Aims

The aim of this study was to examine the results of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) undertaken for stiffness in the absence of sepsis or loosening.

The ‘jumbo’ acetabular component is now commonly used in acetabular revision surgery where there is extensive bone loss. It offers high surface contact, permits weight bearing over a large area of the pelvis, the need for bone grafting is reduced and it is usually possible to restore centre of rotation of the hip. Disadvantages of its use include a technique in which bone structure may not be restored, a risk of excessive posterior bone loss during reaming, an obligation to employ screw fixation, limited bone ingrowth with late failure and high hip centre, leading to increased risk of dislocation. Contraindications include unaddressed pelvic dissociation, inability to implant the component with a rim fit, and an inability to achieve screw fixation. Use in acetabulae with < 50% bone stock has also been questioned. Published results have been encouraging in the first decade, with late failures predominantly because of polyethylene wear and aseptic loosening. Dislocation is the most common complication of jumbo acetabular revisions, with an incidence of approximately 10%, and often mandates revision. Based on published results, a hemispherical component with an enhanced porous coating, highly cross-linked polyethylene, and a large femoral head appears to represent the optimum tribology for jumbo acetabular revisions.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):64–7.

The August 2015 Hip & Pelvis Roundup360 looks at: The well-fixed acetabular revision; Predicting complications in revision arthroplasty; Is infection associated with fixation?; Front or back? An enduring question in hip surgery; Muscle-sparing approaches?; Gabapentin as a post-operative analgesic adjunct; An Indian take on AVN of the hip; Weight loss and arthroplasty

The aims of this study were to determine the functional impact and financial burden of isolated and recurrent dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Our secondary goal was to determine whether there was a difference between patients who were treated non-operatively and those who were treated operatively.

We retrospectively reviewed 71 patients who had suffered dislocation of a primary THA. Their mean age was 67 years (41 to 92) and the mean follow-up was 3.8 years (2.1 to 8.2).

Because patients with recurrent dislocation were three times more likely to undergo operative treatment (p < 0.0001), they ultimately had a significantly higher mean Harris Hip Score (HHS) (p = 0.0001), lower mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) scores (p = 0.001) and a higher mean SF-12 score (p < 0.0001) than patients with a single dislocation. Likewise, those who underwent operative treatment had a higher mean HHS (p < 0.0001), lower mean WOMAC score (p < 0.0001) and a higher mean SF-12 score (p < 0.0001) than those who were treated non-operatively.

Recurrent dislocation and operative treatment increased costs by 300% (£11 456; p < 0.0001) and 40% (£5217; p < 0.0001), respectively.

The operative treatment of recurrent dislocation results in significantly better function than non-operative management. Moreover, the increase in costs for operative treatment is modest compared with that of non-operative measures.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:1046–9.

When fracture of an extensively porous-coated femoral component occurs, its removal at revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) may require a femoral osteotomy and the use of a trephine. The remaining cortical bone after using the trephine may develop thermally induced necrosis. A retrospective review identified 11 fractured, well-fixed, uncemented, extensively porous-coated femoral components requiring removal using a trephine with a minimum of two years of follow-up.

The mean time to failure was 4.6 years (1.7 to 9.1, standard deviation (sd) 2.3). These were revised using a larger extensively porous coated component, fluted tapered modular component, a proximally coated modular component, or a proximal femoral replacement. The mean clinical follow-up after revision THA was 4.9 years (2 to 22, sd 3.1). The mean diameter of the femoral component increased from 12.7 mm (sd 1.9) to 16.2 mm (sd 3.4; p >  0.001). Two revision components had radiographic evidence of subsidence that remained radiographically stable at final follow-up. The most common post-operative complication was instability affecting six patients (54.5%) on at least one occasion.

A total of four patients (36.4%) required further revision: three for instability and one for fracture of the revision component. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean Harris hip score before implant fracture (82.4; sd 18.3) and after trephine removal and revision THA (81.2; sd 14.8, p = 0.918).

These findings suggest that removal of a fractured, well-fixed, uncemented, extensively porous-coated femoral component using a trephine does not compromise subsequent fixation at revision THA and the patient’s pre-operative level of function can be restored. However, the loss of proximal bone stock before revision may be associated with a high rate of dislocation post-operatively.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1192–6.

Adverse reaction to wear and corrosion debris is a cause for concern in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Modular junctions are a potential source of such wear products and are associated with secondary pseudotumour formation.

We present a consecutive series of 17 patients treated at our unit for this complication following metal-on-highly cross-linked polyethylene (MoP) THA. We emphasise the risk of misdiagnosis as infection, and present the aggregate laboratory results and pathological findings in this series.

The clinical presentation was pain, swelling or instability. Solid, cystic and mixed soft-tissue lesions were noted on imaging and confirmed intra-operatively. Corrosion at the head–neck junction was noted in all cases. No bacteria were isolated on multiple pre- and intra-operative samples yet the mean erythrocyte sedimentation rate was 49 (9 to 100) and C-reactive protein 32 (0.6 to 106) and stromal polymorphonuclear cell counts were noted in nine cases.

Adverse soft–tissue reactions can occur in MoP THA owing to corrosion products released from the head–neck junction. The diagnosis should be carefully considered when investigating pain after THA. This may avoid the misdiagnosis of periprosthetic infection with an unidentified organism and mitigate the unnecessary management of these cases with complete single- or two-stage exchange.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1024–1030.

Degenerative problems of the hip in patients with childhood and adult onset neuromuscular disorders can be challenging to treat. Many orthopaedic surgeons are reluctant to recommend total hip replacement (THR) for patients with underlying neuromuscular disorders due to the perceived increased risks of dislocation, implant loosening, and lack of information about the functional outcomes and potential benefits of these procedures in these patients. Modular femoral components and alternative bearings which facilitate the use of large femoral heads, constrained acetabular components and perhaps more importantly, a better understanding about the complications and outcomes of THR in the patient with neuromuscular disorders, make this option viable. This paper will review the current literature and our experience with THR in the more frequently encountered neuromuscular disorders.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):27–31.

Neurological conditions affecting the hip pose a considerable challenge in replacement surgery since poor and imbalanced muscle tone predisposes to dislocation and loosening. Consequently, total hip replacement (THR) is rarely performed in such patients. In a systematic review of the literature concerning THR in neurological conditions, we found only 13 studies which described the outcome. We have reviewed the evidence and discussed the technical challenges of this procedure in patients with cerebral palsy, Parkinson’s disease, poliomyelitis and following a cerebrovascular accident, spinal injury or development of a Charcot joint. Contrary to traditional perceptions, THR can give a good outcome in these often severly disabled patients.

We are currently facing an epidemic of periprosthetic fractures around the hip. They may occur either during surgery or post-operatively. Although the acetabulum may be involved, the femur is most commonly affected. We are being presented with new, difficult fracture patterns around cemented and cementless implants, and we face the challenge of an elderly population who may have grossly deficient bone and may struggle to rehabilitate after such injuries. The correct surgical management of these fractures is challenging. This article will review the current choices of implants and techniques available to deal with periprosthetic fractures of the femur.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):48–55.

Dislocation is one of the most common causes of patient and surgeon dissatisfaction following hip replacement and to treat it, the causes must first be understood. Patient factors include age greater than 70 years, medical comorbidities, female gender, ligamentous laxity, revision surgery, issues with the abductors, and patient education. Surgeon factors include the annual quantity of procedures and experience, the surgical approach, adequate restoration of femoral offset and leg length, component position, and soft-tissue or bony impingement. Implant factors include the design of the head and neck region, and so-called skirts on longer neck lengths. There should be offset choices available in order to restore soft-tissue tension. Lipped liners aid in gaining stability, yet if improperly placed may result in impingement and dislocation. Late dislocation may result from polyethylene wear, soft-tissue destruction, trochanteric or abductor disruption and weakness, or infection. Understanding the causes of hip dislocation facilitates prevention in a majority of instances. Proper pre-operative planning includes the identification of patients with a high offset in whom inadequate restoration of offset will reduce soft-tissue tension and abductor efficiency. Component position must be accurate to achieve stability without impingement. Finally, patient education cannot be over-emphasised, as most dislocations occur early, and are preventable with proper instructions.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:67–9.

A total of 31 patients, (20 women, 11 men; mean age 62.5 years old; 23 to 81), who underwent conversion of a Girdlestone resection-arthroplasty (RA) to a total hip replacement (THR) were compared with 93 patients, (60 women, 33 men; mean age 63.4 years old; 20 to 89), who had revision THR surgery for aseptic loosening in a retrospective matched case-control study. Age, gender and the extent of the pre-operative bone defect were similar in all patients. Mean follow-up was 9.3 years (5 to 18).

Pre-operative function and range of movement were better in the control group (p = 0.01 and 0.003, respectively) and pre-operative leg length discrepancy (LLD) was greater in the RA group (p < 0.001). The post-operative clinical outcome was similar in both groups except for mean post-operative LLD, which was greater in the study group (p = 0.003). There was a significant interaction effect for LLD in the study group (p < 0.001). A two-way analysis of variance showed that clinical outcome depended on patient age (patients older than 70 years old had worse pre-operative pain, p = 0.017) or bone defect (patients with a large acetabular bone defect had higher LLD, p = 0.006, worse post-operative function p = 0.009 and range of movement, p = 0.005), irrespective of the group.

Despite major acetabular and femoral bone defects requiring complex surgical reconstruction techniques, THR after RA shows a clinical outcome similar to those obtained in aseptic revision surgery for hips with similar sized bone defects.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1478–84.

We retrospectively reviewed 44 consecutive patients (50 hips) who underwent acetabular re-revision after a failed previous revision that had been performed using structural or morcellised allograft bone, with a cage or ring for uncontained defects. Of the 50 previous revisions, 41 cages and nine rings were used with allografts for 14 minor-column and 36 major-column defects. We routinely assessed the size of the acetabular bone defect at the time of revision and re-revision surgery. This allowed us to assess whether host bone stock was restored. We also assessed the outcome of re-revision surgery in these circumstances by means of radiological characteristics, rates of failure and modes of failure. We subsequently investigated the factors that may affect the potential for the restoration of bone stock and the durability of the re-revision reconstruction using multivariate analysis.

At the time of re-revision, there were ten host acetabula with no significant defects, 14 with contained defects, nine with minor-column, seven with major-column defects and ten with pelvic discontinuity. When bone defects at re-revision were compared with those at the previous revision, there was restoration of bone stock in 31 hips, deterioration of bone stock in nine and remained unchanged in ten. This was a significant improvement (p <  0.001). Morselised allografting at the index revision was not associated with the restoration of bone stock.

In 17 hips (34%), re-revision was possible using a simple acetabular component without allograft, augments, rings or cages. There were 47 patients with a mean follow-up of 70 months (6 to 146) available for survival analysis. Within this group, the successful cases had a minimum follow-up of two years after re-revision. There were 22 clinical or radiological failures (46.7%), 18 of which were due to aseptic loosening. The five and ten year Kaplan–Meier survival rate was 75% (95% CI, 60 to 86) and 56% (95% CI, 40 to 70) respectively with aseptic loosening as the endpoint. The rate of aseptic loosening was higher for hips with pelvic discontinuity (p = 0.049) and less when the allograft had been in place for longer periods (p = 0.040).

The use of a cage or ring over structural allograft bone for massive uncontained defects in acetabular revision can restore host bone stock and facilitate subsequent re-revision surgery to a certain extent.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:319–24.

Aims

Reconstruction of the acetabulum after failed total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be a surgical challenge in the presence of severe bone loss. We report the long-term survival of a porous tantalum revision acetabular component, its radiological appearance and quality of life outcomes.

The technique of femoral cement-in-cement revision is well established, but there are no previous series reporting its use on the acetabular side at the time of revision total hip replacement. We describe the technique and report the outcome of 60 consecutive acetabular cement-in-cement revisions in 59 patients at a mean follow-up of 8.5 years (5 to 12). All had a radiologically and clinically well-fixed acetabular cement mantle at the time of revision. During the follow-up 29 patients died, but no hips were lost to follow-up. The two most common indications for acetabular revision were recurrent dislocation (46, 77%) and to complement femoral revision (12, 20%).

Of the 60 hips, there were two cases of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component (3.3%) requiring re-revision. No other hip was clinically or radiologically loose (96.7%) at the latest follow-up. One hip was re-revised for infection, four for recurrent dislocation and one for disarticulation of a constrained component. At five years the Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 100% for aseptic loosening and 92.2% (95% CI 84.8 to 99.6), with revision for any cause as the endpoint.

These results support the use of cement-in-cement revision on the acetabular side in appropriate cases. Theoretical advantages include preservation of bone stock, reduced operating time, reduced risk of complications and durable fixation.

Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is projected to increase by 137% from the years 2005 to 2030. Reconstruction of the femur with massive bone loss can be a formidable undertaking. The goals of revision surgery are to create a stable construct, preserve bone and soft tissues, augment deficient host bone, improve function, provide a foundation for future surgery, and create a biomechanically restored hip. Options for treatment of the compromised femur include: resection arthroplasty, allograft prosthetic composite (APC), proximal femoral replacement, cementless fixation with a modular tapered fluted stem, and impaction grafting. The purpose of this article is to review the treatment options along with their associated outcomes in the more severe femoral defects (Paprosky types IIIb and IV) in revision THA.

Hip arthrodesis remains a viable surgical technique in well selected patients, typically the young manual labourer with isolated unilateral hip disease. Despite this, its popularity with patients and surgeons has decreased due to the evolution of hip replacement, and is seldom chosen by young adult patients today. The surgeon is more likely to encounter a patient who requests conversion to total hip replacement (THR). The most common indications are a painful pseudarthrosis, back pain, ipsilateral knee pain or contralateral hip pain. Occasionally the patient will request conversion because of difficulty with activities of daily living, body image and perceived cosmesis. The technique of conversion and a discussion of the results are presented.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:114–19.

We report the use of an allograft prosthetic composite for reconstruction of the skeletal defect in complex revision total hip replacement for severe proximal femoral bone loss. Between 1986 and 1999, 72 patients (20 men, 52 women) with a mean age of 59.9 years (38 to 78) underwent reconstruction using this technique.

At a mean follow-up of 12 years (8 to 20) 57 patients were alive, 14 had died and one was lost to follow-up. Further revision was performed in 19 hips at a mean of 44.5 months (11 to 153) post-operatively. Causes of failure were aseptic loosening in four, allograft resorption in three, allograft nonunion in two, allograft fracture in four, fracture of the stem in one, and deep infection in five. The survivorship of the allograft-prosthesis composite at ten years was 69.0% (95% confidence interval 67.7 to 70.3) with 26 patients remaining at risk. Survivorship was statistically significantly affected by the severity of the pre-operative bone loss (Paprosky type IV; p = 0.019), the number of previous hip revisions exceeding two (p = 0.047), and the length of the allograft used (p = 0.005).

A moderator and panel of five experts led an interactive session in discussing five challenging and interesting patient case presentations involving surgery of the hip. The hip pathologies reviewed included failed open reduction internal fixation of subcapital femoral neck fracture, bilateral hip disease, evaluation of pain after metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty, avascular necrosis, aseptic loosening secondary to osteolysis and polyethylene wear, and management of ceramic femoral head fracture.

Trabecular metal (TM) augments are a relatively new option for reconstructing segmental bone loss during acetabular revision. We studied 34 failed hip replacements in 34 patients that were revised between October 2003 and March 2010 using a TM acetabular shell and one or two augments. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 69.3 years (46 to 86) and the mean follow-up was 64.5 months (27 to 107). In all, 18 patients had a minor column defect, 14 had a major column defect, and two were associated with pelvic discontinuity. The hip centre of rotation was restored in 27 patients (79.4%). The Oxford hip score increased from a mean of 15.4 points (6 to 25) before revision to a mean of 37.7 (29 to 47) at the final follow-up. There were three aseptic loosenings of the construct, two of them in the patients with pelvic discontinuity. One septic loosening also occurred in a patient who had previously had an infected hip replacement. The augments remained stable in two of the failed hips. Whenever there was a loose acetabular component in contact with a stable augment, progressive metal debris shedding was evident on the serial radiographs. Complications included another deep infection treated without revision surgery. Good clinical and radiological results can be expected for bone-deficient acetabula treated by a TM cup and augment, but for pelvic discontinuities this might not be a reliable option.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:166–72.

We report the results of 62 hips in 62 patients (17 males, 45 females) with mean age of 62.4 years (37 to 81), who underwent revision of the acetabular component of a total hip replacement due to aseptic loosening between May 2003 and November 2007. All hips had a Paprosky type IIIa acetabular defect. Acetabular revision was undertaken using a Procotyl E cementless oblong implant with modular side plates and a hook combined with impaction allografting.

At a mean follow-up of 60.5 months (36 to 94) with no patients lost to follow-up and one died due to unrelated illness, the complication rate was 38.7%. Complications included aseptic loosening (19 hips), deep infection (3 hips), broken hook and side plate (one hip) and a femoral nerve palsy (one hip). Further revision of the acetabular component was required in 18 hips (29.0%) and a further four hips (6.4%) are currently loose and awaiting revision.

We observed unacceptably high rates of complication and failure in our group of patients and cannot recommend this implant or technique.