Epidural anaesthesia, with and without opiate, is widely used in total hip arthroplasty (THA). It may cause urinary retention, leading to catheterisation, and a subsequent increase in the likelihood of deep infection. We investigated prospectively the rate of urinary catheterisation in patients after THA performed under general anaesthesia, with or without peri-operative fentanyl and bupivacaine opiate epidural anaesthesia.

Of 173 patients, 75 received general anaesthesia alone and 98 both general and epidural management. The post-operative rate of catheterisation was 14.7% in those who received general anaesthesia alone and 13.3% in those who received both.

Our findings suggest that the rate of post-operative urinary catheterisation does not increase when general anaesthesia is supplemented by epidural anaesthesia using fentanyl and bupivicaine.

We describe a prospective study of 328 patients undergoing arthroscopy of the hip. Arthrography, CT or MRI was performed when clinically indicated. A preoperative diagnosis was reached in 174 patients (53%), while the remaining 154 were diagnosed as having ‘idiopathic hip pain’.

In seven patients, access to the hip was inadequate. Arthroscopy altered the diagnosis in 176 hips (53%). The new primary diagnoses were osteoarthritis (75 patients), osteochondral defects (34), torn labra (23), synovitis (11) and loose bodies (9). In 172 hips (52%) an operative procedure was undertaken. In the remaining 84 patients (26%), arthroscopy neither changed the diagnosis nor provided surgical treatment.

Arthroscopy of the hip is considered to be of value in assessing and treating the adult patient with pain in the hip of uncertain cause.

Primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most effective ways of improving quality of life (QoL). We have compared the improvement in QoL in 62 patients who had a cemented revision of a THA with that of 62 primary replacements.

One year after operation the median QoL score had been significantly improved in both groups; from 0.870 to 0.990 in the primary group (p < 0.0001) and from 0.870 to 0.980 in the revised group (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the improvement in scores between the groups (p = 0.29).

When reviewed after four years there was no difference in the pain score for either group (p = 0.89), but that for function had deteriorated significantly. This was associated with revision surgery (p = 0.018) and a low preoperative QoL score (p = 0.004).

We conclude that both primary and revision operations give a significant improvement in the QoL but function after revision may be less durable than after a primary arthroplasty.