Aims. Varus-valgus constrained (VVC) devices are typically used in revision settings, often with stems to mitigate the risk of aseptic loosening. However, in at least one system, the VVC insert is compatible with the primary posterior-stabilized (PS) femoral component, which may be an option in complex primary situations. We sought to determine the implant survivorship, radiological and clinical outcomes, and complications when this VVC insert was coupled with a PS femur without stems in complex primary total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). Methods. Through our institution’s total joint registry, we identified 113 primary TKAs (103 patients) performed between 2007 and 2017 in which a VVC insert was coupled with a standard cemented PS femur without stems. Mean age was 68 years (SD 10), mean BMI was 32 kg/m. 2. (SD 7), and 59 patients (50%) were male. Mean follow-up was four years (2 to 10). Results. The five-year survivorship free from aseptic loosening was 100%. The five-year survivorship free from any revision was 99%, with the only revision performed for infection. The five-year survivorship free from reoperation was 93%. The most common reoperation was treatment for infection (n = 4; 4%), followed by manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA; n = 2; 2%). Survivorship free from any complication at five years was 90%, with superficial wound infection as the most frequent (n = 4; 4%). At most recent follow-up, two TKAs had non-progressive radiolucent lines about both the tibial and femoral components. Knee Society Scores improved from 53 preoperatively to 88 at latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Conclusion. For complex primary TKA in occasional situations, coupling a VVC insert with a standard PS femur without stems proved reliable and durable at five years. Longer-term follow-up is required before recommending this technique more broadly. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(11):921–925

Aims. The aim of this study was to compare the functional and radiological outcomes in patients with a displaced fracture of the hip who were treated with a cemented or a cementless femoral stem. Patients and Methods. A four-year follow-up of a randomized controlled study included 141 patients who underwent surgery for a displaced femoral neck fracture. Patients were randomized to receive either a cemented (n = 67) or a cementless (n = 74) stem at hemiarthroplasty (HA; n = 83) or total hip arthroplasty (THA; n = 58). Results. Early differences in functional outcome, assessed using the Harris Hip Score, the Short Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment score and EuroQol-5D, with better results in cemented group, deteriorated over time and there were no statistically significant differences at 48 months. Two (3%) patients in the cemented group and five (6.8%) in the cementless group underwent further surgery for a periprosthetic fracture. This difference was statistically significant (p = 0.4). No patient underwent further surgery for instability or infection between one and four years postoperatively. The mortality and the radiological outcomes were similar in both groups. Conclusion. Patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture treated with an arthroplasty using a cemented or cementless stem had good function and few complications up to four years postoperatively. However, due to the poor short-term functional outcomes in the cementless group, the findings do not support their routine use in the treatment of these elderly patients. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1087–93

Aims. The aim of this study was to radiologically evaluate the quality of cement mantle and alignment achieved with a polished tapered cemented femoral stem inserted through the anterior approach and compared with the posterior approach. Methods. A comparative retrospective study of 115 consecutive hybrid total hip arthroplasties or cemented hemiarthroplasties in 110 patients, performed through anterior (n = 58) or posterior approach (n = 57) using a collarless polished taper-slip femoral stem, was conducted. Cement mantle quality and thickness were assessed in both planes. Radiological outcomes were compared between groups. Results. No significant differences were identified between groups in Barrack grade on the anteroposterior (AP) (p = 0.640) or lateral views (p = 0.306), or for alignment on the AP (p = 0.603) or lateral views (p = 0.254). An adequate cement mantle (Barrack A or B) was achieved in 77.6% (anterior group, n = 45) and in 86% (posterior group, n = 49), respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed factors associated with unsatisfactory cement mantle (Barrack C or D) included higher BMI, left side, and Dorr Type C morphology. A mean cement mantle thickness of ≥ 2 mm was achieved in all Gruen zones for both approaches. The mean cement mantle was thicker in zone 7 (p < 0.001) and thinner in zone 9 for the anterior approach (p = 0.032). Incidence of cement mantle defects between groups was similar (6.9% (n = 4) vs 8.8% (n = 5), respectively; p = 0.489). Conclusion. An adequate cement mantle and good alignment can be achieved using a collarless polished tapered femoral component inserted through the anterior approach. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):46–52

Aims

Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) following hip arthroplasty are complex injuries. This study evaluates patient demographic characteristics, management, outcomes, and risk factors associated with PPF subtypes over a decade.

Aims

Obtaining solid implant fixation is crucial in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) to avoid aseptic loosening, a major reason for re-revision. This study aims to validate a novel grading system that quantifies implant fixation across three anatomical zones (epiphysis, metaphysis, diaphysis).

Aims. Periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFF) following total hip arthroplasty (THA) are devastating complications that are associated with functional limitations and increased overall mortality. Although cementless implants have been associated with an increased risk of PFF, the precise contribution of implant geometry and design on the risk of both intra-operative and post-operative PFF remains poorly investigated. A systematic review was performed to aggregate all of the PFF literature with specific attention to the femoral implant used. Patients and Methods. A systematic search strategy of several journal databases and recent proceedings from the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons was performed. Clinical articles were included for analysis if sufficient implant description was provided. All articles were reviewed by two reviewers. A review of fundamental investigations of implant load-to-failure was performed, with the intent of identifying similar conclusions from the clinical and fundamental literature. Results. In total 596 articles were initially identified, with 34 being eligible for analysis. Aggregate analysis of 1691 PFFs in 342 719 primary THAs revealed a significantly higher number of PFFs with cementless femoral implants (p < 0.001). Single-wedge and double-wedge (fit-and-fill) femoral implants were associated with a threefold increase in PFF rates (p < 0.001) compared with anatomical, fully coated and tapered/rounded stems. Within cemented stems, loaded-taper (Exeter) stems were associated with more PFFs than composite-beam (Charnley) stems (p = 0.004). Review of the fundamental literature revealed very few studies comparing cementless component designs. Conclusion. Very few studies within the PFF literature provide detailed implant information. Cementless implants, specifically those of single-wedge and double-wedge, have the highest PFF rates in the literature, with most investigations recommending against their use in older patients with osteoporotic bone. This review illustrates the need for registries and future PFF studies to record implant name and information for future analysis. Furthermore, future biomechanical investigations comparing modern implants are needed to clarify the precise contribution of implant design to PFF risk. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(1 Supple A):50–9

Aims. Metaphyseal tritanium cones can be used to manage the tibial bone loss commonly encountered at revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). Tibial stems provide additional fixation and are generally used in combination with cones. The aim of this study was to examine the role of the stems in the overall stability of tibial implants when metaphyseal cones are used for rTKA. Methods. This computational study investigates whether stems are required to augment metaphyseal cones at rTKA. Three cemented stem scenarios (no stem, 50 mm stem, and 100 mm stem) were investigated with 10 mm-deep uncontained posterior and medial tibial defects using four loading scenarios designed to mimic activities of daily living. Results. Small micromotions (mean < 12 µm) were found to occur at the bone-implant interface for all loading cases with or without a stem. Stem inclusion was associated with lower micromotion, however these reductions were too small to have any clinical significance. Peak interface micromotion, even when the cone is used without a stem, was too small to effect osseointegration. The maximum difference occurred with stair descent loading. Stress concentrations in the bone occurred around the inferior aspect of each implant, with the largest occurring at the end of the long stem; these may lead to end-of-stem pain. Stem use is also found to result in stress shielding in the bone along the stem. Conclusion. When a metaphyseal cone is used at rTKA to manage uncontained posterior or medial defects of up to 10 mm depth, stem use may not be necessary. Cite this article:Bone Joint Res. 2020;9(4):162–172

The February 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Trial of vancomycin and cefazolin as surgical prophylaxis in arthroplasty; Is preoperative posterior femoral neck tilt a risk factor for fixation failure? Cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fractures of the hip; Periprosthetic fractures in larger hydroxyapatite-coated stems: are collared stems a better alternative for total hip arthroplasty?; Postoperative periprosthetic fracture following hip arthroplasty with a polished taper slip versus composite beam stem; Is oral tranexamic acid as good as intravenous?; Stem design and the risk of early periprosthetic femur fractures following THA in elderly patients; Does powered femoral broaching compromise patient safety in total hip arthroplasty?

The August 2023 Hip & Pelvis Roundup. 360. looks at: Using machine learning to predict venous thromboembolism and major bleeding events following total joint arthroplasty; Antibiotic length in revision total hip arthroplasty; Preoperative colonization and worse outcomes; Short stem cemented total hip arthroplasty; What are the outcomes of one- versus two-stage revisions in the UK?; To cement or not to cement? The best approach in hemiarthroplasty; Similar re-revisions in cemented and cementless femoral revisions for periprosthetic femoral fractures in total hip arthroplasty; Are hip precautions still needed?

Aims

Cementing in arthroplasty for hip fracture is associated with improved postoperative function, but may have an increased risk of early mortality compared to uncemented fixation. Quantifying this mortality risk is important in providing safe patient care. This study investigated the association between cement use in arthroplasty and mortality at 30 days and one year in patients aged 50 years and over with hip fracture.

Many different lengths of stem are available for use in primary total hip replacement, and the morphology of the proximal femur varies greatly. The more recently developed shortened stems provide a distribution of stress which closely mimics that of the native femur. Shortening the femoral component potentially comes at the cost of decreased initial stability. Clinical studies on the performance of shortened cemented and cementless stems are promising, although long-term follow-up studies are lacking. We provide an overview of the current literature on the anatomical features of the proximal femur and the biomechanical aspects and clinical outcomes associated with the length of the femoral component in primary hip replacement, and suggest a classification system for the length of femoral stems. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:442-8

The outcome of 219 revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in 98 male and 121 female patients, using 137 long length and 82 standard length cemented collarless double-taper femoral stems in 211 patients, with a mean age of 72 years (30 to 90) and mean follow-up of six years (two to 18) have been described previously. We have extended the follow-up to a mean of 13 years (8 to 20) in this cohort of patients in which the pre-operative bone deficiency Paprosky grading was IIIA or worse in 79% and 73% of femurs with long and standard stems, respectively. For the long stem revision group, survival to re-revision for aseptic loosening at 14 years was 97% (95% confidence interval (CI) 91 to 100) and in patients aged > 70 years, survival was 100%. Two patients (two revisions) were lost to follow-up and 86 patients with 88 revisions had died. Worst-case analysis for survival to re-revision for aseptic loosening at 14 years was 95% (95% CI 89 to 100) and 99% (95% CI 96 to 100) for patients aged > 70 years. One additional long stem was classified as loose radiographically but not revised. For the standard stem revision group, survival to re-revision for aseptic loosening at 14 years was 91% (95% CI 83 to 99). No patients were lost to follow-up and 49 patients with 51 hips had died. No additional stems were classified as loose radiographically. Femoral revision using a cemented collarless double-taper stem, particularly with a long length stem, and in patients aged > 70 years, continues to yield excellent results up to 20 years post-operatively, including in hips with considerable femoral metaphyseal bone loss. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1038–45

Aims

The aim of this study was to describe services available to patients with periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPFF) in England and Wales, with focus on variation between centres and areas for care improvement.

The February 2023 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Total hip arthroplasty or internal fixation for hip fracture?; Significant deterioration in quality of life and increased frailty in patients waiting more than six months for total hip or knee arthroplasty: a cross-sectional multicentre study; Long-term cognitive trajectory after total joint arthroplasty; Costal cartilage grafting for a large osteochondral lesion of the femoral head; Foley catheters not a problem in the short term; Revision hips still a mortality burden?; How to position implants with a robotic arm; Uncemented stems in hip fracture?

The April 2023 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Do technical errors determine outcomes of operatively managed femoral neck fractures in younger adults?; Single-stage or two-stage revision for hip prosthetic joint infection (INFORM); Fixation better than revision in type B periprosthetic fractures of taper slip stems; Can you maximize femoral head size at the expense of liner thickness?; Plasma D-dimer for periprosthetic joint infection?; How important is in vivo oxidation?; Total hip arthroplasty for HIV patients with osteonecrosis.

The August 2024 Hip & Pelvis Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Understanding perceived leg length discrepancy post-total hip arthroplasty: the role of pelvic obliquity; Influence of femoral stem design on revision rates in total hip arthroplasty; Outcomes of arthroscopic labral treatment of femoroacetabular impingement in adolescents; Characteristics and quality of online searches for direct anterior versus posterior approach for total hip arthroplasty; Rapid return to braking after anterior and posterior approach total hip arthroplasty; How much protection does a collar provide?; Timing matters: reducing infection risk in total hip arthroplasty with corticosteroid injection intervals; Identifying pain recovery patterns in total hip arthroplasty using PROMIS data.

Aims

The aim of this study was to analyze how proximal radial neck resorption (PRNR) starts and progresses radiologically in two types of press-fit radial head arthroplasties (RHAs), and to investigate its clinical relevance.

Aims

The Vantage Total Ankle System is a fourth-generation low-profile fixed-bearing implant that has been available since 2016. We aimed to describe our early experience with this implant.

Aims. Compared with primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), revision surgery can be challenging. The cement-in-cement femoral revision technique involves removing a femoral component from a well-fixed femoral cement mantle and cementing a new stem into the original mantle. This technique is widely used and when carried out for the correct indications, is fast, relatively inexpensive and carries a reduced short-term risk for the patient compared with the alternative of removing well-fixed cement. We report the outcomes of this procedure when two commonly used femoral stems are used. Patients and Methods. We identified 1179 cement-in-cement stem revisions involving an Exeter or a Lubinus stem reported to the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register (SHAR) between January 1999 and December 2015. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed. Results. Survivorship is reported up to six years and was better in the Exeter group (91% standard deviation (. sd). 2.8% versus 85% . sd. 5.0%) (p = 0.02). There was, however, no significant difference in the survival of the stem and risk of re-revision for any reason (p = 0.58) and for aseptic loosening (p = 0.97), between revisions in which the Exeter stem (94% . sd. 2.2%; 98% . sd. 1.6%) was used compared with those in which the Lubinus stem (95% . sd. 3.2%; 98% . sd.  2.2%) was used. The database did not allow identification of whether a further revision was indicated for loosening of the acetabular or femoral component or both. Conclusion. The cement-in-cement technique for revision of the femoral component gave promising results using both designs of stem, six years post-operatively. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B(4 Supple B):27–32