Why revision total hip arthroplasty fails

Performing Revision Arthroplasty Increases Surgeon and Practice Volumes Through the Generation of Subsequent Cases: A Retrospective Study

Background

Revision total knee (TKR) and hip (THR) arthroplasty surgeries are disincentivized due to unfavorable reimbursement rates, surgical times, and complication rates. Our study investigates secondary benefits of performing these surgeries by generating subsequent cases for surgeons and practices.

Methods

Patients undergoing TKR and THR between April 1, 2011, and January 1, 2019, at our tertiary academic institution were analyzed. Patients were identified with Current Procedural Terminology codes for TKR and THR. We calculated a subsequent surgery rate on the same or different joint by the initial surgeon or another surgeon within the practice to determine the procedure yield after initial revision arthroplasty.

Results

One thousand six hundred twenty-five patients met inclusion criteria. Six hundred forty-nine (39.9%) patients received at least one subsequent procedure on any joint by any orthopaedic surgeon in the practice. Four hundred five patients (24.9%) underwent another procedure on any joint by the same surgeon. Two hundred sixty patients (16.0%) underwent another procedure on the same joint by the same surgeon, with 109 cases (41.9%) being a planned second stage of a 2-stage revision for infection. Two hundred eighty-five patients (17.5%) underwent another procedure on a different joint by the same surgeon, with 122 of these patients (42.8%) undergoing at least one primary total hip or knee arthroplasty.

Conclusions

TKRs and THRs can increase surgeon and practice volumes through the generation of future cases, which are primarily the second stage of a 2-stage revision or primary joint arthroplasties on other joints.

Contemporary Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients ≤50 Years of Age: Results of >500 Cases

BACKGROUND

There has been a paucity of long-term outcomes data on aseptic revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in the young adult population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate implant survivorship, complications, and clinical outcomes in a large cohort of contemporary aseptic revision THAs in patients ≤50 years of age at the time of the surgical procedure.

METHODS

We identified 545 aseptic revision THAs performed at a single academic institution from 2000 to 2020 in patients who were 18 to 50 years of age. Patients who underwent conversion THAs and patients with a history of any ipsilateral hip infection were excluded. The mean age was 43 years, the mean body mass index (BMI) was 29 kg/m 2 , and 63% were female. The index indication for revision THA was aseptic loosening in 46% of cases, polyethylene wear or osteolysis in 28% of cases (all revisions of conventional polyethylene), and dislocation in 11% of cases. There were 126 hips (23%) that had undergone at least 1 previous revision (median, 1 revision [range, 1 to 5 revisions]). The mean follow-up was 10 years.

RESULTS

In the entire cohort, the 20-year survivorship free of any re-revision was 76% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 69% to 82%). There were 87 re-revisions, with 31 dislocations, 18 cases of aseptic loosening of the femoral component, and 16 periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) being the most common reasons for re-revision. Dislocation as the indication for the index revision was associated with an increased risk of re-revision (hazard ratio, 2.9; p < 0.001). The 20-year survivorship free of any reoperation was 73% (95% CI, 66% to 78%). There were 75 nonoperative complications (14%), including 32 dislocations. The mean Harris hip score significantly improved (p < 0.001) from 65 preoperatively to 81 at 10 years postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary aseptic revision THAs in patients ≤50 years of age demonstrated a re-revision risk of approximately 1 in 4 at 20 years. Dislocation, aseptic loosening of the femoral component, and PJI were the most common reasons for re-revision. Index revision THAs for dislocation had a 3 times higher risk of re-revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Surgical Approach Does Not Influence Instability Risk in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Although the direct anterior (DA) approach has increased in popularity for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), there is limited evidence regarding its use for revision THA. It is unknown whether the dislocation benefit seen in the primary setting translates to revision cases.

METHODS

This retrospective review compared the dislocation rates of revision THA performed through DA versus postero-lateral (PL) approaches at a single institution (2011 to 2021). Exclusion criteria included revision for instability, ≥ 2 prior revisions, approaches other than DA or PL, and placement of dual-mobility or constrained liners. There were 182 hips in 173 patients that met the inclusion criteria. The average follow-up was 6.5 years (range, 2 to 8 years).

RESULTS

There was a trend toward more both-component revisions being performed through the PL approach. There were no differences in dislocation rates between the DA revision and PL revision cohorts, which were 8.1% (5 of 72) and 7.5% (9 of 120), respectively (P = .999). Dislocation trended lower when the revision approach was discordant from the primary approach compared to cases where primary and revision had a concordant approach (4.9 versus 8.5%), but this was not statistically significant (P = .740). No significant differences were found in return to operating room, 90-day emergency department visits, or 90-day readmissions. However, the length of stay was significantly shorter in patients who had DA revisions after a primary PL procedure (P = .021).

CONCLUSIONS

Dislocation rates following revision THA did not differ between the DA and PL approaches irrespective of the primary approach. Surgeons should choose their revision approach based on their experience and the specific needs of the patient.

Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty Places a Disproportionate Burden on Surgeons: A Comparison Using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA TLX)

BACKGROUND

Perceived surgeon workload of performing primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging to quantify. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA TLX) survey was developed to quantify experiences following aviation and has been applied to healthcare fields. Our purposes were to 1) quantify the workload endured by surgeons who are performing primary and revision TKA and THA and 2) compare these values to their Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement.

METHODS

A prospective cohort of 5 fellowship-trained adult reconstruction surgeons completed NASA TLX surveys following primary and revision TKA/THA cases. A total of 122 surveys consisting of 70 TKA (48 primaries and 22 revisions) and 55 THA surveys (38 primaries and 17 revisions) were completed. Patient demographics and surgical variables were recorded. Final NASA TLX workloads were compared to 2021 CMS work relative value units.

RESULTS

Compared to primary TKA, revision TKA had 176% increased intraoperative workload (P < .001), 233% increased mental burden (P < .001), and 150% increased physical burden (P < .001). Compared to primary THA, revision THA had 106% increased intraoperative workload (P < .001), 96% increased mental burden (P < .001), and 91% increased physical burden (P < .001). Operative time was higher in revision versus primary TKA (118 versus 84.5 minutes, P = .05) and THA (150 versus 115 minutes, P = .001). Based upon 2021 CMS data, revision TKA and THA would need to be compensated by an additional 36% and 12.3%, respectively, to parallel intraoperative efforts.

CONCLUSIONS

Revision hip and knee arthroplasty places a major mental and physical workload upon surgeons and is disproportionately compensated by CMS.

Biomechanical Comparison of Impaction Techniques and Cross-Sectional Femoral Stem Shapes for Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty

Introduction

Traditional mallet broaching and stem seating in cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) can result in femoral stem misalignment, potentially reducing implant longevity. This study aimed to compare the pullout strength of cementless THA femoral stems with different cross-sectional designs achieved through the powered impactor method versus the traditional mallet method.

Methods

The authors utilized 24 polyurethane foam femurs and two femoral bone preservation stems with different proximal cross-sectional shapes (double taper: ACTIS®, size 5; flat taper: TRI-LOCK®, size 5). A single orthopedic surgeon broached each femur from size 0 to size 5 using either the powered impactor or mallet impaction methods. Broaching time and component implantation times were recorded. A load-to-failure pullout strength test was conducted, and the ultimate pullout load was recorded.

Results

The broaching time for the TRI-LOCK® stem showed a statistically significant difference between the two impaction methods (powered: 37±7 seconds, mallet: 75±29 seconds, F[3, 20] = 4.56, p = 0.002), but no statistically significant difference was detected for the ACTIS® stem between the two impaction methods (powered: 47±22 seconds, mallet: 59±9 seconds, F[3, 20] = 4.56, p = 0.304). There was a statistically significant difference in pullout strength between the two impaction groups, and this strength was influenced by the implant cross-sectional shape (ACTIS®: 774±75N versus 679±22N, F(3,20) = 16.38, p = 0.018; TRI-LOCK®: 616±57N versus 859±85N, F(3, 20) = 16.38, p <0.001).

Conclusions

The technique used for femoral bone preparation (powered impactor versus mallet) and the cross-sectional design of the cementless femoral stem are crucial factors that affect initial stem stability and operation time.

Long-term Outcomes of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Modular Fluted Conical Femoral Stem

BACKGROUND

This study presents minimum 6-year follow-up data on the survival and satisfaction of an uncemented modular revision femoral system, following on from our previously published earlier results.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all revision hip arthroplasties performed at our institution between January 2005 and October 2012, using a single modular femoral revision system. Patient-reported outcomes were collected (satisfaction score and Oxford Hip Score). Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were reviewed for stem subsidence, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed for survival. A total of 115 femoral revisions were performed in 106 patients.

RESULTS

All-cause survival was 82% (95% confidence interval 74 to 91%) at 10.8 years, and 96% (95% confidence interval 90 to 100%) excluding septic failure. Of the 19 cases requiring reoperation, 16 were for infection, 2 for aseptic loosening, and 1 for mechanical failure. At final follow-up, 88.5% of patients were "satisfied" or "very satisfied".

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed excellent clinical results of a commonly used revision hip stem with at least 10 years follow-up. Satisfaction rates were high, with few aseptic failures. Stem subsidence was more common in revisions for infection, but did not correlate with lower satisfaction scores.

Understanding the role of head size and neck length in micromotion generation at the taper junction in total hip arthroplasty

Modular hip implants allow intra-operative adjustments for patient-specific customization and targeted replacement of damaged elements without full implant extraction. However, challenges arise from relative micromotions between components, potentially leading to implant failure due to cytotoxic metal debris. In this study magnitude and directions of micromotions at the taper junction were estimated, aiming to understand the effect of variations in head size and neck length. Starting from a reference configuration adhering to the 12/14 taper standard, six additional implant configurations were generated by varying the head size and/or neck length. A musculoskeletal multibody model of a prothesized lower limb was developed to estimate hip contact force and location during a normal walking task. Following the implant assembly, the multibody-derived loads were imposed as boundary conditions in a finite element analysis to compute the taper junction micromotions as the relative slip between the contacting surfaces. Results highlighted the L-size head as the most critical configuration, indicating a 2.81 μm relative slip at the mid-stance phase. The proposed approach enables the investigation of geometric variations in implants under accurate load conditions, providing valuable insights for designing less risky prostheses and informing clinical decision-making processes.

Global mapping of institutional and hospital-based (Level II-IV) arthroplasty registries: a scoping review

PURPOSE

Four joint arthroplasty registries (JARs) levels exist based on the recorded data type. Level I JARs are national registries that record primary data. Hospital or institutional JARs (Level II-IV) document further data (patient-reported outcomes, demographic, radiographic). A worldwide list of Level II-IV JARs must be created to effectively assess and categorize these data.

METHODS

Our study is a systematic scoping review that followed the PRISMA guidelines and included 648 studies. Based on their publications, the study aimed to map the existing Level II-IV JARs worldwide. The secondary aim was to record their lifetime, publications' number and frequency and recognise differences with national JARs.

RESULTS

One hundred five Level II-IV JARs were identified. Forty-eight hospital-based, 45 institutional, and 12 regional JARs. Fifty JARs were found in America, 39 in Europe, nine in Asia, six in Oceania and one in Africa. They have published 485 cohorts, 91 case-series, 49 case-control, nine cross-sectional studies, eight registry protocols and six randomized trials. Most cohort studies were retrospective. Twenty-three per cent of papers studied patient-reported outcomes, 21.45% surgical complications, 13.73% postoperative clinical and 5.25% radiographic outcomes, and 11.88% were survival analyses. Forty-four JARs have published only one paper. Level I JARs primarily publish implant revision risk annual reports, while Level IV JARs collect comprehensive data to conduct retrospective cohort studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study mapping all Level II-IV JARs worldwide. Most JARs are found in Europe and America, reporting on retrospective cohorts, but only a few report on studies systematically.

Does the Primary Surgical Approach Matter When Choosing the Approach for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

Multiple surgical approaches are used for primary total hip arthroplasty (pTHA) and revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). This study sought to investigate prevalence of discordance of pTHA and rTHA surgical approaches and to evaluate how approach concordance impacts postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who underwent rTHA from 2000 to 2021 was conducted at 3 large urban academic centers. Patients who had minimum 1-year follow-up post-rTHA were included and grouped based on whether they received pTHA via a posterior (PA), direct anterior (DA), or laterally based (DL) approach, and by concordance of index rTHA approach with their pTHA approach. Of the 917 patients studied, 839 (91.5%) were included in the concordant cohort and 78 (8.5%) in the discordant cohort. Patient demographics, operative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Discordance was most prevalent in the DA-pTHA subset (29.5%), compared to the DL-pTHA subset (14.7%) or PA-pTHA subset (3.7%). Discordance varied significantly between primary approaches among all revisions, with DA-pTHA patients having the highest discordance rate for patients revised for aseptic loosening (46.3%, P < .001), fracture (22.2%, P < .001), and dislocation (33.3%, P < .001). There were no differences between groups in dislocation rate, re-revision for infection, or re-revision for fracture.

CONCLUSION

The results of this multicenter study showed patients who received pTHA via the DA were more likely to receive rTHA via a discordant approach compared to other primary approaches. Since approach concordance did not impact dislocation, infection, or fracture rates after rTHA, surgeons can feel reassured using a separate approach for rTHA.

LEVEL III EVIDENCE

Retrospective Cohort Study.

Accuracy and safety of a new robotic arm for both femoral and acetabular side in total hip arthroplasty: a cadaveric study

BACKGROUND

To investigate the accuracy and safety of a newly constructed robotic arm which can cover the whole process of THA, we performed a series of robot-assisted total hip replacement on the cadaver.

METHODS

Fifteen frozen cadaveric specimens (30 hips) were used for this study. In this investigation, united hip system and Longwell robotic-assisted system were used. The entire lower limb was CT scanned prior to surgery. The 3D model was produced based on CT data; the site of the prosthesis, including acetabular anteversion, inclination angle, and the position of femoral prosthesis, was planned. With the assistance of a robotic arm, the surgeon changed the parameters based on the preoperative plan and the actual condition during surgery, and completed the whole procedure. Following surgery, we measured the acetabular anteversion angle, acetabular inclination angle, femur anteversion angle, combined anteversion angle, stem angulation, and canal fill ratio.

RESULTS

The parameters proved that the acetabular anteversion angle was 16.85 ± 3.00°, the acetabular inclination angle was 40.38 ± 5.37°, femur anteversion angle was 15.90 ± 9.01°, combined anteversion angle was 32.75 ± 9.03°, stem angulation was 1.84 ± 0.99°, and leg length discrepancy was 2.47 ± 1.43 mm. The canal fill ratio (CFR) of femoral prosthesis of osteotomy line in sagittal section is 99.72 ± 1.54% and in coronal section is 62.94 ± 8.91%; below osteotomy line 2.5 cm in sagittal section is 100.00% and in coronal section is 81.48 ± 12.94%; below osteotomy line 7.5 cm in sagittal section is 59.51 ± 12.94% and in coronal section is 89.79 ± 11.13%; femoral shaft isthmus in sagittal section is 56.41 ± 13.80% and in coronal section is 84.95 ± 15.17%.

CONCLUSION

The accuracy and safety of this novel robotic arm are suitable for preparing both the acetabular and femoral sides, providing evidence for clinical trial.

Revision total hip arthroplasty in patients with ankylosing spondylitis: Mid-term results

BACKGROUND

Few studies have reported on the outcome of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for ankylosing spondylitis (AS). Therefore, we sought to investigate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of revision THA in patients with AS.

HYPOTHESIS

The mid-term outcome of revision THA in AS patients was comparable to conventional revision THA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty-one patients with AS who underwent revision THA (on a total of 51 hips) between April 2004 and June 2018 were included. The mean follow-up duration was 7.5±3.6 years (3.0-15.8 years). Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Functional Index (BASFI), Harris Hip Score (HHS), and the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index. Complications were assessed at each follow-up. Radiological outcomes were examined by reviewing postoperative plain radiographs.

RESULTS

Significant improvements were seen in BASFI, HHS, and WOMAC scores (p<0.01). Postoperative combined range of motion (ROM) was 128.9±45.3° (range, 60-300°). Complications included heterotopic ossification, periprosthetic fractures, aseptic loosening, osteolysis, reinfection, residual pain or stiffness, delayed wound healing, numbness, deep vein thrombosis, leg length discrepancy, and posterior dislocation. Five (9.8%) of the 51 hips were treated with re-revision due to aseptic loosening, re-infection, or re-fracture. The incidence of dislocation was 1.9% at 7.5 years. Implant survival for all reasons was estimated to be 96.3% at 5 years, 85.9% at 10 years and 61.0% at 15 years. Forty-two (82.4%) hip revisions were rated "satisfactory" or "very satisfactory" by the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The mid-term result of revision THA for patients with AS is comparable to conventional revisions in terms of implant survival, despite high complication rates. The benefit-risk ratio of these indications is acceptable but deserves specific information for these patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; case series.

Femoral neck fracture patients with ischaemic stroke choose hemiarthroplasty or constrained liner total hip arthroplasty? A retrospective comparative study of 199 cases

Background

The objective of this study was to assess the long-term survival rate, complications, as well as the clinical and radiological outcomes of hemiarthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty using constrained polyethylene liners in patients with ischemic stroke.

Methods

This study was a retrospective cohort study that included patients with ischemic stroke who underwent hip arthroplasty from March 2010 to September 2017. In the Constrained Acetabular Liners (CAL) group, patients received an uncemented acetabular shell with a constrained polyethylene liner. The Dual Mobility (DM) group underwent hemiarthroplasty (HA). Additionally, hip function, range of motion, quality of life, the incidence of clinical complications, and prosthesis stability were investigated.

Results

96 patients with unilateral femoral neck fractures who underwent hip replacement with CAL were included in the CAL group, while 103 patients who underwent hip replacement with a dual mobility head were included in the DM group. VAS, and SF-36 data were available for both CAL and DM groups. At the 1-year postoperative follow-up, the HHS in the CAL group was significantly lower than that in the DM group (80.83 ± 3.91 vs. 83.17 ± 4.15, P < 0.05). The VAS score in the CAL group peaked at the 1-year follow-up (2.07 ± 0.91 vs. 1.49 ± 0.85, P < 0.05). However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of HSS, VAS, and SF-36 at the last follow-up after surgery. Operative time and the amount of bleeding in the DM group were significantly lower than those in the CAL group (105.30 ± 29.68 vs. 94.85 ± 31.07; 355.11 ± 123.95 vs. 302.22 ± 107.68, P < 0.05). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the mean leg length discrepancy between the two groups.

Conclusion

The clinical, imaging, and postoperative complications of the CAL and DM groups were analyzed. The prognosis for DM appears to be more beneficial for early patient recovery, but a higher likelihood of recurrent dislocation is observed. CAL offers excellent stability for primary THA in high-risk patients; however, attention should be given to preventing aseptic loosening.

What is the rate of successful closed reduction of dislocated dual mobility cups following complex revision hip arthroplasty?

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess the difference in success rates of closed reduction in septic and aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) performed with a dual mobility (DM) implant. Our objective was to answer the following questions: (1) Is there a difference in success rates of closed reduction between septic and aseptic revision THA with a DM implant? (2) Is closed or open reduction more successful in preventing re-dislocation?

METHODS

Between January 2009 and October 2021, 924 revisions were performed with a DM implant. All patients presenting to our institution with a dislocation following septic or aseptic revision THA using a cemented DM cup were included in this study. We analyzed 106 cases of dislocation in 74 patients. For all patients, we collected reason for revision, and classified index surgery as septic or aseptic.

RESULTS

Overall, 106 dislocations occurred (106/924, 11.5%). Thirty-nine cases (52.7%) had a dislocation after a septic exchange THA, while in 35 patients (47.3%), a dislocation occurred after an aseptic rTHA. In 29 patients (39.2%), successful closed reduction under general anesthesia was feasible, while the majority of cases required open reduction. In 31 of these patients (67.4%), open reduction was combined with a revision arthroplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

In case of DM cup dislocation, there is a low success rate of closed reduction. To prevent re-dislocation, total revision leads to a significantly reduced risk compared to open or closed reduction alone. Careful X-ray analysis for a halo sign showing intra-prosthetic DM cup dislocation is mandatory to avoid futile reduction attempts.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty in Octogenarians Compared with Septuagenarians: Is There a Real Difference?

BACKGROUND

The increasing frequency of total hip arthroplasty (THA) as well as an aging population indicate that the need for revision THA will continue to grow, especially in older and potentially medically complex patients. The purpose of this study was to compare THA revision indications, perioperative complications, and readmissions between octogenarian and septuagenarian patients. We hypothesized that patients aged 80 to 89 years would have similar outcomes to patients aged 70 to 79 years undergoing revision THA.

METHODS

Between 2008 and 2019, 572 revision THAs were performed at a single tertiary care hospital. Patients were stratified by age group: 70 to 79 years (n = 407) and 80 to 89 years (n = 165). Indication for revision, perioperative medical complications, and 90-day readmission were identified for each patient. Chi-square tests and t-tests were used to compare the groups. Logistic regression was used to assess medical complications and readmissions.

RESULTS

Aseptic loosening was a more common indication for revision in patients aged 70 to 79 years (33.4% versus 26.7%; p < 0.001), while periprosthetic fracture was a more common indication for revision in those aged 80 to 89 years (30.9% versus 13.0%). Perioperative medical complications occurred more often in octogenarians (10.9% versus 3.0%; p = 0.001), with arrythmia being the most common type. Patients aged 80 to 89 years were at increased risk for medical complications (odds ratio [OR], 3.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5 to 7.3; p = 0.004) and readmission (OR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.7 to 6.3; p < 0.001) when adjusting for body mass index (BMI) and indication for revision. Octogenarians had a higher rate of reoperation following first-time revision than septuagenarians (10.3% versus 4.2%, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Octogenarians more commonly underwent revision THA for periprosthetic fracture and had higher rates of perioperative medical complications, 90-day readmissions, and reoperations than septuagenarians. Such findings should be considered when counseling patients on both primary and revision THAs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

A finite element study on the interactive effect between the damage of the cup-bone interface and the bone strain of hip implants under various fixation conditions

Interfacial damage has a high impact on the loosening of the acetabular cup. However, monitoring this damage induced by the variations in loading conditions, such as the angle, amplitude, and frequency in vivo, is challenging. In this study, we evaluated the risk of loosening of the acetabular cup due to interfacial damages induced by the deviation in loading conditions and amplitudes. A three-dimensional model of the acetabular cup component was developed, and the interfacial crack growth between the cup and the bone was modeled using a fracture mechanics approach, which simulated the extent of interfacial damage and associated cup displacement. The interfacial delamination mechanism changed with the increasing inclination angle, wherein a fixation angle of 60° exhibited the largest area of contact loss. The compressive strain of embedding the simulated bone at the remaining bonding area accumulated as the lost contact area widened. Such interfacial damages, namely, the growth of the lost contact area and accumulated compressive strain in the simulated bone, promoted both embedding and rotational displacement of the acetabular cup. In the worst case of a fixation angle of 60°, the total displacement of the acetabular cup exceeded the limit of the modified safe zone, suggesting a quantitative risk of dislocation of the acetabular cup induced by the accumulated interfacial damage. Furthermore, nonlinear regression analyses between the degree of displacement of the acetabular cup and the extent of the two types of interfacial damage demonstrated that the interactive effect of the fixation angle with the loading amplitude showed a significant effect on increasing cup displacement. These findings suggest that proper control of the fixation angle during operation is useful in preventing the loosening of the hip joint.

Dual Mobility Articulation in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: An American Joint Replacement Registry Analysis of Patients Aged 65 Years and Older

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, dual mobility (DM) articulations have been used in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA), which may prevent postoperative hip instability. The purpose of this study was to report on outcomes of DM implants used in revision THA from the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR).

METHODS

Revision THA cases performed between 2012 and 2018 Medicare were eligible and categorized by 3 articulations: DM, ≤32 mm, and ≥36 mm femoral heads. The AJRR-sourced revision THA cases were linked to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) claims data to supplement (re)revision cases not captured in the AJRR. Patient and hospital characteristics were described and modeled as covariates. Using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models, considering competing risk of mortalities, hazard ratios were estimated for all-cause re-revision and re-revision for instability. Of 20,728 revision THAs, 3,043 (14.7%) received a DM, 6,565 (31.7%) a ≤32 mm head, and 11,120 (53.6%) a ≥36 mm head.

RESULTS

At 8-year follow-up, the cumulative all-cause re-revision rate for ≤32 mm heads was 21.9% (95%-confidence interval (CI) 20.2%-23.7%) and significantly (P < .0001) higher than DM (16.5%, 95%-CI 15.0%-18.2%) and ≥36 mm heads (15.2%, 95%-CI 14.2%-16.3%). At 8-year follow-up, ≥36 heads had significantly (P < .0001) lower hazard of re-revision for instability (3.3%, 95%-CI 2.9%-3.7%) while the DM (5.4%, 95%-CI 4.5%-6.5%) and ≤32 mm groups (8.6%, 95%-CI 7.7%-9.6%) had higher rates.

CONCLUSION

The DM bearings are associated with lower rates of revision for instability compared to patients who had ≤32 mm heads and higher revision rates for ≥36 mm heads. These results may be biased due to unidentified covariates associated with implant selection.

Comparative Survival of Contemporary Cementless Acetabular Components Following Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The advent of highly porous ingrowth surfaces and highly crosslinked polyethylene has been expected to improve implant survivorship in revision total hip arthroplasty. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the survival of several contemporary acetabular designs following revision total hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

Acetabular revisions performed from 2000 to 2019 were identified from our institutional total joint registry. We studied 3,348 revision hips, implanted with 1 of 7 cementless acetabular designs. These were paired with highly crosslinked polyethylene or dual-mobility liners. A historical series of 258 Harris-Galante-1 components, paired with conventional polyethylene, was used as reference. Survivorship analyses were performed. For the 2,976 hips with minimum 2-year follow-up, the median follow-up was 8 years (range, 2 to 35 years).

RESULTS

Contemporary components with adequate follow-up had survivorship free of acetabular rerevision of ≥95% at 10-year follow-up. Relative to Harris-Galante-1 components, 10-year survivorship free of all-cause acetabular cup rerevision was significantly higher in Zimmer Trabecular Metarevision (hazard ratio (HR) 0.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.2-0.45), Zimmer Trabecular MetaModular (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13-0.89), Zimmer Trilogy (HR 0.4, 95% CI 0.24-0.69), DePuy Pinnacle Porocoat (HR 0.24, 95% CI 0.11-0.51), and Stryker Tritanium revision (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24-0.91) shells. Among contemporary components, there were only 23 rerevisions for acetabular aseptic loosening and no rerevisions for polyethylene wear.

CONCLUSION

Contemporary acetabular ingrowth and bearing surfaces were associated with no rerevisions for wear and aseptic loosening was uncommon, particularly with highly porous designs. Therefore, it appears that contemporary revision acetabular components have dramatically improved upon historical results at available follow-up.

Prophylactic cable prevents tapered titanium stem subsidence with 2 cm of stem-cortical engagement in a cadaveric model

Aims

When performing revision total hip arthroplasty using diaphyseal-engaging titanium tapered stems (TTS), the recommended 3 to 4 cm of stem-cortical diaphyseal contact may not be available. In challenging cases such as these with only 2 cm of contact, can sufficient axial stability be achieved and what is the benefit of a prophylactic cable? This study sought to determine, first, whether a prophylactic cable allows for sufficient axial stability when the contact length is 2 cm, and second, if differing TTS taper angles (2° vs 3.5°) impact these results.

Methods

A biomechanical matched-pair cadaveric study was designed using six matched pairs of human fresh cadaveric femora prepared so that 2 cm of diaphyseal bone engaged with 2° (right femora) or 3.5° (left femora) TTS. Before impaction, three matched pairs received a single 100 lb-tensioned prophylactic beaded cable; the remaining three matched pairs received no cable adjuncts. Specimens underwent stepwise axial loading to 2600 N or until failure, defined as stem subsidence > 5 mm.

Results

All specimens without cable adjuncts (6/6 femora) failed during axial testing, while all specimens with a prophylactic cable (6/6) successfully resisted axial load, regardless of taper angle. In total, four of the failed specimens experienced proximal longitudinal fractures, three of which occurred with the higher 3.5° TTS. One fracture occurred in a 3.5° TTS with a prophylactic cable yet passed axial testing, subsiding < 5 mm. Among specimens with a prophylactic cable, the 3.5° TTS resulted in lower mean subsidence (0.5 mm (SD 0.8)) compared with the 2° TTS (2.4 mm (SD 1.8)).

Conclusion

A single prophylactic beaded cable dramatically improved initial axial stability when stem-cortex contact length was 2 cm. All implants failed secondary to fracture or subsidence > 5 mm when a prophylactic cable was not used. A higher taper angle appears to decrease the magnitude of subsidence but increased the fracture risk. The fracture risk was mitigated by the use of a prophylactic cable.

Mixed manufacturer dual mobility bearing and the Exeter V40 Stem: is it safe? Short-term results in primary and revision hip replacement

The aim is to review clinical and radiological outcomes for all cases of primary and revision THA, combining a cemented stem (Exeter V40) with a dual mobility component from a different manufacturer (SERF Novae), to evaluate whether concerns regarding mixing components from different manufacturers are justified. We identified 72 hip replacements performed between May 2010 and December 2015 using the SERF Novae dual mobility cup with an Exeter V40 stem, the majority of which were cemented (90%) and revisions (58%). Patients were evaluated clinically and radiologically at a minimum of two years. There were five (6.9%) dislocations; three (4.2%) requiring revision - one of which was an intra-prosthetic disarticulation and two infections. No cases were lost to follow-up and 49 surviving cases were reviewed at a mean of 4.0 (range 1.8-8.1) years following surgery. Pain and functional outcome scores all improved. There were no radiological failures and no revisions for aseptic loosening of stem or cup. The combination of Exeter cemented stem with a dual mobility bearing from a different manufacturer results in acceptable short-term outcomes in terms of hip stability, revision rates and patient-reported measures.

Dislocation and survival rate of dual mobility cups in revision total hip arthroplasty in patients with high risk of instability

PURPOSE

Instability remains as an unsolved complication after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Dual mobility (DM) cups have decreased dislocation rate in rTHA; however, there are few clinical studies that evaluate the risk of dislocation after rTHA in patients with high risk of instability.

METHODS

Between 2007 and 2019, 95 consecutive rTHA using a DM cup, in 93 patients with instability risk factors were retrospectively reviewed. Instability risk factors were defined as follows: deficient abductor mechanism (22.1%), previous dislocation (68.4%), Paprosky 3 acetabular bone defect (21.1%), neuromuscular disease (4.2%), lumbar spine arthrodesis (6.3%), and more than one previous surgery (33.6%). Mean follow-up was 4.3 ± 2.4 years. Clinical and radiographic parameters were reported. DM cup survival was determined using a Kaplan-Meier analysis with re-revision for any cause as the end-point. Surgical complications and re-dislocation rate was recorded.

RESULTS

Seven DM cups were re-revised; three due to aseptic loosening, three due to peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI), and one due to instability. At seven years follow-up, the survival rate of the DM cup using re-revision for any reason as the end-point was 82.4% (95% confidence interval, 66.4-98.4%). There were 12 (12.6%) complications: two (2.1%) dislocations, six (6.3%) PJI, four (4.2%) peri-prosthetic fractures.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest DM cups are effective reducing dislocation rate in rTHA in patients with a high risk of instability, without increasing early aseptic loosening and with a low rate of dislocation. Nevertheless, longer follow-up is needed to confirm implant stability and dislocation rates in the long term.

Clinical outcome of Bioball universal adapter in revision hip arthroplasty

Background

Removal of a well-fixed uncemented femoral component in revision hip arthroplasty is challenging. A modular head-neck adapter provides an option to optimise the femoral offset and anteversion, avoiding the need for femoral stem revision.

Aim

To present the clinical results following revision arthroplasty with the Bioball head-neck adapter in the elderly American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) Grade II, III & IV patients.

Materials and methods

A retrospective review of our database was performed, and all patients classed as ASA grades II, III, & IV treated with the Bioball Universal Adapter (BUA) for 10 years were included. The indication for revision, stem retention, type of adapter, and head size were identified. Patients were contacted by a research nurse to assess the Forgotten Joint Score (FJS), the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), and any symptoms of instability at a minimum of one year post revision surgery.

Results

Our study included 47 patients. 5 (10.6%) were ASA II, 19 (40.4%) were ASA III and 23 (49%) were ASA IV. The mean age was 74 years. The mean follow up was 52 months ± 28.4 SD. The median FJS was 86 ± 11.6 SD. The median OHS was 43 ± 6.2 SD. One patient (2.1%) developed recurrent dislocation following lumbar spinal fusion. None of the other patients experienced instability. The survival rate for the adapter was 98%.

Conclusion

The BUA gives good clinical outcomes with very low post revision instability. It is a valuable option for the elderly because it avoids the morbidity and risks associated with the removal of a well-fixed femoral stem.

Level of Evidence

Level IV.

Prevalence of groin pain after primary dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Instability remains a challenging problem following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Dual-mobility (DM) components are used with increasing frequency to mitigate this potential complication. As has been shown with larger metal-on-metal (MoM) THA, the larger size femoral head may pose an increased risk of groin pain. This study aims to evaluate the prevalence of groin pain following primary DM THA compared to other THA constructs.

METHODS

We identified 190 primary THAs (183 patients) performed with DM components at a single academic institution from 2008 to 2017. We retrospectively reviewed standardised patient questionnaires and the electronic medical record to determine the prevalence of groin pain. DM patients were compared to historical controls of 39 MoM hip resurfacing, 26 large-head MoM THA, and 217 conventional THA. Mean age was 64 years, 58% were female, mean body mass index was 30 kg/m², and mean follow-up was 3.5 years (range 2-8 years).

RESULTS

The prevalence of groin pain in patients with DM components was 5%, similar to the prevalence reported by patients with conventional THA (7%). There was a decreased prevalence of groin pain in DM patients compared to hip resurfacing (18%) and MoM THA (15%). Among the 9 DM patients with groin pain, 1 was treated with iliopsoas injection, and 1 underwent radiofrequency ablation of the articular nerve.

CONCLUSIONS

This study documents a relatively low prevalence of groin pain among primary DM THA patients. This is comparable with historical controls of conventional THA and decreased compared to hip resurfacing and large head MoM THA.

Acetabular Total Hip Arthroplasty Revision: A Summary of Operative Factors, Outcomes, and Comparison of Approaches

BACKGROUND

Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) presents a greater risk to patients than primary THA, and surgical approach may impact outcomes. This study aimed to summarize acetabular revisions at our institution and to compare outcomes between direct anterior and posterior revision THA.

METHODS

A series of 379 acetabular revision THAs performed from January 2010 through August 2022 was retrospectively reviewed. Preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative factors were summarized for all revisions and compared between direct anterior and posterior revision THA.

RESULTS

The average time to acetabular revision THA was 10 years (range, 0.04 to 44.1), with mechanical failure (36.7%) and metallosis (25.6%) being the most prevalent reasons for revision. No differences in age, body mass index, or sex were noted between groups. Anterior revision patients had a significantly shorter length of stay (2.2 versus 3.2 days, P = .003) and rate of discharge to a skilled nursing facility (7.5 versus 25.2%, P = .008). In the 90-day postoperative period, 9.2% of patients returned to the emergency department (n = 35) and twelve patients (3.2%) experienced a dislocation. There were 13.2% (n = 50) of patients having a rerevision during the follow-up period with a significant difference between anterior and posterior approaches (3.8 versus 14.7%, respectively, P = .049).

CONCLUSION

This study provides some evidence that the anterior approach may be protective against skilled nursing facility discharge and rerevision and contributes to decreased lengths of stay. We recommend surgeons select the surgical approach for revision THA based on clinical preferences and patient factors.

A Review of Conventional and Novel Treatments for Osteoporotic Hip Replacements

INTRODUCTION

Osteoporosis is a skeletal disease that severely affects the mechanical properties of bone. It increases the porosity of cancellous bone and reduces the resistance to fractures. It has been reported in 2009 that there are approximately 500 million osteoporotic patients worldwide. Patients who suffer fractures due to fragility cost the National Healthcare Systems in the United Kingdom £4.4 billion in 2018, in Europe €56 billion in 2019, and in the United States $57 billion in 2018. Thus, osteoporosis is problematic for both patients and healthcare systems.

AIM

This review is conducted for the purpose of presenting and discussing all articles introducing or investigating treatment solutions for osteoporotic patients undergoing total hip replacement.

METHODS

Searches were implemented using three databases, namely Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science to extract all relevant articles. Predetermined eligibility criteria were used to exclude articles out of the scope of the study.

RESULTS

29 articles out of 183 articles were included in this review. These articles were organised into three sections: (i) biomechanical properties and structure of osteoporotic bones, (ii) hip implant optimisations, and (iii) drug, cells, and bio-activators delivery through hydrogels.

DISCUSSION

The findings of this review suggest that diagnostic tools and measurements are crucial for understanding the characteristics of osteoporosis in general and for setting patient-specific treatment plans. It was also found that attempts to overcome complications associated with osteoporosis included design optimisation of the hip implant; however, only short-term success was reported, while the long-term stability of implants was compromised by the progressive nature of osteoporosis. Finally, it was also found that targeting implantation sites with cells, drugs, and growth factors has been outworked using hydrogels, where promising results have been reported regarding enhanced osteointegration and inhibited bacterial and osteoclastic activities.

CONCLUSIONS

These results may encourage investigations that explore the effects of these impregnated hydrogels on osteoporotic bones beyond metallic scaffolds and implants.

Effectiveness and Accuracy of a Patient-Specific Instrumentation System for Total Hip Arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE

Traditional total hip arthroplasty (THA) is often performed by visual inspection due to the lack of reliable reference, which results in inappropriate position of prosthesis and poor outcomes. This study attempts to introduce a novel patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) system and assess its effectiveness and accuracy compared with freehand operation and robot system through bone model experiments.

METHODS

Equally divide 30 sawbone models into the freehand group, PSI group, and robot group. Ten sets of prosthesis parameters were randomly generated as planning, and the three groups underwent simulated THA depending on these parameters. After the placement of the femoral prosthesis, the acetabular anteversion plan was adjusted in the PSI and robot groups so that the combined anteversion was maintained before and after adjustment. After the surgery, the actual prosthesis parameters of all bone models were measured and analyzed statistically.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference was found in femoral anteversion error among the three groups (p = 0.951). The errors of acetabular cup anteversion, acetabular cup abduction, and combined anteversion in PSI group were 3.92° (2.94°, 4.62°), 5.65° (4.63°, 6.70°), and 3.93° (2.94°, 4.62°), respectively, which were significantly smaller than those in the freehand group [11.84° (9.92°, 13.87°), 13.54° (9.81°, 15.21°), 16.04° (8.18°, 19.25°), respectively, p < 0.05], but significantly larger than those in the robot group [1.34° (0.98°, 1.70°), 1.80° (1°, 2.02°), 1.34° (0.98°, 1.70°), respectively, p < 0.05].

CONCLUSION

Compared with the traditional freehand operation, the patient-specific instrumentation system is feasible in total hip arthroplasty because it improves the accuracy of prosthesis placement. In addition, the rapid measurement of intraoperative femoral prosthesis parameters can help surgeons optimize preoperative planning.

Extended Oral Antibiotic Prophylaxis After Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Does It Decrease Infection Risk?

BACKGROUND

Extended oral antibiotic prophylaxis (EOA) has been shown to reduce infection after high-risk primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) and reimplantations. However, data are limited regarding EOA after aseptic revision THAs. This study evaluated the impact of EOA on infection-related outcomes after aseptic revision THAs.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 1,107 aseptic revision THAs performed between 2014 and 2019. Patients who received EOA >24 hours perioperatively (n = 370) were compared to those who did not (n = 737) using an inverse probability of treatment weighting model. Their mean age was 65 years (range, 19-98 years), mean body mass index was 30 kg/m² (range, 16-72), and 54% were women. Outcomes included cumulative probabilities of any infection, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), and re-revision or reoperation for infection. Mean follow-up was 4 years (range, 2-8 years).

RESULTS

The cumulative probability of any infection after aseptic revision THA was 2.3% at 90 days, 2.7% at 1 year, and 3.5% at 5 years. The cumulative probability of PJI was 1.7% at 90 days, 2.1% at 1 year, and 2.8% at 5 years. There was a trend toward an increased risk of any infection (hazards ratio [HR] = 2.6; P = .058), PJI (HR = 2.6; P = .085), and re-revision (HR = 6.5; P = .077) or reoperation (HR = 2.3; P = .095) for infection in patients who did not have EOA at the final clinical follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

EOA after aseptic revision THA was not associated with a statistically significant decreased risk of any infection, PJI, or re-revision or reoperation for infection at all time points.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Monobloc press-fit cups with large-diameter bearings are safe in revision total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Instability is a major cause of failure of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) which can be avoided with the use of monobloc press-fit cups with large diameter heads (LDH).

OBJECTIVE

This consecutive case series analyses whether LDH monobloc components are a safe and clinically beneficial option for revision THA.

METHODS

This consecutive case series includes 47 revision THA with LDH monobloc acetabular cup. Acetabular bone defects were Paprosky type I (42), type IIA (2) and type IIC (3). The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Forgotten Joint Score (FJS) and the Patient's Joint Perception (PJP) scores were analysed and a radiographic evaluation for signs of implant dysfunction was performed.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up of 4.5 years, there were 5 (10.6%) acetabular cup re-revisions: 2 loss of primary fixation and 3 instabilities. Implant survivorship at 4-years was 89.4% (95% CI: 89.3 to 89.5). Recurrent hip dislocation was reported in 1 patient (2.1%) and remains under conservative treatment. The mean WOMAC and FJS were 19.5 (16.8; 0.0 to 58.3) and 57.3 (28.9; 6.3 to 100.0), respectively. Regarding the PJP, 3 (8.8%) patients perceived their hip as natural, 8 (23.5%) as an artificial joint with no restriction, 14 (41.2%) with minor restriction and 9 (26.5%) with major restriction.

CONCLUSION

In cases of revision THA with limited bone loss, press-fit primary fixation with LDH monobloc acetabular components are valuable options that offer excellent mid-term out-comes with low re-revision and joint instability rates.

Trabecular titanium cups in acetabular revision arthroplasty: analysis of 10-year survivorship, restoration of center of rotation and osteointegration

AIMS

In case of severe bone loss, acetabular revision can be challenged using extra porous pure trabecular titanium (TT) revision cups designed to ensure enhanced iliac and ischiatic purchase. Aim of the study is to report on the clinical and radiological results of a TT acetabular component, evaluating functional outcome, restoration of the hip center of rotation and osteointegration.

METHODS

85 patients, who underwent acetabular revision with a TT revision cup system between October 2009 and December 2018, were included in a retrospective study. Clinical outcome were assessed with Harris Hip Score (HHS). The hip rotation center was measured using the Pierchon method on the AP pelvis film. Loosening of the cup was determined according to the Kosashvili modification of Gill's criteria. Kaplan- Meier survivorship curve was performed. Results The mean follow-up was 6.12 years. The average HHS improved from 54.7 points to 89.7 points (p < 0.05). Two acetabular components (2.3%) were re-revised after a mean of 5.6 years, for aseptic loosening and for infection, with a progressive radiolucency and a > 5 mm vertical migration, respectively. The radiographic evaluation of the position of the hip rotation center revealed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) between the pre- and post-operative values. The hip rotation center was correctly restored within 5% of the reference Pierchon values in a percentage of 85.4% relative to horizontal parameters and within 8% in a percentage of 66.7% relative to vertical parameters. 5-year and 10-year survivorships were, respectively, 100% and 88%.

CONCLUSIONS

In case of severe bone loss, TT revision cup system allows for good restoration of center of rotation and osteointegration showing good 10-year survival rate.

Cementless primary or revision stem in revision hip arthroplasty for aseptic stem loosening with Paprosky type I/II femoral defect?

BACKGROUND

The use of primary or revision stem during revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) for aseptic stem loosening with Paprosky type I/II femoral defect remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent revision THA with a primary or revision stem.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 78 patients who received revision THA for aseptic stem loosening using primary (N = 28) or revision stems (N = 50). The bone defects were classified as Paprosky type I or II. The mean follow-up duration was 72.3 ± 34.7 months. The primary outcome domains included surgical complications and implant failures. The secondary outcome domains included medical complications, 30- and 90-day readmission, and Harris hip score (HHS).

RESULTS

The use of revision stem was associated with a higher incidence than primary stem of patient complications (60.0% vs. 32.1%, p = 0.018), including intraoperative femur fracture (28.0% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.029) and greater trochanter fracture (16.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.045). The implant survival rate was comparable between groups. HHS at the final follow-up was similar.

CONCLUSION

With a lower risk of surgical complications and a similar rate of mid-term implant survival, cementless primary stem appears superior to revision stem in revision THA for aseptic stem loosening with Paprosky type I/II femoral defect.

Survivorship of the retained femoral component after revision total hip arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to estimate re-revision rates of retained femoral components after revision of total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods

Papers were searched in the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases with predetermined keywords from January 2000 to January 2022. The studies reporting the re-revision rates of retained stems after revision THA were identified. Pooled rates of re-revision for any reason and aseptic loosening were calculated using a random-effects model or a fixed-effects model based on the results of heterogeneity assessment after the Freeman–Tukey double-arcsine transformation. A meta-regression was performed to explore potential sources of heterogeneity.

Results

There were 20 studies with 1,484 hips that received the isolated cup revision with the femoral component retained. The pooled re-revision rate of retained stems was 1.75% [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43%–3.65%]. The re-revision rate of retained stems due to aseptic loosening was 0.62% (95% CI, 0.06%–1.55%). The meta-regression showed that the fixation type (cemented or cementless) was related to the re-revision rate for any reason and the re-revision rate for aseptic loosening.

Conclusion

Based on the existing evidence, the isolated cup revision with a stable stem in situ yields low re-revision rates. The cement status of retained stems may influence the survivorship of stems.

Does metaphyseal modularity in femoral revision stems have a role in treating bone defects less severe than IIIB? Clinical and radiological results of a series of 163 modular femoral stems

INTRODUCTION

Revision for loosening of femoral stems requires an extensive analysis of bone defects to determine the most appropriate course of action. The drawbacks of using modular stems are that they can break or corrode at their junction. They have rarely been evaluated based on the extent of bone loss and particularly in patients with less severe bone loss. This led us to carry out a retrospective study to analyze modular femoral stems as a function of the initial bone defect (stage IIIB versus less severe in the Paprosky classification): 1) implant survivorship, 2) osteointegration and subsidence of the stem, and 3) breakage of implant.

HYPOTHESIS

Modular femoral stems can be used for all types of bone defects (not only IIIB) as the complication rate is identical.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between January 1, 1996, and December 31, 2016, 163 patients were included who had received a modular femoral revision stem. The minimum follow-up was 4 years; the mean was 6.7 years±3.3 [4-21]. One patient was lost to follow-up, 88 had died before the analysis date and 74 were still alive; however, 10 of them had the stem removed less than 4 years after implantation. Thus 64 patients were available for the clinical evaluation. There were 44% (72 patients) with Paprosky stage IIIB femoral bone loss and 56% (91 patients) with stage I, II or IIIA bone loss. The stem's bone integration was evaluated using the Engh and Massin score. All complications were documented.

RESULTS

The survivorship of the femoral stem was 93.75% (95% CI: 83.33-96.70) at 5 years with removal for any reason as the end point. There was no significant difference (p=0.0877) in survivorship relative to the severity of the initial bone loss: 89.84% (95% CI: 78.73-95.31) for stage IIIB; 95.23% (95% CI: 82.24-98.79) for stage IIIA; 97.06% (95% CI: 80.90-99.58) for stage II. Bone integration was considered as being achieved in 76% of stems based on available radiographs (119 of 156 patients) with the severity of bone loss having no effect. We found 18 instances of stem subsidence out of 156 stems with available data (11.5%). The mean subsidence was 14.7 mm ± 12.3 [5-40]. Among the 18 stems with postoperative subsidence, 13 had been implanted for stage IIIB defects, while 5 were for less severe defects (p=0.751). Two stem fractures occurred in patients with stage IIIB bone loss, thus 2/66 for stage IIIB and 0/86 in the less severe bone loss cases (p=0.188).

CONCLUSION

Modularity provides similar results no matter the severity of initial bone loss, without the risk of additional complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, Retrospective study.

Trabecular Titanium for Orthopedic Applications: Balancing Antimicrobial with Osteoconductive Properties by Varying Silver Contents

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and implant loosening are the most common complications after joint replacement surgery. Due to their increased surface area, additively manufactured porous metallic implants provide optimal osseointegration but they are also highly susceptible to bacterial colonization. Antibacterial surface coatings of porous metals that do not inhibit osseointegration are therefore highly desirable. The potential of silver coatings on arthroplasty implants to inhibit PJI has been demonstrated, but the optimal silver content and release kinetics have not yet been defined. A tight control over the silver deposition coatings can help overcome bacterial infections while reducing cytotoxicity to human cells. In this regard, porous titanium sputtered with silver and titanium nitride with increasing silver contents enabled controlling the antibacterial effect against common PJI pathogens while maintaining the metabolic activity of human primary cells. Electron beam melting additively manufactured titanium alloys, coated with increasing silver contents, were physico-chemically characterized and investigated for effects against common PJI pathogens. Silver contents from 7 at % to 18 at % of silver were effective in reducing bacterial growth and biofilm formation. Staphylococcus epidermidis was more susceptible to silver ions than Staphylococcus aureus. Importantly, all silver-coated titanium scaffolds supported primary human osteoblasts proliferation, differentiation, and mineralization up to 28 days. A slight reduction of cell metabolic activity was observed at earlier time points, but no detrimental effects were found at the end of the culture period. Silver release from the silver-coated scaffolds also had no measurable effects on primary osteoblast gene expression since similar expression of genes related to osteogenesis was observed regardless the presence of silver. The investigated silver-coated porous titanium scaffolds may thus enhance osseointegration while reducing the risk of biofilm formation by the most common clinically encountered pathogens.

Analysis of perioperative outcomes in hip resection arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Hip resection arthroplasty (HRA) is a salvage surgical technique for the management of complex hip conditions wherein arthroplasty may be contraindicated. The purpose of this study was to review modern-day indications for HRA and compare outcomes between patients undergoing HRA and revision total hip arthroplasty (RTHA).

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) was used to identify patients undergoing HRA or RTHA between 2012 and 2017. Patient demographics, risk factors, and perioperative complications were analyzed. Multivariate regression was used to determine predictors of early postoperative complications. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to compare relative risks (RR) of complications in HRA compared to RTHA.

RESULTS

290 patients underwent HRA between 2012 and 2017. Infection was the most common indication for HRA (39.8%), followed by femoral neck fracture or malunion/nonunion (26%) and prosthetic instability (12.2%). Increased body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.012) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (p = 0.007) were associated with increased risk of complication in HRA. There were no significant differences in short-term complication risks between RTHA and HRA.

CONCLUSIONS

HRA was associated with short-term complication rates comparable to RTHA. These findings may help in surgical decision-making and appropriate indications in the present day.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Dual-mobility bearings in complex revision hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) is associated with an increased dislocation risk. Dual-mobility (DM) bearings have been used to address this issue. Such constructs offer increased range of motion and enhanced stability whilst avoiding some issues associated with fully-constrained devices. DM bearings have been used in our unit since 2013.

METHODS

All rTHA cases since 2013 were reviewed using the following criteria: (1) use of a DM bearing; (2) extensive soft tissue or bone loss resulting from ARMD, infection or multiple revisions, or requiring custom or megaprosthetic reconstruction; (3) minimum 2-month follow-up.

RESULTS

52 cases were identified with a median of 2 previous operations (range 1-6) and mean follow-up of 14 (2-41) months. The Novae-Stick component was used in 50 cases, the Avantage in 2 and the Trident MDM in 1 case. 19 required acetabular reconstruction using trabecular metal and four required custom acetabular components. 19 required femoral reconstruction with a proximal or total femoral replacement.Postoperatively, 8 patients (15.4%) sustained a dislocation at a mean of 1.6 (range 1-3) months. 3 (5.8%) requiring re-revision. 1 required excision arthroplasty and 2 a constrained liner, 1 of which went on to have further instability. There were no intraprosthetic dislocations.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual-mobility components are a viable option in the complex rTHA setting. Early dislocations can occur but the rate of instability is acceptable in this high-risk group.

Can machine learning models predict failure of revision total hip arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION

Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) represents a technically demanding surgical procedure which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Understanding risk factors for failure of revision THA is of clinical importance to identify at-risk patients. This study aimed to develop and validate novel machine learning algorithms for the prediction of re-revision surgery for patients following revision total hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

A total of 2588 consecutive patients that underwent revision THA was evaluated, including 408 patients (15.7%) with confirmed re-revision THA. Electronic patient records were manually reviewed to identify patient demographics, implant characteristics and surgical variables that may be associated with re-revision THA. Machine learning algorithms were developed to predict re-revision THA and these models were assessed by discrimination, calibration and decision curve analysis.

RESULTS

The strongest predictors for re-revision THA as predicted by the four validated machine learning models were the American Society of Anaesthesiology score, obesity (> 35 kg/m²) and indication for revision THA. The four machine learning models all achieved excellent performance across discrimination (AUC > 0.80), calibration and decision curve analysis. Higher net benefits for all machine learning models were demonstrated, when compared to the default strategies of changing management for all patients or no patients.

CONCLUSION

This study developed four machine learning models for the prediction of re-revision surgery for patients following revision total hip arthroplasty. The study findings show excellent model performance, highlighting the potential of these computational models to assist in preoperative patient optimization and counselling to improve revision THA patient outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, case-control retrospective analysis.

The Utility of MRI With Multiacquisition Variable-Resonance Image Combination (MAVRIC) in Diagnosing Deep Total Hip Arthroplasty Infection

Background: The 2010 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines report insufficient evidence to address the diagnostic efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Questions/Purposes: The purpose of this study was to determine the utility of MRI with multiacquisition variable-resonance image combination (MAVRIC) metal artifact suppression techniques in diagnosing PJI in the setting of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: Multiacquisition variable-resonance image combination MRIs obtained of THAs between November 2012 and November 2016 were queried. Radiology reports were classified as positive (suspicious for infection), negative (no features of infection), or inconclusive (infection cannot be excluded or correlation with aspiration suggested if clinically concerned). Chart review identified cases of deep PJI according to the modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. Results: Of 2156 MRIs of THAs included, MRI was concerning for infection in 1.8% (n = 39), inconclusive in 1.2% (n = 26), and negative in 97.0% (n = 2091). Deep PJI was identified in 53 (2.5%) patients, 30 of whom (56.6%) had conclusively positive finding on MRI (false-negative rate: 43.4%, sensitivity: 56.6%). Of 2103 aseptic THAs, only 9 (0.4%) MRIs were read as suspicious for infection (false-positive rate: 0.4%; specificity: 99.6%). Conclusion: Magnetic resonance imaging with MAVRIC is a highly specific test for PJI with a low false-positive rate. This indicates that when clinicians are provided with an MRI that unexpectedly suggests infection, a formal evaluation for infection is indicated. In patients with otherwise equivocal diagnostic findings, MRI may help confirm, but not refute, a diagnosis of PJI. Prospective study with more experienced image reviewers may further support the use of MRI in PJI.

Deep Learning for Radiographic Measurement of Femoral Component Subsidence Following Total Hip Arthroplasty

Femoral component subsidence following total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a worrisome radiographic finding. This study developed and evaluated a deep learning tool to automatically quantify femoral component subsidence between two serial anteroposterior (AP) hip radiographs. The authors' institutional arthroplasty registry was used to retrospectively identify patients who underwent primary THA from 2000 to 2020. A deep learning dynamic U-Net model was trained to automatically segment femur, implant, and magnification markers on a dataset of 500 randomly selected AP hip radiographs from 386 patients with polished tapered cemented femoral stems. An image processing algorithm was then developed to measure subsidence by automatically annotating reference points on the femur and implant, calibrating that with respect to magnification markers. Algorithm and manual subsidence measurements by two independent orthopedic surgeon reviewers in 135 randomly selected patients were compared. The mean, median, and SD of measurement discrepancy between the automatic and manual measurements were 0.6, 0.3, and 0.7 mm, respectively, and did not demonstrate a systematic tendency between human and machine. Automatic and manual measurements were strongly correlated and showed no evidence of significant differences. In contrast to the manual approach, the deep learning tool needs no user input to perform subsidence measurements. Keywords: Total Hip Arthroplasty, Femoral Component Subsidence, Artificial Intelligence, Deep Learning, Semantic Segmentation, Hip, Joints Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 2022.

Short Stem for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) - Overview, Patient Selection and Perspectives by Using the Metha® Hip Stem System

Short stem hip replacement has not only gained attention but also significance over the past decades. However, there still remains uncertainty regarding the correct indications for these stems. Even companies, producing implants, have varying recommendations that are more likely based on a well-meant advice than on statistically evaluated data. Thus, it is important to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a short stem prosthesis. The goal of this paper is to reveal some of the existing uncertainty in this field, by analyzing the Metha^® short hip stem system. This paper does not only focus on general aspects but also discusses some more specific problems, such as avascular necrosis and post-rheumatic diseases, as well as hip dysplasia and coxarthrosis. The aim is also to convey the opportunity to indicate this type of implant for elderly and obese patients as well as for femoral misalignments following post-Perthes disease, post-traumatic deformities or other malpositions of the hip.

Tripolar Constrained and Dual Mobility Liners Are Both Successful When Cemented Into Tantalum Acetabular Revision Shells in Complex Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background

Instability is a common complication after revision total hip arthroplasty. Tripolar constrained (TC) and dual mobility (DM) liners cemented into tantalum acetabular revision (TM) shells are established alternatives that reduce instability risk. This study compares outcomes of TC and DM liners cemented into TM shells in complex revision hip replacements.

Methods

Fifty cases using a TM shell and a TC or DM cemented liner with at least 12 months of follow-up were identified. There were 25 TC and 25 DM liners. Clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes were collected. Reasons for re-revision and failures were analyzed.

Results

The average age was 73 years in the TC group and 75 years in the DM group. The median follow-up duration was 50 months (23 - 96) and 13 months (12 – 21) for the TC and DM groups, respectively. The mean Harris Hip Score improved from 37 to 61 for the TC group and from 51 to 73 in the DM group at the last review. Two TC cases required revision for wear and liner failure. One DM insert was changed at reoperation for periprosthetic femur fracture. There were no failures of cement fixation in either group and no revisions for cup loosening.

Conclusions

In complex revision hip replacement with a history of instability or judged to have a high risk of instability postoperatively, TC and DM liners cemented into tantalum revision shells are both successful, giving acceptable results. The improved arc of movement with DM liners, minimizing impingement, makes them preferable except when there is a global abductor deficiency or severe joint laxity.

Influence of dual-mobility acetabular implants on revision and survivorship of cup and Kerboull-type reinforcement ring constructs in aseptic acetabular loosening

INTRODUCTION

Dual-mobility (DM) acetabular implants have been used in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) to prevent postoperative instability, with excellent mid-term survivorship. However, few comparative studies assessed the long-term outcomes of DM implants used in Kerboull-type reinforcement ring constructs for acetabular revision. The present study aimed to compare long-term survivorship, dislocation rates and clinical outcome between DM acetabular implants and conventional single-bearing (SB) implants when cemented in a reinforcement ring.

HYPOTHESIS

Dual-mobility implants are associated with equivalent survivorship and lower dislocation rates than SB implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study included 60 revision THAs for aseptic loosening using a Kerboull-type reinforcement ring, and finally included 2 groups of 23 patients with either DM or SB cemented acetabular implants after matching for age, gender, BMI and preoperative Harris hip score. Mean follow-up was 10 years (range, 6-14 years). Acetabular implant survivorship, dislocation rate and radiographic failure incidence (>5mm migration, progressive radiolucency, graft non-integration, reinforcement ring breakage) were compared between the two groups. Clinical outcomes used the Harris hip score, the Postel-Merle d'Aubigné score and the Parker score.

RESULTS

Survivorship free of aseptic acetabular re-revision was 89% at 10 years, with no significant difference between DM and SB (91% and 86%, respectively; p=0.54). Single-bearing implants showed a hazard ratio for dislocation of 6.7 (95% CI, 1.5-29.6; p=0.01) compared to DM implants. There were no significant differences in radiologic failure (10-year survivorship 72% and 64%, respectively; p=0.88) or functional scores.

DISCUSSION

The present study confirmed the impact of dual-mobility implants in reducing long-term dislocation risk when used in Kerboull-type reinforcement ring constructs for acetabular aseptic revision, with no increased risk of re-revision compared to conventional single-bearing implants.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, comparative retrospective study.

Treatment of Severe Acetabular Bone Loss Using a Tantalum Acetabular Shell and a Cemented Monoblock Dual Mobility Acetabular Cup

As the number of revision total hip arthroplasty increases, innovative solutions to complex problems are needed to address challenges posed by these complex cases. Severe acetabular bone loss, including cases of pelvic discontinuity, is a notable challenge with few solutions. Hip instability after revision arthroplasty remains one of the leading causes of revision and patient morbidity. The use of pelvic distraction and a press-fit tantalum shell for chronic discontinuity and posterior column open reduction and internal fixation with acetabular revision for acute pelvic discontinuity have previously been described. Similarly, dual mobility articulations have demonstrated long-term success in minimizing instability after revision total hip arthroplasty with good long-term survivorship. Here, the authors present a surgical technique in the management of Paprosky types 2 and 3 acetabular defects often with pelvic discontinuity using a tantalum shell in combination with cemented dual mobility liner to increase the stability of the joint. Custom screw placement is facilitated with the use of a metal cutting burr, both on the back table and in situ. The dual mobility liner is cemented, thus allowing for independent positioning of the acetabular implant and bearing surface. This technique has been successfully used in 19 patients with encouraging short-term results.

Dual-Mobility Implants and Constrained Liners in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Instability remains the most common complication after revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was a difference in aseptic revision rates and survivorship between dual-mobility (DM) and constrained liners (CL) in revision THA.

METHODS

We reviewed a consecutive series of 2432 revision THA patients from 2008 to 2019 at our institution and identified all patients who received either a CL or DM bearing. We compared demographics, comorbidities, indications, dislocations, and aseptic failure rates between the two groups. Bivariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to determine risk factors for failure, and a Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed with an aseptic re-revision as the endpoint.

RESULTS

Of the 191 patients, 139 (72%) received a DM bearing, and 52 (28%) had a CL. At a mean follow-up of 14.3 months, there was no statistically significant difference in rates of dislocation (10.4% vs 14.0%, P = .667), aseptic revision (30.9% vs 46.2%, P = .073), or time to revision (3.78 vs 6 months, P = .565) between the two groups. The multivariate analysis revealed CL had no difference in aseptic re-revision rates when compared with DM (odds ratio 1.47, 95% confidence interval 0.84-2.52, P = .177). The survivorship analysis found no difference in aseptic failure between the groups at 12 months (P = .059).

CONCLUSION

Both CL and DM bearings have high aseptic failure rates at intermediate term follow-up after revision THA. CL did show a higher risk of failure than DM bearings, but it was not statistically significant with the numbers available for this study. Further prospective studies are needed to determine the optimal treatment for recurrent instability.

Hip Hemiarthroplasty for Fractured Neck of Femur Revised to Total Hip Arthroplasty: Outcomes Are Influenced by Patient Age Not Articulation Options

BACKGROUND

Hip hemiarthroplasty is the most common arthroplasty option for fractured neck of femur (FNOF). Revision to total hip arthroplasty (THA) is occasionally required. This study aimed to assess the outcome of hemiarthroplasty revised to THA and to assess the impact of femoral head size, dual mobility (DM), and constrained liners.

METHODS

All aseptic 1^st revisions reported to the Australian Joint Replacement Registry after hemiarthroplasty performed for FNOF when a THA was used as the revision procedure were included from September 1999 to December 2019. The primary outcome measure was the cumulative percent revision for all-causes and dislocation. The impact of prosthesis factors on revision THA was assessed: standard head THA (≤32 mm), large head THA (≥36 mm), DM, and constrained liners. Outcomes were compared using Kaplan Meyer and competing risk.

RESULTS

There were 96,861 hemiarthroplasties performed, with 985 revised to THA. The most common reasons for 1^st revision were loosening (49.3%), fracture (17.7%), and dislocation (11.0%). Of the hemiarthroplasty procedures revised to THA, 76 had a 2^nd revision. The most common reasons for 2^nd revision were fracture (27.6%), dislocation (26.3%), loosening (23.7%), and infection (18.4%). Femoral head size, DM, or constrained liner use did not alter the incidence of all-cause 2^nd revision. This did not change when solely looking at patients still alive. A 2^nd revision was more likely in patients aged <75 years.

CONCLUSION

The outcome of hemiarthroplasty performed for FNOF revised to THA is influenced by patient age, not by the articulation used.

Additively manufactured patient-specific prosthesis for tumor reconstruction: Design, process, and properties

Design and processing capabilities of additive manufacturing (AM) to fabricate complex geometries continues to drive the adoption of AM for biomedical applications. In this study, a validated design methodology is presented to evaluate AM as an effective fabrication technique for reconstruction of large bone defects after tumor resection in pediatric oncology patients. Implanting off-the-shelf components in pediatric patients is especially challenging because most standard components are sized and shaped for more common adult cases. While currently reported efforts on AM implants are focused on maxillofacial, hip and knee reconstructions, there have been no reported studies on reconstruction of proximal humerus tumors. A case study of a 9-year-old diagnosed with proximal humerus osteosarcoma was used to develop a patient-specific AM prosthesis for the humerus following tumor resection. Commonly used body-centered cubic (BCC) structures were incorporated at the surgical neck and distal interface in order to increase the effective surface area, promote osseointegration, and reduce the implant weight. A patient-specific prosthesis was fabricated using electron beam melting method from biocompatible Ti-6Al-4V. Both computational and biomechanical tests were performed on the prosthesis to evaluate its biomechanical behavior under varying loading conditions. Morphological analysis of the construct using micro-computed tomography was used to compare the as-designed and as-built prosthesis. It was found that the patient-specific prosthesis could withstand physiologically-relevant loading conditions with minimal permanent deformation (82 μm after 105 cycles) at the medial aspect of the porous surgical neck. These outcomes support potential translation of the patient-specific AM prostheses to reconstruct large bone defects following tumor resection.

Etiology and Complications of Early Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Within 90 Days

BACKGROUND

The etiology, complications, and rerevision risks of early aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) within 90 days are insufficiently documented.

METHODS

A national insurance claims database (PearlDiver Technologies, Fort Wayne, IN) was queried for patients who underwent unilateral aseptic revision THA within 90 days of the index procedure using administrative codes. Patients who underwent revision for infection, without minimum 2-year follow-up, and younger than 18 years were excluded. This cohort was matched based on gender, age, and Charlson Comorbidity Index to a control group of patients who underwent primary THA without revision within 90 days. Two-year rerevision and 90-day complication rates were recorded. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used as appropriate for statistical comparison.

RESULTS

Four hundred two patients met the inclusion criteria for early aseptic revision within 90 days of the index procedure and were matched to the control group. The overall 2-year rerevision rate was higher in the early revision group compared with control group (14.9% vs 2.5%, P < .001). Complications within 90 days occurred more frequently in the early revision group, including blood transfusion (10.2% vs 3.2%, P < .001), deep vein thrombosis (9.0% vs 3.2%, P = .001), and pulmonary embolism (2.74% vs 0.75%, P = .031). The most common reasons for early aseptic revision were dislocation (41.5%), fracture (38.1%), and loosening (17.4%).

CONCLUSION

Early aseptic revision THA is associated with significantly higher 90-day complication rates and 2-year rerevision rates compared with a control group of primary THA without revision. The most common reasons for acute early revision were dislocation, fracture, and mechanical loosening.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

High Incidence of Irradiated Cortical Strut Allograft Resorption Following Revision of Femoral Stems

BACKGROUND

Despite the widespread use of revision total hip arthroplasties using cementless stems and cortical strut allografts, graft resorption has not been explicitly studied.

METHODS

Between 2010 and 2018, 40 femoral strut grafts were used in the revision of femoral stems of 36 patients (18 males and 18 females; average age, 51.9 ± 12.9 years). The mean follow-up was 78.9 ± 37.3 months. Failure was defined as revision surgery for any reason and subsidence of greater than 5 mm.

RESULTS

The survival rate of the stem without the need for revision at 5 years was 95% (mean graft survival time, 10.8 [95% CI, 9.414-12.234] years). Overall survival with graft resorption as the endpoint was 90% at 5 years (mean graft survival time, 8.8 [95% CI, 7.5-10.2] years). Survival with graft nonunion as the endpoint was 90% at 3 years (mean survival time, 11.7 [95% CI, 10.5-12.8] years).

CONCLUSION

The resorption rate increases proportionally to the follow-up duration and can be very severe in a high percentage of cases. Long-term multicenter studies are required to assess the effect of resorption on prosthesis longevity.

Dual mobility for total hip arthroplasty revision surgery: A systematic review and metanalysis

INTRODUCTION

Revision THA (R-THA) is thought to have a higher complication rate if compared to primary THA. Dual Mobility (DM) implants have been designed aiming for achieving greater stability, with good clinical results. However, scarce material can be found about the real improvements provided by this type of implant compared to traditional implant in Revisions of Total Hip Arthroplasties.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies were performed in December 2019. This was in accordance with the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Our primary outcome measure was overall survivorship and dislocation rate, either treated with a conservative method or requiring surgery.

RESULTS

Regarding the overall implant survival, we found a slight significant risk ratio, with a statistically meaningful difference between the two groups in questions in favour of the DM implant. A statistically significant difference in favour of the DM group turned out considering only the Dislocation rate Risk ratio and the aseptic loosening risk as well. No statistical difference was found between the two groups about the risk ratio of infection.

DISCUSSION

A steady increase of evidence is demonstrating the efficacy of using a DM cup system in THA revisions with low dislocation rates, but currently there is no study in the literature that demonstrates with statistically significant evidence. The main finding of the present study is that implant's Survivor and prevention of dislocation at medium follow-up showed better results with a DM if compared to a fixed-bearing cup, for Revision THA.

What Is the Dislocation and Revision Rate of Dual-mobility Cups Used in Complex Revision THAs?

BACKGROUND

Dual-mobility cups have been shown to reduce the dislocation risk after THA. Although dual-mobility cups can be a useful strategy to mitigate against recurrent dislocation after revision surgery, few clinical studies have focused on the results of complex revision THAs with extensive bone and soft-tissue loss or in patients who have undergone more than one previous surgical procedure.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What is the survival free from revision for dislocation of dual-mobility cups used in complex revision THAs? (2) What is the survival free from any dislocation?

METHODS

Between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2013, 327 patients underwent a complex revision THA that included an acetabular revision, defined as preexisting massive bone loss in the acetabulum (at least Paprosky Type 2B) and/or proximal femur (at least Paprosky Type 3), substantial gluteal soft-tissue involvement, at least two previous surgical procedures or a one-stage septic revision, or history of dislocation. All 327 complex revision patients received a dual-mobility cup. Of those, 34% (111) were lost to follow-up before 5 years and were not known to have reached a study endpoint (revision for dislocation, and any dislocation) before then, leaving 216 patients for analysis. For patients with bilateral hip surgeries only the first operated hip was included for analysis. The median (range) follow-up duration was 69 months (60 to 110). The primary endpoint was dislocation or re-revision for dislocation. Fifty-six percent (120 of 216) of the patients were women and 44% (96 of 216) were men. The mean age of the patients was 69 ± 9 years. The patients underwent a median of four surgical procedures (1 to 4) before the index procedure (the revision evaluated in this study). A survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method; any dislocation or revision for dislocation was determined as the endpoint.

RESULTS

The dislocation-free survival rates were 96% (95% confidence interval 92 to 98) at 5 years and 82% (95% CI 72 to 89) at 9 years. The overall dislocation rate was 11% (24 of 216 patients) at the final follow-up interval. Survival free of revision for dislocation was 99% (95% CI 96 to 100) at 5 years and 85% (95% CI 75 to 92) at 9 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual-mobility cups used in complex revision THA in this series had a higher rate of dislocation and revision than expected, based on earlier studies of dislocations of these components. Although we believe dual-mobility cups are still the first choice of implant if the patient has instability, these cups should be used cautiously if severe bone loss or soft-tissue involvement is present.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Extensively hydroxyapatite-coated long femoral stem revision hip arthroplasty: Clinical outcome and survivorship in 11 to 17.5 years follow up

Extensively coated long femoral stem revision hip arthroplasty is based on the principle of distal fixation at diaphyseal region, which can overcome the problem of proximal femoral bone stock deficiencies causing inadequate support and unstable fixation when using conventional length femoral stem. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of 43 cases of revision hip arthroplasties using extensively hydroxyapatite-coated long femoral stem performed in our department from Jan 1998 to Dec 2005. Patients’ background demographic data, operative details and clinical outcome were analyzed. The mean age at revision surgery was 63.7 (32–84). The mean follow-up period was of 13.8 years (11–17.5 years). In the latest follow up, all patients reported either no or mild hip or thigh pain. 29.2% of patients were able to walk unaided, 25.0% were able to walk with stick, and 33.3% were able to walk with quadripod. The average Harris hip score measured in the latest follow up was 78.8 (55–100). 4.7% were complicated with implant loosening requiring re-revision and 4.7% were complicated with implant infection requiring implant removal. The survival rate was 89.9% at 17.5 years. The femoral stem without femoral fixation augmentation had better survivorship as compared with those with augmentation (p = 0.038). Extensively hydroxyapatite-coated long femoral stem is a good option for revision hip arthroplasty with good clinical outcome and high survival rate.