postoperatively (1 to 63). No patient had radiological evidence of loosening or failure. Acetabular component survival was 100%. Three patients (5.4%) had further surgery; one (1.8%) underwent revision of the femoral component for dislocation, one required debridement with implant retention for periprosthetic joint infection, and one required closed reduction for dislocation. Using death as a competing risk, at 100 months, the probability of revision was 0.036 and the risk of death was 0.84. Conclusion. With appropriate patient selection, the antiprotrusio cage offers good implant survival, with a reasonable perioperative complication rate in this high-risk group of patients when managing metastatic disease or haematological malignancy around the acetabulum. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(4):504–509

The April 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Acute rehabilitation following traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (ARTISAN): pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial; Prevalence and predisposing factors of neuropathic pain in patients with rotator cuff tears; Are two plates better than one? The clavicle fracture reimagined; A single cell atlas of frozen shoulder capsule identifies features associated with inflammatory fibrosis resolution; Complication rates and deprivation go hand in hand with total shoulder arthroplasty; Longitudinal instability injuries of the forearm; A better than “best-fit circle” method for glenoid bone loss assessment; 3D supraspinatus muscle volume and intramuscular fatty infiltration after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

The February 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Does indomethacin prevent heterotopic ossification following elbow fracture fixation?; Arthroscopic capsular shift in atraumatic shoulder joint instability; Ultrasound-guided lavage with corticosteroid injection versus sham; Combined surgical and exercise-based interventions following primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis; Are vascularized fibula autografts a long-lasting reconstruction after intercalary resection of the humerus for primary bone tumours?; Anatomical versus reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with limited forward elevation; Tension band or plate fixation for simple displaced olecranon fractures?; Is long-term follow-up and monitoring in shoulder and elbow arthroplasty needed?

Aims. One-stage revision hip arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) has several advantages; however, resection of the proximal femur might be necessary to achieve higher success rates. We investigated the risk factors for resection and re-revisions, and assessed complications and subsequent re-revisions. Methods. In this single-centre, case-control study, 57 patients who underwent one-stage revision arthroplasty for PJI of the hip and required resection of the proximal femur between 2009 and 2018 were identified. The control group consisted of 57 patients undergoing one-stage revision without bony resection. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify any correlation with resection and the risk factors for re-revisions. Rates of all-causes re-revision, reinfection, and instability were compared between groups. Results. Patients who required resection of the proximal femur were found to have a higher all-cause re-revision rate (29.8% vs 10.5%; p = 0.018), largely due to reinfection (15.8% vs 0%; p = 0.003), and dislocation (8.8% vs 10.5%; p = 0.762), and showed higher rate of in-hospital wound haematoma requiring aspiration or evacuation (p = 0.013), and wound revision (p = 0.008). The use of of dual mobility components/constrained liner in the resection group was higher than that of controls (94.7% vs 36.8%; p < 0.001). The presence and removal of additional metal hardware (odds ratio (OR) = 7.2), a sinus tract (OR 4), ten years’ time interval between primary implantation and index infection (OR 3.3), and previous hip revision (OR 1.4) increased the risk of proximal femoral resection. A sinus tract (OR 9.2) and postoperative dislocation (OR 281.4) were associated with increased risk of subsequent re-revisions. Conclusion. Proximal femoral resection during one-stage revision hip arthroplasty for PJI may be required to reduce the risk of of recurrent or further infection. Patients with additional metalware needing removal or transcortical sinus tracts and chronic osteomyelitis are particularly at higher risk of needing proximal femoral excision. However, radical resection is associated with higher surgical complications and increased re-revision rates. The use of constrained acetabular liners and dual mobility components maintained an acceptable dislocation rate. These results, including identified risk factors, may aid in preoperative planning, patient consultation and consent, and intraoperative decision-making. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(11):1678–1685

The June 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Reverse versus anatomical total shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis? A UK national picture; Acute rehabilitation following traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (ARTISAN): pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial; acid for rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; Metal or ceramic humeral head total shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of data from the National Joint Registry; Platelet-rich plasma has better results for long-term functional improvement and pain relief for lateral epicondylitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials; Quantitative fatty infiltration and 3D muscle volume after nonoperative treatment of symptomatic rotator cuff tears: a prospective MRI study of 79 patients; Locking plates for non-osteoporotic proximal humeral fractures in the long term; A systematic review of the treatment of primary acromioclavicular joint osteoarthritis

The June 2023 Spine Roundup. 360. looks at: Characteristics and comparative study of thoracolumbar spine injury and dislocation fracture due to tertiary trauma; Sublingual sufentanil for postoperative pain management after lumbar spinal fusion surgery; Minimally invasive bipolar technique for adult neuromuscular scoliosis; Predictive factors for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis; Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae and lumbar fusion surgery at level L4/5; Does recall of preoperative scores contaminate trial outcomes? A randomized controlled trial; Vancomycin in fibrin glue for prevention of SSI; Perioperative nutritional supplementation decreases wound healing complications following elective lumbar spine surgery: a randomized controlled trial

The April 2024 Children’s orthopaedics Roundup. 360. looks at: Ultrasonography or radiography for suspected paediatric distal forearm fractures?; Implant density in scoliosis: an important variable?; Gait after paediatric femoral shaft fracture treated with intramedullary nail fixation: a longitudinal prospective study; The opioid dilemma: navigating pain management for children’s bone fractures; 12- to 20-year follow-up of Dega acetabuloplasty in patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip; Physeal fractures of the distal ulna: incidence and risk factors for premature growth arrest; Analysis of growth after transphyseal anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction in children; Management of lateral condyle humeral fracture associated with elbow dislocation in children: a retrospective international multicentre cohort study

Aims. Pelvic discontinuity is a rare but increasingly common complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA). This single-centre study evaluated the performance of custom-made triflange acetabular components in acetabular reconstruction with pelvic discontinuity by determining: 1) revision and overall implant survival rates; 2) discontinuity healing rate; and 3) Harris Hip Score (HHS). Methods. Retrospectively collected data of 38 patients (39 hips) with pelvic discontinuity treated with revision THA using a custom-made triflange acetabular component were analyzed. Minimum follow-up was two years (mean 5.1 years (2 to 11)). Results. There were eight subsequent surgical interventions. Two failures (5%) of the triflange acetabular components were both revised because of deep infection. There were seven (18%) patients with dislocation, and five (13%) of these were treated with a constraint liner. One patient had a debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) procedure. In 34 (92%) hips the custom-made triflange component was considered stable, with a healed pelvic discontinuity with no aseptic loosening at midterm follow-up. Mean HHS was 80.5 (48 to 96). Conclusion. The performance of the custom triflange implant in this study is encouraging, with high rates of discontinuity healing and osteointegration of the acetabular implant with no aseptic loosening at midterm follow-up. However, complications are not uncommon, particularly instability which we successfully addressed with constrained liners. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(11):867–876

Aims. To evaluate the rate of dislocation following dual mobility total hip arthroplasty (DM-THA) in patients with displaced femoral neck fractures, and to compare rates of dislocation, surgical-site infection, reoperation, and one-year mortality between DM-THA and bipolar hemiarthroplasty (BHA). Methods. Studies were selected based on the following criteria: 1) study design (retrospective cohort studies, prospective cohort studies, retrospective comparative studies, prospective comparative studies, and randomized controlled studies (RCTs)); 2) study population (patients with femoral neck fracture); 3) intervention (DM-THA or BHA); and 4) outcomes (complications during postoperative follow-up and clinical results). Pooled meta-analysis was carried out to evaluate the dislocation rate after DM-THA and to compare outcomes between DM-THA and BHA. Results. A total of 17 studies (ten cohort studies on DM-THA and seven comparative studies of DM-THA and BHA) were selected. These studies included 2,793 patients (2,799 hips), made up of 2,263 DM-THA patients (2,269 hips) and 530 BHA patients (530 hips). In all, 16 studies were analyzed to evaluate dislocation rate after DM-THA. The cumulative dislocation rate was 4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 3 to 5). Seven studies were analyzed to compare the rates dislocation and surgical-site infection. The rate of dislocation was significantly lower in the DM-THA group than in the BHA group (risk ratio (RR) 0.3; 95% CI 0.17 to 0.53, p < 0.001, Z −4.11). There was no significant difference in the rate of surgical-site infection between the two groups (p = 0.580). Six studies reported all-cause reoperations. The rate of reoperation was significantly lower in the DM-THA group than in the BHA group (RR 0.5; 95% CI 0.32 to 0.78, p = 0.003, Z −3.01). Five studies reported one-year mortality. The mortality rate was significantly lower in the DM-THA group than in the BHA group (RR 0.58 95% CI 0.45 to 0.75, p < 0.0001, Z −4.2). Conclusion. While the evidence available consisted mainly of non-randomized studies, DM-THA appeared to be a viable option for patients with displaced fractures of the femoral neck, with better reported rates of dislocation, reoperation, and mortality than BHA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1457–1466

Aims. To systematically review the predominant complication rates and changes to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation for shoulder instability. Methods. This systematic review, following PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO, involved a comprehensive literature search using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus. Key search terms included “allograft”, “shoulder”, “humerus”, and “glenoid”. The review encompassed 37 studies with 456 patients, focusing on primary outcomes like failure rates and secondary outcomes such as PROMs and functional test results. Results. A meta-analysis of primary outcomes across 17 studies revealed a dislocation rate of 5.1% and an increase in reoperation rates from 9.3% to 13.7% post-publication bias adjustment. There was also a noted rise in conversion to total shoulder arthroplasty and incidence of osteoarthritis/osteonecrosis over longer follow-up periods. Patient-reported outcomes and functional tests generally showed improvement, albeit with notable variability across studies. A concerning observation was the consistent presence of allograft resorption, with rates ranging from 33% to 80%. Comparative studies highlighted similar efficacy between distal tibial allografts and Latarjet procedures in most respects, with some differences in specific tests. Conclusion. OCA transplantation presents a promising treatment option for shoulder instability, effectively addressing both glenoid and humeral head defects with favourable patient-reported outcomes. These findings advocate for the inclusion of OCA transplantation in treatment protocols for shoulder instability, while also emphasizing the need for further high-quality, long-term research to better understand the procedure’s efficacy profile. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(7):570–580

Aims. Dual-mobility acetabular components (DMCs) have improved total hip arthroplasty (THA) stability in femoral neck fractures (FNFs). In osteoarthritis, the direct anterior approach (DAA) has been promoted for improving early functional results compared with the posterolateral approach (PLA). The aim of this study was to compare these two approaches in FNF using DMC-THA. Methods. A prospective continuous cohort study was conducted on patients undergoing operation for FNF using DMC by DAA or PLA. Functional outcome was evaluated using the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Parker score at three months and one year. Perioperative complications were recorded, and radiological component positioning evaluated. Results. There were 50 patients in the DAA group and 54 in the PLA group. The mean HHS was 85.5 (SD 8.8) for the DAA group and 81.8 (SD 11.9) for the PLA group (p = 0.064). In all, 35 patients in the DAA group and 40 in the PLA group returned to their pre-fracture Parker score (p = 0.641) in both groups. No statistically significant differences between groups were found at one year regarding these two scores (p = 0.062 and p = 0.723, respectively). The DAA was associated with more intraoperative complications (p = 0.013). There was one dislocation in each group, and four revisions for DAA and one for PLA, but this difference was not statistically significant. There were also no significant differences regarding blood loss, length of stay, or operating time. Conclusion. In DMC-THA for FNF, DAA did not achieve better functional results than PLA, either at three months or at one year. Moreover, DAA presented an increased risk of intra-operative complications. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(5 Supple B):133–138