The purpose of this study was twofold: first, to determine whether the five-year results of hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) in Canada justified the continued use of HRA; and second, to identify whether greater refinement of patient selection was warranted.

This was a retrospective cohort study that involved a review of 2773 HRAs performed between January 2001 and December 2008 at 11 Canadian centres. Cox’s proportional hazards models were used to analyse the predictors of failure of HRA. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was performed to predict the cumulative survival rate at five years. The factors analysed included age, gender, body mass index, pre-operative hip pathology, surgeon’s experience, surgical approach, implant sizes and implant types. The most common modes of failure were also analysed.

The 2773 HRAs were undertaken in 2450 patients: 2127 in men and 646 in women. The mean age at operation was 50.5 years (sd 8.72; 18 to 82) and mean follow-up was 3.4 years (sd 2.1; 2.0 to 10.1). At the last follow-up a total of 101 HRAs (3.6%) required revision. Using revision for all causes of failure as the endpoint, Kaplan–Meier survival analysis showed a cumulative survival of 96.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 96.1 to 96.9) at five years. With regard to gender, the five-year overall survival was 97.4% in men (95% CI 97.1 to 97.7) and 93.6% in women (95% CI 92.6 to 94.6). Female gender, smaller femoral components, specific implant types and a diagnosis of childhood hip problems were associated with higher rates of failure. The most common cause of failure was fracture of the femoral neck, followed by loosening of the femoral component.

The failure rates of HRA at five years justify the ongoing use of this technique in men. Female gender is an independent predictor of failure, and a higher failure rate at five years in women leads the authors to recommend this technique only in exceptional circumstances for women.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1044–50.

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.

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.

Tribocorrosion at the head–neck taper interface – so-called ‘taperosis’ – may be a source of metal ions and particulate debris in metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty (THA).

We examined the effect of femoral head length on fretting and corrosion in retrieved head–neck tapers in vivo for a minimum of two years (mean 8.7 years; 2.6 to 15.9). A total of 56 femoral heads ranging from 28 mm to 3 mm to 28 mm + 8 mm, and 17 femoral stems featuring a single taper design were included in the study. Fretting and corrosion were scored in three horizontally oriented concentric zones of each taper by stereomicroscopy.

Head length was observed to affect fretting (p = 0.03), with 28 mm + 8 mm femoral heads showing greater total fretting scores than all other head lengths. The central zone of the femoral head bore taper was subject to increased fretting damage (p = 0.01), regardless of head length or stem offset. High-offset femoral stems were associated with greater total fretting of the bore taper (p = 0.04).

Increased fretting damage is seen with longer head lengths and high-offset femoral stems, and occurs within a central concentric zone of the femoral head bore taper. Further investigation is required to determine the effect of increased head size, and variations in head–neck taper design.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:911–16.

We evaluated an operative technique, described by the Exeter Hip Unit, to assist accurate introduction of the femoral component. We assessed whether it led to a reduction in the rate of leg-length discrepancy after total hip arthroplasty (THA).

A total of 100 patients undergoing THA were studied retrospectively; 50 were undertaken using the test method and 50 using conventional methods as a control group. The groups were matched with respect to patient demographics and the grade of surgeon. Three observers measured the depth of placement of the femoral component on post-operative radiographs and measured the length of the legs.

There was a strong correlation between the depth of insertion of the femoral component and the templated depth in the test group (R = 0.92), suggesting accuracy of the technique. The mean leg-length discrepancy was 5.1 mm (0.6 to 21.4) pre-operatively and 1.3 mm (0.2 to 9.3) post-operatively. There was no difference between Consultants and Registrars as primary surgeons. Agreement between the templated and post-operative depth of insertion was associated with reduced post-operative leg-length discrepancy. The intra-class coefficient was R ≥ 0.88 for all measurements, indicating high observer agreement. The post-operative leg-length discrepancy was significantly lower in the test group (1.3 mm) compared with the control group (6.3 mm, p < 0.001).

The Exeter technique is reproducible and leads to a lower incidence of leg-length discrepancy after THA.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:154–9.

This review examines the future of total hip arthroplasty, aiming to avoid past mistakes

We assessed the orientation of the acetabular component in 1070 primary total hip arthroplasties with hard-on-soft, small diameter bearings, aiming to determine the size and site of the target zone that optimises outcome. Outcome measures included complications, dislocations, revisions and ΔOHS (the difference between the Oxford Hip Scores pre-operatively and five years post-operatively). A wide scatter of orientation was observed (2sd 15°). Placing the component within Lewinnek’s zone was not associated withimproved outcome. Of the different zone sizes tested (± 5°, ± 10° and ± 15°), only ± 15° was associated with a decreased rate of dislocation. The dislocation rate with acetabular components inside an inclination/anteversion zone of 40°/15° ± 15° was four times lower than those outside. The only zone size associated with statistically significant and clinically important improvement in OHS was ± 5°. The best outcomes (ΔOHS > 26) were achieved with a 45°/25° ± 5° zone.

This study demonstrated that with traditional technology surgeons can only reliably achieve a target zone of ±15°. As the optimal zone to diminish the risk of dislocation is also ±15°, surgeons should be able to achieve this. This is the first study to demonstrate that optimal orientation of the acetabular component improves the functional outcome. However, the target zone is small (± 5°) and cannot, with current technology, be consistently achieved.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:164–72.

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.

We investigated factors that were thought to be associated with an increased incidence of squeaking of ceramic-on-ceramic total hip replacements. Between June 1997 and December 2008 the three senior authors implanted 2406 primary total hip replacements with a ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surface. The mean follow-up was 10.6 years. The diagnosis was primary osteoarthritis in each case, and no patient had undergone previous surgery to the hip. We identified 74 squeaking hips (73 patients) giving an incidence of 3.1% at a mean follow-up of 9.5 years (4.1 to 13.3).

Taller, heavier and younger patients were significantly more likely to have hips that squeaked. Squeaking hips had a significantly higher range of post-operative internal (p = 0.001) and external rotation (p = 0.003) compared with silent hips. Patients with squeaking hips had significantly higher activity levels (p = 0.009). A squeaking hip was not associated with a significant difference in patient satisfaction (p = 0.24) or Harris hip score (p = 0.34). Four implant position factors enabled good prediction of squeaking. These were high acetabular component inclination, high femoral offset, lateralisation of the hip centre and either high or low acetabular component anteversion.

This is the largest study to date to examine patient factors and implant position factors that predispose to squeaking of a ceramic-on-ceramic hip. The results suggest that factors which increase the mechanical forces across the hip joint and factors which increase the risk of neck-to-rim impingement, and therefore edge-loading, are those that predispose to squeaking.

Large-head metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip replacements (THR) have given rise to concern. Comparative studies of small-head MoM THRs over a longer follow-up period are lacking. Our objective was to compare the incidence of complications such as infection, dislocation, revision, adverse local tissue reactions, mortality and radiological and clinical outcomes in small-head (28 mm) MoM and ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP) THRs up to 12 years post-operatively.

A prospective cohort study included 3341 THRs in 2714 patients. The mean age was 69.1 years (range 24 to 98) and 1848 (55.3%) were performed in women, with a mean follow-up of 115 months (18 to 201). There were 883 MoM and 2458 CoP bearings. Crude incidence rates (cases/1000 person-years) were: infection 1.3 vs 0.8; dislocation 3.3 vs 3.1 and all-cause revision 4.3 vs 2.2, respectively. There was a significantly higher revision rate after ten years (adjusted hazard ratio 9.4; 95% CI 2.6 to 33.6) in the MoM group, and ten of 26 patients presented with an adverse local tissue reaction at revision. No differences in mortality, osteolysis or clinical outcome were seen.

In conclusion, we found similar results for small-head MoM and CoP bearings up to ten years post-operatively, but after ten years MoM THRs had a higher risk of all-cause revision. Furthermore, the presence of an adverse response to metal debris seen in the small-head MOM group at revision is a cause for concern.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:868–75.

Hip replacement is a very successful operation and the outcome is usually excellent. There are recognised complications that seem increasingly to give rise to litigation. This paper briefly examines some common scenarios where litigation may be pursued against hip surgeons. With appropriate record keeping, consenting and surgical care, the claim can be successfully defended if not avoided. We hope this short summary will help to highlight some common pitfalls. There is extensive literature available for detailed study.

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) versus 99 (96 to 100); p = 0.029). There were two re-revisions for infection in the entire cohort.

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: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B, Supple A:88–91.

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

Dislocation is a common reason for revision following total hip replacement. This study investigated the relationship between the bearing surface and the risk of revision due to dislocation. It was based on 110 239 primary total hip replacements with a diagnosis of osteoarthritis collected by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry between September 1999 and December 2007. A total of 862 (0.78%) were revised because of dislocation. Ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces had a lower risk of requiring revision due to dislocation than did metal-on-polyethylene and ceramic-on-polyethylene surfaces, with a follow-up of up to seven years. However, ceramic-on-ceramic implants were more likely to have larger prosthetic heads and to have been implanted in younger patients. The size of the head of the femoral component and age are known to be independent predictors of dislocation. Therefore, the outcomes were stratified by the size of the head and age.

There is a significantly higher rate of revision for dislocation in ceramic-on-ceramic bearing surfaces than in metal-on-polyethylene implants when smaller sizes (≤ 28 mm) of the head were used in younger patients (< 65 years) (hazard ratio = 1.53, p = 0.041) and also with larger (> 28 mm) and in older patients (≥ 65 years) (hazard ratio = 1.73, p = 0.016).

Objectives

To quantify and compare peri-acetabular bone mineral density (BMD) between a monoblock acetabular component using a metal-on-metal (MoM) bearing and a modular titanium shell with a polyethylene (PE) insert. The secondary outcome was to measure patient-reported clinical function.

Noise generation has been reported with ceramic-on-ceramic articulations in total hip replacement (THR). This study evaluated 208 consecutive Delta Motion THRs at a mean follow-up of 21 months (12 to 35). There were 141 women and 67 men with a mean age of 59 years (22 to 84). Patients were reviewed clinically and radiologically, and the incidence of noise was determined using a newly described assessment method. Noise production was examined against range of movement, ligamentous laxity, patient-reported outcome scores, activity level and orientation of the acetabular component. There were 143 silent hips (69%), 22 (11%) with noises other than squeaking, 17 (8%) with unreproducible squeaking and 26 (13%) with reproducible squeaking. Hips with reproducible squeaking had a greater mean range of movement (p < 0.001) and mean ligament laxity (p = 0.004), smaller median head size (p = 0.01) and decreased mean acetabular component inclination (p = 0.02) and anteversion angle (p = 0.02) compared with the other groups. There was no relationship between squeaking and age (p = 0.13), height (p = 0.263), weight (p = 0.333), body mass index (p = 0.643), gender (p = 0.07) or patient outcome score (p = 0.422). There were no revisions during follow-up. Despite the surprisingly high incidence of squeaking, all patients remain satisfied with their hip replacement.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:160–5.

The purpose of this study was to compare the amount of acetabular bone removed during hip resurfacing (HR) and cementless total hip replacement (THR), after controlling for the diameter of the patient’s native femoral head. Based on a power analysis, 64 consecutive patients (68 hips) undergoing HR or THR were prospectively enrolled in the study. The following data were recorded intra-operatively: the diameter of the native femoral head, the largest reamer used, the final size of the acetabular component, the size of the prosthetic femoral head and whether a decision was made to increase the size of the acetabular component in order to accommodate a larger prosthetic femoral head. Results were compared using two-sided, independent samples Student’s t-tests. A statistically significant difference was seen in the mean ratio of the size of the acetabular component to the diameter of the native femoral head (HR: 1.05 (sd 0.04) versus THR: 1.09 (sd 0.05); p <  0.001) and largest acetabular reamer used to the diameter of the native femoral head (HR: 1.03 (sd 0.04) versus THR: 1.09 (sd 0.05); p < 0.001). The ratios varied minimally when the groups were subdivided by gender, age and obesity. The decision to increase the size of the acetabular component to accommodate a larger femoral head occurred more often in the THR group (27% versus 9%). Despite the emphasis on avoiding damage to the femoral neck during HR, the ratio of the size of the acetabular component to the diameter of the native femoral head was larger in cementless THR than in HR.

A prospective cohort of 222 patients who underwent revision hip replacement between April 2001 and March 2004 was evaluated to determine predictors of function, pain and activity level between one and two years post-operatively, and to define quality of life outcomes using validated patient reported outcome tools. Predictive models were developed and proportional odds regression analyses were performed to identify factors that predict quality of life outcomes at one and two years post-operatively. The dependent outcome variables were the Western Ontario and McMaster Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) function and pain scores, and University of California Los Angeles activity scores. The independent variables included patient demographics, operative factors, and objective quality of life parameters, including pre-operative WOMAC, and the Short Form-12 mental component score.

There was a significant improvement (t-test, p < 0.001) in all patient quality of life scores. In the predictive model, factors predictive of improved function (original regression analyses, p < 0.05) included a higher pre-operative WOMAC function score (p < 0.001), age between 60 and 70 years (p < 0.037), male gender (p = 0.017), lower Charnley class (p < 0.001) and aseptic loosening being the indication for revision (p < 0.003). Using the WOMAC pain score as an outcome variable, factors predictive of improvement included the pre-operative WOMAC function score (p = 0.001), age between 60 and 70 years (p = 0.004), male gender (p = 0.005), lower Charnley class (p = 0.001) and no previous revision procedure (p = 0.023). The pre-operative WOMAC function score (p = 0.001), the indication for the operation (p = 0.007), and the operating surgeon (p = 0.008) were significant predictors of the activity assessment at follow-up.

Predictors of quality of life outcomes after revision hip replacement were established. Although some patient-specific and surgery-specific variables were important, age, gender, Charnley class and pre-operative WOMAC function score had the most robust associations with outcome.