The anterior approach for conversion hip arthroplasty

Hardware Removal and Conversion Hip Arthroplasty via a Single Interval Anterior Approach: Surgical Technique

The supine 'off-table' anterior-based muscle-sparing (ABMS) approach is an established approach for primary total hip arthroplasty. The approach is performed with the patient positioned supine on a regular operating room table. It combines utilizing the Watson-Jones interval (without disrupting the abductor muscles) with principles of capsular management borrowed from the direct anterior approach. The approach may also be utilized for complex primary and revision hip arthroplasties. One clinical scenario the ABMS approach may be particularly well-suited to is conversion hip arthroplasty when retained hardware requires removal. The approach enables the surgeon to remove proximal femoral hardware and perform hip arthroplasty within the same muscle interval. This is in contrast to direct anterior approach, which entails separate windows being created on either side of the tensor fascia lata muscle to remove hardware and insert hip arthroplasty components, respectively. In this article, we describe our surgical technique for performing conversion total hip arthroplasty with hardware removal (sliding hip screw and plate in the discussed case) via a single interval with the supine off-table ABMS approach.

Conversion total hip arthroplasty following extracapsular hip fracture fixation with a cephalomedullary device: a comprehensive review

With the annual incidence of hip fractures and hip fracture fixation rising, the need for conversion total hip arthroplasty has also risen. About half of the 280,000 hip fractures that occur annually in the United States are extracapsular. Commonly extracapsular hip fractures are treated with either cephalomedullary nails (CMNs) or sliding hip screws (SHS). More recently, there has been a shift toward increased CMN use due to increased training with this fixation method as well as perioperative and biomechanical benefits. Given this shift, orthopedic surgeons need to understand the factors that lead to CMN failure. Failed CMN treatment leaves both patients and surgeons with few management options including revision fixation with or without osteotomy, conversion total hip arthroplasty, and conversion hemiarthroplasty. Surgeons must consider the patient and injury characteristics before deciding the best treatment plan. Conversion total hip arthroplasty is indicated in younger patients without femoral head and/or acetabular articular injury, degenerative joint disease, or avascular necrosis. Conversion total arthroplasty is a technically demanding and resource-intensive surgery associated with lower success rates and outcomes than primary total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedic surgeons should have thorough understanding of preoperative workup needed prior to surgery, implant selection associated with best outcomes, most common surgical approaches used, intraoperative considerations, and complications associated with conversion total hip arthroplasty. A comprehensive understanding of these concepts gives patients the best chance of having a successful outcome.

Conversion hip arthroplasty via the direct anterior approach: pearls, pitfalls and personal experience

OBJECTIVE

Conversion total hip arthroplasty (CTHA) through a direct anterior approach (DAA) in supine position.

INDICATIONS

Failed osteosynthesis of proximal femoral fractures or failed conservative hip surgery, with hardware in situ.

CONTRAINDICATIONS

Decayed general conditions, infection (peri-implant or systemic infection), need for greater trochanter reconstruction, severe proximal femur deformity.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

Supine position. Mark DAA and expected limited incisions for hardware removal (HR) with the help of a C-arm. Use guidewire and extraction devices for HR. Perform a DAA with particular attention to a wide release of the femur.

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

Full progressive weight-bearing starting on day 1, depending on bone quality. Discharge with crutches following patient walking capability. Precautions for 6 weeks.

RESULTS

In all, 27 conversion THAs through a DAA. Mean age at the time of surgery 59.8 (range 18-81) years. Mean body mass index was 23.5 (range 17-31.6). Reasons of previous surgery failures were avascular necrosis of the femoral head, posttraumatic arthritis and nonunion with or without hardware migration. Mean surgical time was 125.8 min (range 58-190 min, standard deviation [SD] 38.2 min). Mean follow-up time was 6.9 years (range 2-15, SD 5.03 years). Mean pre-Harris Hip Score (mHHs) was 24.4 (range 19-36, SD 5.4), while the mean post-mHHS was 90.3 (range 89-91, SD 0.95). Two patients required postoperative osteosynthesis for periprosthetic fractures due to falls. Overall complication rate was 10%.

Primary total hip arthroplasty via the direct anterior approach in the lateral decubitus position : surgical technique, learning curve, complications, and early results

AIMS

The direct anterior approach (DAA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA) has potential advantages over other approaches and is most commonly performed with the patient in the supine position. We describe a technique for DAA THA with the patient in the lateral decubitus position and report the early clinical and radiological outcomes, the characteristics of the learning curve, and perioperative complications.

METHODS

All primary DAA THAs performed in the lateral position by a single surgeon over a four-year period from the surgeon's first case using the technique were identified from a prospectively collected database. Modified Harris Hip Scores (mHHS) were collected to assess clinical outcome, and routine radiological analysis was performed. Retrospective review of the medical records identified perioperative complications, the characteristics of the learning curve, and revisions.

RESULTS

A total of 257 patients were included in the study. Their mean age was 60 years (SD 9.0). A total of 164 (64%) were female. The mean mHHS improved significantly from 52.1 (SD 16.2) preoperatively to 94.4 (SD 11) at a follow-up of one year (p < 0.001), with 212 of 225 patients (94%) achieving a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (> 8 points). Radiological evaluation showed a mean leg length discrepancy of 2.6 mm (SD 5.9) and a mean difference in femoral offset of 0.2 mm (SD 4.9). A total of 234/243 acetabular components (96.3%) were positioned within Lewinnek's safe zone. Analysis of operating time, blood loss, the position of the components, and complications did not identify a learning curve. A total of 14 patients (5.4%) had a major perioperative complication and three (1.2%) required revision THA. There were no major neurovascular complications and no dislocations.

CONCLUSION

We have described and analyzed a surgical technique for undertaking DAA THA in the familiar lateral decubitus position using a routine operating table, positioning devices, and instrumentation, and shown that it can be performed safely and effectively under these circumstances. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7 Supple B):53-58.