Persistent groin pain after seemingly successful
total hip replacement (THR) appears to have become more common.
Recent studies have indicated a high incidence after metal-on-polyethylene
and metal-on-metal conventional THR and it has been documented in
up to 18% of patients after metal-on-metal resurfacing. There are many
causes, including acetabular loosening, stress fracture, and iliopsoas
tendonitis and impingement. The evaluation of this problem requires
a careful history and examination, plain radiographs and an algorithmic approach
to special diagnostic imaging and tests. Non-operative treatment
is not usually successful. Specific operative treatment depending
on the cause of the pain usually involves revision of the acetabular
component, iliopsoas tenotomy or other procedures, and is usually
successful. Here, an appropriate algorithm is described.
The August 2014 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: Serial MRIs best for pseudotumour surveillance; Is ultrasound good enough for MOM follow-up?; Does weight loss in obese patients help?; Measuring acetabular anteversion on plain films; Two-stage one-stage too many in fungal hip revisions? and 35 is the magic number in arthroplasty.
We compared the clinical and radiological outcomes
of two cementless femoral stems in the treatment of patients with
a Garden III or IV fracture of the femoral neck. A total of 70 patients At final follow-up there were no statistically significant differences
between the short anatomical and the conventional stems with regard
to the mean Harris hip score (85.7 (66 to 100) Our study demonstrated that despite the poor bone quality in
these elderly patients with a fracture of the femoral neck, osseo-integration
was obtained in all hips in both groups. However, the incidence
of thigh pain, pulmonary microemboli and peri-prosthetic fracture
was significantly higher in the conventional stem group than in
the short stem group.
Surface hip replacement (SHR) is generally used
in younger, active patients as an alternative conventional total
hip replacement in part because of the ability to preserve femoral
bone. This major benefit of surface replacement will only hold true
if revision procedures of SHRs are found to provide good clinical
results. A retrospective review of SHR revisions between 2007 and 2012
was presented, and the type of revision and aetiologies were recorded.
There were 55 SHR revisions, of which 27 were in women. At a mean
follow-up of 2.3 years (0.72 to 6.4), the mean post-operative Harris
hip score (HHS) was 94.8 (66 to 100). Overall 23 were revised for mechanical
reasons, nine for impingement, 13 for metallosis, nine for unexplained
pain and one for sepsis. Of the type of revision surgery performed,
14 were femoral-only revisions; four were acetabular-only revisions,
and 37 were complete revisions. We did not find that clinical scores were significantly different
between gender or different types of revisions. However, the mean
post-operative HHS was significantly lower in patients revised for
unexplained pain compared with patients revised for mechanical reasons
(86.9 (66 to 100) Based on the overall clinical results, we believe that revision
of SHR can have good or excellent results and warrants a continued
use of the procedure in selected patients. Close monitoring of these
patients facilitates early intervention, as we believe that tissue
damage may be related to the duration of an ongoing problem. There
should be a low threshold to revise a surface replacement if there
is component malposition, rising metal ion levels, or evidence of
soft-tissue abnormalities. Cite this article:
The December 2013 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: Enhanced recovery works; Acetabular placement; Exercise better than rest in osteoarthritis patients; if Birmingham hip resurfacing is immune from pseudotumour; HIV and arthroplasty; Labral tears revisited; Prophylactic surgery for FAI; and Ceramics and impaction grafting
There is widespread concern regarding the incidence of adverse soft-tissue reactions after metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacement. Recent National Joint Registry data have shown clear differences in the rates of failure of different designs of hip resurfacing. Our aim was to update the failure rates related to metal debris for the Articular Surface Replacement (ASR). A total of 505 of these were implanted. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a failure rate of 25% at six years for the ASR resurfacing and of 48.8% for the ASR total hip replacement (THR). Of 257 patients with a minimum follow-up of two years, 67 (26.1%) had a serum cobalt concentration which was greater than 7 μg/l. Co-ordinate measuring machine analysis of revised components showed that all patients suffering adverse tissue reactions in the resurfacing group had abnormal wear of the bearing surfaces. Six THR patients had relatively low rates of articular wear, but were found to have considerable damage at the trunion-taper interface. Our results suggest that wear at the modular junction is an important factor in the development of adverse tissue reactions after implantation of a large-diameter MoM THR.
The term developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH)
describes a spectrum of disorders that results in abnormal development
of the hip joint. If not treated successfully in childhood, these
patients may go on to develop hip symptoms and/or secondary osteoarthritis
in adulthood. In this review we describe the altered anatomy encountered
in adults with DDH along with the management options, and the challenges
associated with hip arthroscopy, osteotomies and arthroplasty for
the treatment of DDH in young adults. Cite this article:
Eighteen hip fusions were converted to total
hip replacements. A constrained acetabular liner was used in three hips.
Mean follow up was five years (two to 15). Two (11%) hips failed,
requiring revision surgery and two patients (11%) had injury to
the peroneal nerve. Heterotopic ossification developed in seven
(39%) hips, in one case resulting in joint ankylosis. No hips dislocated. Conversion of hip fusion to hip replacement carries an increased
risk of heterotopic ossification and neurological injury. We advise
prophylaxis against heterotropic ossification. When there is concern
about hip stability we suggest that the use of a constrained acetabular
liner is considered. Despite the potential for complications, this procedure
had a high success rate and was effective in restoring hip function.
This multicentre study analysed 12 alumina ceramic-on-ceramic
components retrieved from squeaking total hip replacements after
a mean of 23 months
We sought to establish the incidence of joint failure secondary to adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD) following metal-on-metal hip resurfacing in a large, three surgeon, multicentre study involving 4226 hips with a follow-up of 10 to 142 months. Three implants were studied: the Articular Surface Replacement; the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing; and the Conserve Plus. Retrieved implants underwent analysis using a co-ordinate measuring machine to determine volumetric wear. There were 58 failures associated with ARMD. The median chromium and cobalt concentrations in the failed group were significantly higher than in the control group (p <
0.001). Survival analysis showed a failure rate in the patients with Articular Surface Replacement of 9.8% at five years, compared with <
1% at five years for the Conserve Plus and 1.5% at ten years for the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing. Two ARMD patients had relatively low wear of the retrieved components. Increased wear from the metal-on-metal bearing surface was associated with an increased rate of failure secondary to ARMD. However, the extent of tissue destruction at revision surgery did not appear to be dose-related to the volumetric wear.
The aims of this study were to compare the diagnostic test characteristics
of ultrasound alone, metal artefact reduction sequence MRI (MARS-MRI)
alone, and ultrasound combined with MARS-MRI for identifying intra-operative
pseudotumours in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MoMHR) patients
undergoing revision surgery. This retrospective diagnostic accuracy study involved 39 patients
(40 MoMHRs). The time between imaging modalities was a mean of 14.6
days (0 to 90), with imaging performed at a mean of 5.3 months (0.06
to 12) before revision. The prevalence of intra-operative pseudotumours
was 82.5% (n = 33).Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to investigate the
possible benefit of large-head metal-on-metal bearing on a stem
for primary hip replacement compared with a 28 mm diameter conventional
metal-on-polyethylene bearing in a prospective randomised controlled
trial. We investigated cemented stem behaviour between these two
different bearings using Einzel-Bild-Röntgen-Analyse, clinical and
patient reported measures (Harris hip score, Western Ontario and
McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, Short Form-36 and satisfaction)
and whole blood metal ion levels at two years. A power study indicated
that 50 hips were needed in each group to detect subsidence of >
5 mm at two years with a
p-value of <
0.05. Significant improvement (p <
0.001) was found in the mean
clinical and patient reported outcomes at two years for both groups.
Comparison of outcomes between the groups at two years showed no
statistically significant difference for mean stem migration, clinical
and patient reported outcomes; except overall patient satisfaction which
was higher for metal-on-metal group (p = 0.05). Metal ion levels
were raised above the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory
Agency advised safety level (7 µg per litre) in 20% of the metal-on-metal
group and in one patient in metal-on-polyethylene group (who had
a metal-on-metal implant on the contralateral side). Two patients
in the metal-on-metal group were revised, one for pseudotumour and
one for peri-prosthetic fracture. Use of large modular heads is associated with a risk of raised
whole blood metal ion levels despite using a proven bearing from
resurfacing. The head-neck junction or excess stem micromotion are
possibly the weak links warranting further research.
Arthroscopy of the native hip is an established diagnostic and therapeutic procedure. Its application in the symptomatic replaced hip is still being explored. We describe the use of arthroscopy of the hip in 24 symptomatic patients following total hip replacement, resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip and partial resurfacing (study group), and compared it with arthroscopy of the native hip in 24 patients (control group). A diagnosis was made or confirmed at arthroscopy in 23 of the study group and a therapeutic arthroscopic intervention resulted in relief of symptoms in ten of these. In a further seven patients it led to revision hip replacement. In contrast, arthroscopy in the control group was diagnostic in all 24 patients and the resulting arthroscopic therapeutic intervention provided symptomatic relief in 21. The mean operative time in the study group (59.7 minutes (35 to 93)) was less than in the control group (71 minutes (40 to 100), p = 0.04) but the arthroscopic approach was more difficult in the arthroplasty group. We suggest that arthroscopy has a role in the management of patients with a symptomatic arthroplasty when other investigations have failed to provide a diagnosis.
We report the survival, radiological and functional outcomes of a single surgeon series of his first 144 consecutive Birmingham hip resurfacing procedures (130 patients) at a minimum of ten years. There were ten revisions during this time. Although no patients were lost to follow-up some did not complete the scoring assessment or undergo radiological assessment at ten years. The ten-year survival for male patients was 98.0% (95% confidence interval 95.2 to 100). The ten-year survival for the total cohort with aseptic revision as the endpoint was 95.5% (95% confidence interval 91.8 to 99.0) and including revisions for sepsis was 93.5% (95% confidence interval 89.2 to 97.6). The median modified Oxford hip score at ten years was 4.2% (interquartile range 0 to 19) and the median University of California, Los Angeles score was 7.0 (interquartile range 5.0 to 8.0). This study confirms the midterm reports that metal-on-metal hip resurfacing using the Birmingham Hip provides a durable alternative to total hip replacement, particularly in younger male patients wishing to maintain a high level of function, with low risk of revision for at least ten years.
This study reports the clinical outcome of reconstruction
of deficient abductor muscles following revision total hip arthroplasty
(THA), using a fresh–frozen allograft of the extensor mechanism
of the knee. A retrospective analysis was conducted of 11 consecutive
patients with a severe limp because of abductor deficiency which
was confirmed on MRI scans. The mean age of the patients (three
men and eight women) was 66.7 years (52 to 84), with a mean follow-up
of 33 months (24 to 41). Following surgery, two patients had no limp, seven had a mild
limp, and two had a persistent severe limp (p = 0.004). The mean
power of the abductors improved on the Medical Research Council
scale from 2.15 to 3.8 (p <
0.001). Pre-operatively, all patients
required a stick or walking frame; post-operatively, four patients
were able to walk without an aid. Overall, nine patients had severe
or moderate pain pre-operatively; ten patients had no or mild pain
post-operatively. At final review, the Harris hip score was good in five patients,
fair in two and poor in four. We conclude that using an extensor mechanism allograft is relatively
effective in the treatment of chronic abductor deficiency of the
hip after THA when techniques such as local tissue transfer are
not possible. Longer-term follow-up is necessary before the technique can be
broadly applied. Cite this article:
The June 2014 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: Modular femoral necks: early signs are not good; is corrosion to blame for modular neck failures; metal-on-metal is not quite a closed book; no excess failures in fixation of displaced femoral neck fractures; noise no problem in hip replacement; heterotopic ossification after hip arthroscopy: are NSAIDs the answer?; thrombotic and bleeding events surprisingly low in total joint replacement; and the elephant in the room: complications and surgical volume.
The February 2013 Hip &
Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: amazing alumina; dual mobility; white cells and periprosthetic infection; cartilage and impingement surgery; acetabulum in combination; cementless ceramic prosthesis; metal-on-metal hips; and whether size matters in failure.
We report the use of a 15° face-changing cementless
acetabular component in patients undergoing total hip replacement
for osteoarthritis secondary to developmental dysplasia of the hip.
The rationale behind its design and the surgical technique used
for its implantation are described. It is distinctly different from
a standard cementless hemispherical component as it is designed
to position the bearing surface at the optimal angle of inclination,
that is, <
45°, while maximising the cover of the component by
host bone.
Large femoral heads have been used with increasing
frequency over the last decade. The prime reason is likely the effect
of large heads on stability. The larger head neck ratio, combined
with the increased jump distance of larger heads result in a greater
arc of impingement free motion, and greater resistance to dislocation
in a provocative position. Multiple studies have demonstrated clear
clinical efficacy in diminishing dislocation rates with the use
of large femoral heads. With crosslinked polyethylene, wear has
been shown to be equivalent between larger and smaller heads. However,
the stability advantages of increasing diameter beyond 38 mm have
not been clearly demonstrated. More importantly, recent data implicates
large heads in the increasing prevalence of groin pain and psoas impingement.
There are clear benefits with larger femoral head diameters, but
the advantages of diameters beyond 38 mm have not yet been demonstrated
clinically.
Lately, concerns have arisen following the use of large metal-on-metal bearings in hip replacements owing to reports of catastrophic soft-tissue reactions resulting in implant failure and associated complications. This review examines the literature and contemporary presentations on current clinical dilemmas in metal-on-metal hip replacement.