The Direct Anterior Approach for Complex Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty: The Extensile Acetabular Approach on a Regular Operating Room Table

Complications and Survivorship After Aseptic Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Is There a Difference by Surgical Approach?

BACKGROUND

Revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) has traditionally been performed through the posterolateral approach (PA). Anterior approaches (AA) for rTHA are increasingly being utilized. The purpose of this study was to compare complications and survivorship from re-revision and reoperation after aseptic rTHA performed using an AA versus a PA.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent aseptic rTHA either through an AA (direct anterior approach [DAA], anterior-based muscle sparing [ABMS]) or PA from January 2017 to December 2021. There were 116 patients who underwent AA-rTHA (DAA 50, ABMS 66) or PA-rTHA (n = 105). Patient demographics, complications, and postoperative outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

The most common indication in both groups was aseptic loosening (n = 26, 22.4% AA, n = 28, 26.7% PA). Acetabular revision alone was most common in the AA group (n = 33, 28.4%), while both components were most commonly revised in the PA groups (n = 47, 44.8%). In all the AA-rTHA group, the index total hip arthroplasty was performed through a PA in 51% of patients, while the PA-rTHA group had the index procedure performed via AA in 4.8%. There was no statistically significant difference in re-revision rate between the DAA, ABMS, or PA groups (9.55 versus 5.3% versus 11.4%, respectively, P = .11). The most common overall reason for re-revision was persistent instability, with no difference in incidence of postoperative hip dislocation (n = 4, 6.8% DAA, n = 3, 5.3%, n = 10, 9.5% PA; P = .31).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates no difference in complication or re-revision survivorship after aseptic rTHA performed through a DAA, ABMS approach, or PA, nor between anterior or posterior-based approaches.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Periprosthetic fracture following anterior approach or dislocation after posterior approach: which one is the lesser evil?

INTRODUCTION

The most common approaches in total hip arthroplasty (THA) have different complication profiles; anterior-approach (AA-THA) has an increased risk of periprosthetic fractures (PPF); posterior-approach (PA-THA) is associated with higher dislocation risk. However, the relative severity of one versus the other is unknown. This study aims to compare outcome of patients who suffered PPF after AA-THA with those that sustained dislocation after PA-THA.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, single-center, multi-surgeon, consecutive case-series of primary THA patients. In a cohort of 9867 patients who underwent THA, 79 fulfilled the approach-specific, post-operative complication criteria, of which 44 were PPF after AA-THA and 35 with dislocation after PA-THA (age 67.9 years (range: 38.0-88.1), 58.2% women). Outcome included complication- and revision- rates, and patient-reported outcomes including Oxford Hip Score (OHS).

RESULTS

At 5.8 years follow-up (range: 2.0-18.5), reoperation was more common in the dislocation after PA-THA group (23/35 vs. 20/44; p = 0.072). Change of surgical approach occurred in 15/20 of patients with PPF after AA-THA, but none in those with dislocation after PA-THA. Following re-operation, complication rate was greater in the PPF group (9/20 vs. 4/23; p = 0.049). At latest follow-up, OHS were superior in the PPF after AA-THA group [42.6 (range: 25.0-48.0) vs. 36.6 (range: 21.0-47.0); p = 0.006].

CONCLUSION

Dislocation following PA-THA is more likely to require revision. However, PPF following AA-THA requires more often a different surgical approach and is at higher risk of complications. Despite the increased surgical burden post-operative PROMs are better in the peri-prosthetic fracture group, especially in cases not requiring reoperation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, case-control study.

Systematic Review of Total Hip Arthroplasty Outcomes in Cerebral Palsy Patients and a Comparative Analysis with Rheumatoid Arthritis

Background

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is considered a successful treatment option for patients with degenerative hip arthritis. However, in the setting of neuromuscular diseases, patients with cerebral palsy (CP) are considered high-risk due to instability, contractures, and altered muscle tone. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyse the data in the setting of THA in CP patients including indications, types of implants, revision rates, and patient-reported outcomes and compare these with those of a cohort requiring THA due to degenerative arthritis unrelated to neuromuscular disorders.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from inception until June 10, 2023, to identify the relevant studies for THA on CP patients. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS).

Results

The initial search generated 190 studies out of which 21 met the inclusion criteria. The most frequently reported indication was painful hip dislocation or subluxation due to failure of prior nonoperative treatment. The most frequently reported complication was dislocation affecting overall 7.5% (0-28%) of all patients, while other complications included periprosthetic fractures and heterotrophic ossification. The survival rates of primary THAs ranged from 85% to 100% at 5 years and from 73% to 86% at 10 years. Patients with CP who undergo total hip arthroplasty experience a greater overall rate of complications compared to patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) that undergo the same procedure.

Conclusion

The current literature suggests that THA is a beneficial procedure for patients with CP through pain reduction and functional improvement. However, the increased rates of potential complications compared to the general population require careful consideration. We suggest that further investigations on the most appropriate time of procedure, implant type, and procedure are needed.

The Direct Anterior Approach (DAA) as a Standard Approach for Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) in Coxa Profunda and Protrusio Acetabuli? A Radiographic Analysis of 188 Cases

INTRODUCTION

The direct anterior approach (DAA) represents a well-recognized soft tissue sparing technique for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). The feasibility and suitability of the DAA in cases of complex acetabular deformities, namely coxa profunda (CP) and protrusio acetabuli (PA), remain to be determined.

METHODS

A total of 188 cases of CP (100 cases) and PA (88 cases) hips undergoing primary THA via the DAA were retrospectively analyzed. Surgical and radiographic parameters were evaluated and potential complications were assessed. Finally, successful implantation was defined if surgical and radiographic parameters were well within established values of non-complex primary THA.

RESULTS

In 159 hips, the medial border of the acetabular component was transferred laterally to the ilioischial line, corresponding to a fully treated acetabular protrusion. In 23 (12.23%) cases, mild, and in 5 (2.66%) cases, moderate residual acetabular protrusion remained after THA. Postoperatively, 11.40% (PA group) and 9.00% (CP group) had a leg length discrepancy (LLD) greater than 10 mm. The mean operative time was significantly less than 60 min. A linear relationship between the BMI and operative time was observed, with an additional 0.9 min of operative time per BMI unit. Overall, complications were rare and did not differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that the DAA is a suitable approach for primary THA in patients with coxa profunda and acetabular protrusion if performed by experienced surgeons familiar with the DAA. Obese patients with acetabular protrusion may pose a significant limitation to the DAA and caution should be advised in cases of obesity.

Feasibility of total hip arthroplasty in cerebral palsy patients: a systematic review on clinical outcomes and complications

PURPOSE

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a successful treatment for hip osteoarthritis secondary to hip dysplasia. However, the reported rate of complications following THA in the settings of neuromuscular diseases is high. This systematic review aimed to analyze the indications, functional outcomes and surgical failures of primary THA in cerebral palsy (CP) patients.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched, and all clinical studies focusing on THA in patients with CP from inception through March 2020 were included. The methodological quality was assessed with Guo et al.'s quality appraisal checklist for case series and case-control studies, while cohort and prospective studies were evaluated with a modified version of the Downs and Black's quality assessment checklist.

RESULTS

The initial search returned 69 studies out of which 15, including 2732 THAs, met the inclusion criteria. The most frequent indication for THA was dislocated painful hip for which previous non-operative treatment had failed. Complications presented in 10 to 45% of cases. The most frequently reported complication was dislocation (1-20%), followed by component loosening (0.74-20%). Aseptic component loosening was the most frequent cause of revision surgery, followed by dislocation and periprosthetic fracture. Mean implant survival at ten years was 84% (range 81-86%).

CONCLUSION

The available literature suggests that although THA is a beneficial procedure in CP patients, it has a higher rate of complications and worse implant survival than the general population.

Direct Anterior Approach for Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Anatomy and Surgical Technique

There has been increased interest and literature on the efficacy of direct anterior approach (DAA) for total hip arthroplasty (THA). Developments in surgical technique and instrumentation, along with exposure earlier in orthopaedic residency training, may augment the adoption of this approach among practicing orthopaedic surgeons. With the increasing number of primary THA performed through the DAA, understanding the indications and techniques associated with revision THA via the DAA has proved increasingly important. Patient positioning, understanding surgical anatomy and extensile maneuvers, and applying key reconstructive methods are essential for obtaining adequate exposure and fixation. Acetabular exposure can be facilitated through capsular and soft-tissue release, along with extensile approaches to the pelvis and acetabulum. Extensile distal extension can be performed for safe access to the femur, including extended femoral osteotomies. The purpose of this review is to describe indications, surgical anatomy, intraoperative tips, clinical outcomes, and complications after DAA for revision THA.

Does Structured Postgraduate Training Affect the Learning Curve in Direct Anterior Total Hip Arthroplasty? A Single Surgeon's First 200 Cases

Background

The direct anterior approach (DAA) used for primary total hip arthroplasty has been shown to improve early postoperative outcomes, but prior studies have identified a marked learning curve for surgeons transitioning to this approach. However, these studies do not capture surgeons with postgraduate fellowship training in DAA. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the learning curve by comparing perioperative outcomes for the first 100 to latter 100 cases and first 50 to final 50 cases.

Methods

The first 200 consecutive primary total hip arthroplasties performed by a single surgeon were prospectively followed up for up to 2 years postoperatively. Data on demographic and perioperative factors, 90-day readmissions, and short- and long-term complications were collected. Radiographic outcomes included acetabular cup anteversion and abduction measurements. Logistic regressions were used to calculate odds ratios and confidence intervals for surgical time greater than 2 hours.

Results

The first 100 and second 100 cases had significant differences in operative times (118.1 vs 110.4 minutes, P = .009), acetabular abduction (38.3 vs 35.5 degrees, P = .001) and anteversion (13.5 vs 15.1 degrees, P = .009), and incidence of neuropraxia (41 vs 9%, P < .001). Estimated blood loss, transfusions, discharge disposition, length of stay, readmission, and other complications had no statistical significance between the first and second 100 cases. The first 50 cases had higher odds of surgical time greater than 2 hours (odds ratio = 5.2, 95% confidence interval = 1.84-14.75, P = .002) than the final 50 cases.

Conclusions

When compared with the existing literature, incorporation of DAA into fellowship training can lead to reduction in fractures and reoperation rates.

Anterior approach without traction table: A means of saving time and money in hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture? A case-matched study with and without traction table

BACKGROUND

The costs incurred by management of displaced femoral neck fracture are a public health issue. The anterior approach can be used for partial hip replacement, but costs in terms of equipment and time incurred by using a traction table have not to our knowledge been estimated in this indication. We therefore performed a case-control study, comparing (1) installation and deinstallation times (IT, DT) in partial hip replacement using a standard versus a traction table (ST, TT), and (2) operating times, limb-length radiography and intraoperative complications.

HYPOTHESIS

Performing the anterior approach on a standard table saves installation and deinstallation time and operating time, without leading to more intraoperative complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comparative retrospective study included 102 patients (mean age, 84.8±8 years; 46 ST, 56 TT). Installation time (IT) was calculated between entry in the operating room and performance of the incision; operating time (OT) between incision and closure; and deinstallation time (DT) between closure and leaving the operating room.

RESULTS

Mean IT in ST (25.5±6.2min) was significantly shorter than in TT (33.9±6.2min) (p=1.1*10^-9), as were DT (13±4.7 versus 17±3.4min) (p=4.1*10^-6) and OT (73.5±15.9 versus 82.6±21.3minutes) (p=0.01). There were 4 intraoperative complications: 1 greater trochanter fracture in ST and 2 greater trochanter fractures and 1 proximal femoral fracture in TT. Limb-length discrepancy was comparable between ST (3.7±3.2mm (range, 0-15mm)) and TT (5.3±4.6mm (range, 0-20mm)) (p=0.06).

DISCUSSION

Patient installation on a standard table reduced installation, deinstallation and operating time compared to use of a traction table, without increasing the complications rate.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, case-control study.