Tapered fluted titanium stems are increasingly used for femoral revision arthroplasty. They are available in modular and non-modular forms. Modularity has advantages when the bone loss is severe, the proximal femur is mis shapen or the surgeon is unfamiliar with the implant, but it introduces the risk of fracture of the stem at the junction between it and the proximal body segment. For that reason, and while awaiting intermediate-term results of more recently introduced designs of this junction, non-modularity has attracted attention, at least for straightforward revision cases. . We review the risks and causes of fracture of tapered titanium modular revision stems and present an argument in favour of the more selective use of modular designs. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B(1 Suppl A):50–3

Aims

The aim of this randomized trial was to compare the functional outcome of two different surgical approaches to the hip in patients with a femoral neck fracture treated with a hemiarthroplasty.

Aims

Periacetabular osteotomy is an effective way of treating symptomatic hip dysplasia. We describe a new minimally invasive technique using a modification of the Smith-Peterson approach.

We performed a prospective, longitudinal cohort study to assess for any compromise in acetabular correction when using this approach, and to see if the procedure would have a higher complication rate than that quoted in the literature for other approaches. We also assessed for any improvement in functional outcome.

Aims

We wished to quantify the extent of soft-tissue damage sustained during minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty through the direct anterior (DA) and direct superior (DS) approaches.

Aims

The most effective surgical approach for total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains controversial. The direct anterior approach may be associated with a reduced risk of dislocation, faster recovery, reduced pain and fewer surgical complications. This systematic review aims to evaluate the current evidence for the use of this approach in THA.

The outcome after total hip replacement has improved with the development of surgical techniques, better pain management and the introduction of enhanced recovery pathways. These pathways require a multidisciplinary team to manage pre-operative education, multimodal pain control and accelerated rehabilitation. The current economic climate and restricted budgets favour brief hospitalisation while minimising costs. This has put considerable pressure on hospitals to combine excellent results, early functional recovery and shorter admissions.

In this review we present an evidence-based summary of some common interventions and methods, including pre-operative patient education, pre-emptive analgesia, local infiltration analgesia, pre-operative nutrition, the use of pulsed electromagnetic fields, peri-operative rehabilitation, wound dressings, different surgical techniques, minimally invasive surgery and fast-track joint replacement units.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1587–94.

Direct anterior approaches to the hip have gained popularity as a minimally invasive method when performing primary total hip replacement (THR). A retrospective review of a single institution joint registry was performed in order to compare patient outcomes after THR using the Anterior Supine Intermuscular (ASI) approach versus a more conventional direct lateral approach. An electronic database identified 1511 patients treated with 1690 primary THRs between January 2006 and December 2010. Our results represent a summary of findings from our previously published work. We found that patients that underwent an ASI approach had faster functional recovery and higher Harris hip scores in the early post-operative period when compared with patients who had a direct lateral approach The overall complication rate in our ASI group was relatively low (1.7%) compared with other series using the same approach. The most frequent complication was early periprosthetic femoral fractures (0.9%). The dislocation rate in our series was 0.4% and the prosthetic joint infection rate was 0.1%. We suggest that the ASI approach is acceptable and safe when performing THR and encourages early functional recovery of our patients.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96- B(11 Suppl A):32–5.

This conversation represents an attempt by several arthroplasty surgeons to critique several abstracts presented over the last year as well as to use them as a jumping off point for trying to figure out where they fit in into our current understanding of multiple issues in modern hip and knee arthroplasty.

We report the kinematic and early clinical results of a patient- and observer-blinded randomised controlled trial in which CT scans were used to compare potential impingement-free range of movement (ROM) and acetabular component cover between patients treated with either the navigated ‘femur-first’ total hip arthroplasty (THA) method (n = 66; male/female 29/37, mean age 62.5 years; 50 to 74) or conventional THA (n = 69; male/female 35/34, mean age 62.9 years; 50 to 75). The Hip Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, the Harris hip score, the Euro-Qol-5D and the Mancuso THA patient expectations score were assessed at six weeks, six months and one year after surgery. A total of 48 of the patients (84%) in the navigated ‘femur-first’ group and 43 (65%) in the conventional group reached all the desirable potential ROM boundaries without prosthetic impingement for activities of daily living (ADL) in flexion, extension, abduction, adduction and rotation (p = 0.016). Acetabular component cover and surface contact with the host bone were > 87% in both groups. There was a significant difference between the navigated and the conventional groups’ Harris hip scores six weeks after surgery (p = 0.010). There were no significant differences with respect to any clinical outcome at six months and one year of follow-up. The navigated ‘femur-first’ technique improves the potential ROM for ADL without prosthetic impingement, although there was no observed clinical difference between the two treatment groups.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015; 97-B:890–8.