We retrieved 159 femoral heads at revision surgery to determine changes in surface configuration. Macroscopic wear of the head was observed in three bipolar hip prostheses as a result of three-body wear. There was a considerable change in surface roughness in the internal articulation of bipolar hip prostheses. Roughness in alumina heads was almost the same as that in new cobalt-chromium heads. The annual linear wear rate of polyethylene cups with alumina heads was less than that of cups with cobalt-chromium alloy heads. Polyethylene wear was increased in the prostheses which had increased roughness of the head.

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.

We compared the clinical outcome with femoral subsidence and radiographic changes in 102 patients at 9 to 13 years after low friction arthroplasty. In 92 cases with a satisfactory outcome there was an average of 2.3 radiological signs and mean subsidence of less than 5 mm. An unsatisfactory outcome was associated with 3.4 signs per film and with subsidence of more than 5 mm. The radiological signs we describe are often the hallmark of successful load transmission, but if they increase with time or are associated with subsidence of over 5 mm, then clinical failure is likely. Fracture of the cement tip is associated with increased subsidence and adversely affects the long-term clinical outcome.

We assessed the outcome of patients with Vancouver type B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures treated with femoral revision using an uncemented extensively porous-coated implant. A retrospective clinical and radiographic assessment of 22 patients with a mean follow-up of 33.7 months was performed. The mean time from the index procedure to fracture was 10.8 years. There were 17 patients with a satisfactory result. Complications in four patients included subsidence in two, deep sepsis in one, and delayed union in one. Concomitant acetabular revision was required in 19 patients. Uncemented extensively porous-coated femoral stems incorporate distally allowing stable fixation. We found good early survival rates and a low incidence of nonunion using this implant.

We have compared the survival and radiological outcome at ten years after total hip replacement using two techniques for preparing the femoral canal. The same prosthesis was used throughout and all operations were performed by the same surgical team. In technique 1 the canal was over-reamed by 2 mm and in technique 2 it was reamed to the same size as the prosthesis. Technique 1 was performed on 92 patients and technique 2 on 97 patients.

The survival at ten years was 97.2% (90.6 to 99.2) for technique 1 and 98.8% (92.9 to 99.8) for technique 2. Vertical migration was greater in technique 1 (1.8 mm versus 1.0 mm at five years; p = 0.36). There were significantly more lytic lesions and radiolucent lines at five years (p = 0.0061) with technique 1. We conclude that technique 2 is not worse and may produce better long- term results than current teaching suggests.

We have investigated the role of the penetration of saline on the shear strength of the cement-stem interface for stems inserted at room temperature and those preheated to 37°C using a variety of commercial bone cements. Immersion in saline for two weeks at 37°C reduced interfacial strength by 56% to 88% after insertion at room temperature and by 28% to 49% after preheating of the stem. The reduction in porosity as a result of preheating ranged from 71% to 100%. Increased porosity correlated with a reduction in shear strength after immersion in saline (r = 0.839, p < 0.01) indicating that interfacial porosity may act as a fluid conduit.

Aims

Implant waste during total hip arthroplasty (THA) represents a significant cost to the USA healthcare system. While studies have explored methods to improve THA cost-effectiveness, the literature comparing the proportions of implant waste by intraoperative technology used during THA is limited. The aims of this study were to: 1) examine whether the use of enabling technologies during THA results in a smaller proportion of wasted implants compared to navigation-guided and conventional manual THA; 2) determine the proportion of wasted implants by implant type; and 3) examine the effects of surgeon experience on rates of implant waste by technology used.

We report a clinical and radiological survival analysis of 148 consecutive revisions of hip arthroplasties. All patients referred were offered revision if it was indicated and they were medically fit. About one-third (32%) had had at least one previous revision, and about one-third had an established deep infection. The revisions were performed in ultra-clean air with body-exhaust suits. The usual method of fixation was by contained and pressurised cement of standard viscosity, to which appropriate antibiotics had been added in infected cases. Some patients had cementless revision. Clinical failure meant that one or both of the implants had been removed; radiological failure was assessed from serial radiographs. The clinical survival at ten years was 95%. The Merle D'Aubigne and Postel rating for pain improved from a mean of 2.9 to 5.2; and in Charnley group A and B cases, walking ability improved from 2.3 to 4.3. In contrast to some reports we also found good radiological survival; this was 90.5% for cemented femoral stems. Isoelastic revision stems inserted without cement gave poor results.

Review of the radiographs of 882 consecutive metal-to-polyethylene hip replacements after a mean follow-up of 6.8 years showed 72 cases (8%) of aseptic femoral loosening, all of which showed a lucent zone or black line between metal and cement. In 97% of the series this appeared within two years of the arthroplasty. Progress of loosening was unpredictable and only 24% had significant symptoms. Improved technique with methylmethacrylate cement in Stanmore prostheses had reduced loosening after two years from 7.9% to 0.4%. Methods of detection of early loosening are discussed.

Recent publications have drawn attention to the fact that some brands of joint replacement may contain variants which perform significantly worse (or better) than their ‘siblings’. As a result, the National Joint Registry has performed much more detailed analysis on the larger families of knee arthroplasties in order to identify exactly where these differences may be present and may hitherto have remained hidden. The analysis of the Nexgen knee arthroplasty brand identified that some posterior-stabilized combinations have particularly high revision rates for aseptic loosening of the tibia, and consequently a medical device recall has been issued for the Nexgen ‘option’ tibial component which was implicated. More elaborate signal detection is required in order to identify such variation in results in a routine fashion if patients are to be protected from such variation in outcomes between closely related implant types.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(3):221–226.

Literature surrounding artificial intelligence (AI)-related applications for hip and knee arthroplasty has proliferated. However, meaningful advances that fundamentally transform the practice and delivery of joint arthroplasty are yet to be realized, despite the broad range of applications as we continue to search for meaningful and appropriate use of AI. AI literature in hip and knee arthroplasty between 2018 and 2021 regarding image-based analyses, value-based care, remote patient monitoring, and augmented reality was reviewed. Concerns surrounding meaningful use and appropriate methodological approaches of AI in joint arthroplasty research are summarized. Of the 233 AI-related orthopaedics articles published, 178 (76%) constituted original research, while the rest consisted of editorials or reviews. A total of 52% of original AI-related research concerns hip and knee arthroplasty (n = 92), and a narrative review is described. Three studies were externally validated. Pitfalls surrounding present-day research include conflating vernacular (“AI/machine learning”), repackaging limited registry data, prematurely releasing internally validated prediction models, appraising model architecture instead of inputted data, withholding code, and evaluating studies using antiquated regression-based guidelines. While AI has been applied to a variety of hip and knee arthroplasty applications with limited clinical impact, the future remains promising if the question is meaningful, the methodology is rigorous and transparent, the data are rich, and the model is externally validated. Simple checkpoints for meaningful AI adoption include ensuring applications focus on: administrative support over clinical evaluation and management; necessity of the advanced model; and the novelty of the question being answered.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1292–1303.