Postero-posterolateral approach in total hip arthroplasty

Comparing dislocation rates by approach following elective primary dual mobility total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Dual mobility components can be implanted during total hip arthroplasty (THA) for primary osteoarthritis via a direct anterior approach (DAA), anterolateral approach (ALA), direct lateral approach (DLA), or posterior/posterolateral approach (PLA). This review compares dual mobility hip dislocation rates using these approaches for elective primary THA.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for articles published after January 1, 2006 that reported dislocation rates for adult patients after primary THA with dual mobility implants. Articles were excluded if they reported revision procedures, nonelective THA for femoral neck fractures, acetabular defects requiring supplemental implants, prior surgery, or ≤ 5 patients. The primary outcome was hip dislocation rate. Secondary outcomes included infection, Harris Hip Score (HHS), and Postel-Merle d'Aubigné (PMA) score.

RESULTS

After screening 542 articles, 63 met inclusion criteria. Due to study heterogeneity, we did not perform a meta-analysis. Eight studies reported DAA, 5 reported ALA, 6 reported the DLA, and 56 reported PLA. Study size ranged from 41 to 2,601 patients. Mean follow-up time ranged from 6 months to 25 years. Rates of infection and dislocation were low; 80% of ALA, 87.5% of DAA, 100% of DLA, and 82.1% of PLA studies reported zero postoperative dislocations. Studies reporting postoperative HHS and PMA scores showed considerable improvement for all approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing primary THA with dual mobility implants rarely experience postoperative dislocation, regardless of surgical approach. Additional studies directly comparing DAA, ALA, DLA, and PLA are needed to confirm these findings.

The Short-Term Efficacy of Bikini Incision and Traditional Incision in Total Hip Replacement for Elderly Patients via the Direct Anterior Approach

Background

The study aimed to explore the short-term clinical efficacy of bikini incision and traditional incision in total hip replacement via the direct anterior approach.

Methods

The study enrolled 94 patients who underwent total hip replacement using the direct anterior approach between March 2018 and April 2020. They were assigned to the study group and the control group with 47 patients in each group using the random number table method. They received traditional incision and bikini incision, respectively. The operative time, intraoperative estimated blood loss, postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, incision healing, postoperative Harris score, and occurrences of complications were compared between the two groups.

Results

There was no statistically significant difference in operative time, incision length, and intraoperative estimated blood loss between the two groups (P > 0.05). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the study group than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in pain severity between the two groups (P > 0.05). No incision infection occurred in either group. The study group had small scar areas and scar scores than the control group (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in Harris scores between the two groups at three and six months postoperatively (P > 0.05). The rate of lateral femoral cutaneous nerve injury was lower in the study group than that of the control group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Bikini incision in total hip replacement via the direct anterior approach can shorten the length of hospital stay, promote incision healing, lower the incidence of complications, improve the prognosis, and promote recovery of patients, and it is worthy of being promoted for wide clinical use.

The relationship between patient-reported outcomes and preoperative pain characteristics in patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty

Aims

This study aims to answer the following questions in patients with hip osteoarthritis (OA) who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA): are patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) affected by the location of the maximum severity of pain?; are PROMs affected by the presence of non-groin pain?; are PROMs affected by the severity of pain?; and are PROMs affected by the number of pain locations?

Methods

We reviewed 336 hips (305 patients) treated with THA for hip OA from December 2016 to November 2019 using pain location/severity questionnaires, modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score (HOS), international Hip Outcome Tool (iHOT-12) score, and radiological analysis. Descriptive statistics, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), and Spearman partial correlation coefficients were used.

Results

There was a significant difference in iHOT-12 scores between groups experiencing the most severe pain in the groin and the trochanter (p = 0.039). Additionally, more favourable mHHS scores were related to the presence of preoperative pain in trochanter (p = 0.049), lower back (p = 0.056), lateral thigh (p = 0.034), and posterior thigh (p = 0.005). Finally, the maximum severity of preoperative pain and number of pain locations had no significant relationship with PROMs (maximum severity: HHS: p = 0.928, HOS: p = 0.163, iHOT-12 p = 0.233; number of pain locations: HHS: p = 0.211; HOS: p = 0.801; iHOT-12: p = 0.112).

Conclusion

Although there was a significant difference in iHOT-12 scores between patients with the most severe pain in the groin or trochanter, and the presence of pain in the trochanter, lower back, lateral thigh, or posterior thigh was related to higher mHHS scores, the majority of preoperative pain characteristics did not have a significant impact on outcomes. Therefore, a broad array of patients with hip OA might expect similar, favourable outcomes from THA notwithstanding preoperative pain characteristics. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(4):332–339.

Outcome of total hip arthroplasty in patients with failed open reduction and internal fixation of acetabular fractures

BACKGROUND

The problem of failed acetabulum fracture fixation is increasing due to increased incidence of high-velocity injury and a large number of patients are being operated on in the past few years. Limited evidence is available regarding results of Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients with failed acetabulum fracture fixation surgery. We assessed the clinical, radiological and postoperative complications. Besides this, we also evaluated functional outcome and quality of life following THA in failed open reduction and internal fixation of acetabular fractures.

METHOD

The current retrospective study was performed at the tertiary center from 2015 to 2020. Eighteen patients of failed acetabulum fracture fixation surgery (14 males and 4 females) were included with a mean follow-up period of 2.4 years. Postero-lateral approach was done in all cases. Clinico-radiological outcome, functional outcomes were recorded according to Harris Hip score (HHS) and quality of life was assessed by using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) score. Postoperative complications were also assessed.

RESULTS

The age of patients ranged from 20 years to 68 years with a mean age of 44.7 years. 16 of the patients (88.9%) had a united acetabular fracture while 2 of them (11.1%) presented with un-united acetabular fracture. The THA implant was found to be stable in all 18 cases. The Harris Hip score of the study ranged from 82 to 95 with a mean of 89.72 ± 4.24 while the SF-12 score ranged from 40.0 to 49.4 with a mean of 44.29 ± 2.95. Out of 18 cases, 11 (61.1%) returned with excellent outcomes while the rest 7 (38.9%) returned with good outcomes as per Harris Hips score criteria. The correlation and regression analysis shows between HHS and SF-12 was positive and statistically significant (r = 0.592, p = 0.010).

CONCLUSION

THA in patients with failed acetabulum fracture fixation surgery provides a reliable option with satisfactory outcomes along with a better quality of life.

Risk factors and modes of failure in the modern dual mobility implant. A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The aims of this meta-analysis were to: (1) validate the outcome of modern dual mobility (DM) designs in patients who had undergone primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) procedures and (2) to identify factors that affect the outcome.

Methods

We searched for studies that assessed the outcome of modern DM-THA in primary and revision procedures that were conducted between January, 2000 to August, 2020 on PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Reviews and Embase. The pooled incidence of the most common failure modes and patient reported outcomes were evaluated in patients who have received: (1) primary THA, (2) revision THA for all causes or (3) for recurrent dislocation. A meta-regression analysis was performed for each parameter to determine the association with the outcome. The study design of each study was assessed for potential bias and flaws by using the quality assessment tool for case series studies.

Results

A total of 119 studies (N= 30016 DM-THAs) were included for analysis. The mean follow-up duration was 47.3 months. The overall implant failure rate was 4.2% (primary: 2.3%, revision for all causes: 5.5%, recurrent dislocation: 6.0%). The most common failure modes were aseptic loosening (primary: 0.9%, revision for all causes: 2.2%, recurrent dislocation: 2.4%), septic loosening (primary:0.8%, revision for all causes: 2.3%, recurrent dislocation: 2.5%), extra-articular dislocation (primary:0.6%, revision for all causes:1.3%, recurrent dislocation:2.5%), intra-prosthetic dislocation (primary:0.8%, revision for all causes:1.0%, recurrent dislocation:1.6%) and periprosthetic fracture (primary:0.9%, revision for all causes:0.9%, recurrent dislocation:1.3%). The multi-regression analysis identified younger age (β=-0.04, 95% CI -0.07 – -0.02) and female patients (β=3.34, 95% CI 0.91–5.78) were correlated with higher implant failure rate. Age, gender, posterolateral approach and body mass index (BMI) were not risk factors for extra-articular or intra-prosthetic dislocation in this cohort. The overall Harris hip score and Merle d’Aubigné score were 84.87 and 16.36, respectively. Level of evidence of this meta-analysis was IV.

Conclusion

Modern dual-mobility designs provide satisfactory mid-term implant survival and clinical performance. Younger age and female patients might impact the outcome after DM-THA. Future research directions should focus on, (1) long-term outcome of modern dual-mobility design, including specific concerns such as intra-prosthetic dislocation and elevated metal ion, and (2) cost-effectiveness analysis of dual-mobility implant as an alternative to conventional THA for patients who are at high risk of dislocation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-021-04404-4.