Reverse hybrid total hip arthroplasty

Advancement in total hip implant: a comprehensive review of mechanics and performance parameters across diverse novelties

The UK's National Joint Registry (NJR) and the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR) of 2022 revealed that total hip replacement (THR) is the most common orthopaedic joint procedure. The NJR also noted that 10-20% of hip implants require revision within 1 to 10 years. Most of these revisions are a result of aseptic loosening, dislocation, implant wear, implant fracture, and joint incompatibility, which are all caused by implant geometry disparity. The primary purpose of this review article is to analyze and evaluate the mechanics and performance factors of advancement in hip implants with novel geometries. The existing hip implants can be categorized based on two parts: the hip stem and the joint of the implant. Insufficient stress distribution from implants to the femur can cause stress shielding, bone loss, excessive micromotion, and ultimately, implant aseptic loosening due to inflammation. Researchers are designing hip implants with a porous lattice and functionally graded material (FGM) stems, femur resurfacing, short-stem, and collared stems, all aimed at achieving uniform stress distribution and promoting adequate bone remodeling. Designing hip implants with a porous lattice FGM structure requires maintaining stiffness, strength, isotropy, and bone development potential. Mechanical stability is still an issue with hip implants, femur resurfacing, collared stems, and short stems. Hip implants are being developed with a variety of joint geometries to decrease wear, improve an angular range of motion, and strengthen mechanical stability at the joint interface. Dual mobility and reverse femoral head-liner hip implants reduce the hip joint's dislocation limits. In addition, researchers reveal that femoral headliner joints with unidirectional motion have a lower wear rate than traditional ball-and-socket joints. Based on research findings and gaps, a hypothesis is formulated by the authors proposing a hip implant with a collared stem and porous lattice FGM structure to address stress shielding and micromotion issues. A hypothesis is also formulated by the authors suggesting that the utilization of a spiral or gear-shaped thread with a matched contact point at the tapered joint of a hip implant could be a viable option for reducing wear and enhancing stability. The literature analysis underscores substantial research opportunities in developing a hip implant joint that addresses both dislocation and increased wear rates. Finally, this review explores potential solutions to existing obstacles in developing a better hip implant system.

Long-term survival of hybrid total hip replacement for prior failed proximal femoral nail antirotation: a retrospective study with a median 10-year follow-up

Background

Hybrid total hip replacement (THR) is commonly used in the management of proximal femur fractures in elderly individuals. However, in the context of the revision, the literature on hybrid THR is limited, and differences in the long-term survival outcomes reported in the literature are obvious. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the long-term survival of hybrid THR for failed proximal femoral nail antirotation (PFNA) in elderly individuals aged ≥ 75 years.

Methods

An observational cohort of 227 consecutive individuals aged ≥ 75 years who experienced hybrid THRs following prior primary PFNAs was retrospectively identified from the Joint Surgery Centre, the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University. Implant survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. The primary end point was the implant survivorship calculated using the Kaplan–Meier method with revision for any reason as the end point; secondary end points were the function score measured using the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and the incidence of main orthopaedic complications.

Results

In total, 118 individuals (118 THRs) were assessed as available. The median follow-up was 10 (3–11) years. The 10-year survivorship with revision for any reason as the endpoint was 0.914 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.843–0.960). The most common indication for revision was aseptic loosening (70.0%), followed by periprosthetic fracture (30.0%). At the final follow-up, the median functional score was 83.6 (79.0–94.0). Among the 118 patients included in this study, 16 experienced 26 implant-related complications. The overall incidence of key orthopaedic complications was 13.5% (16/118).

Conclusion

For patients aged ≥ 75 years old with prior failed PFNAs, hybrid THR may yield satisfactory long-term survival, with good functional outcomes and a low rate of key orthopaedic complications.

The association between surgeon grade and risk of revision following total hip arthroplasty : an analysis of National Joint Registry data

AIMS

Total hip arthroplasties (THAs) are performed by surgeons at various stages in training with varying levels of supervision, but we do not know if this is safe practice with comparable outcomes to consultant-performed THA. Our aim was to examine the association between surgeon grade, the senior supervision of trainees, and the risk of revision following THA.

METHODS

We performed an observational study using National Joint Registry (NJR) data. We included adult patients who underwent primary THA for osteoarthritis, recorded in the NJR between 2003 and 2016. Exposures were operating surgeon grade (consultant or trainee) and whether or not trainees were directly supervised by a scrubbed consultant. Outcomes were all-cause revision and the indication for revision up to ten years. We used methods of survival analysis, adjusted for patient, operation, and healthcare setting factors.

RESULTS

We included 603,474 THAs, of which 58,137 (9.6%) procedures were performed by a trainee. There was no association between surgeon grade and all-cause revision up to ten years (crude hazard ratio (HR) 1.00 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.07); p = 0.966), a finding which persisted with adjusted analysis. Fully adjusted analysis demonstrated an association between trainees operating without scrubbed consultant supervision and an increased risk of all-cause revision (HR 1.10 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.21); p = 0.045). There was an association between trainee-performed THA and revision for instability (HR 1.14 (95% CI 1.01 to 1.30); p = 0.039). However, this was not observed in adjusted models, or when trainees were supervised by a scrubbed consultant.

CONCLUSION

Within the current training system in England and Wales, appropriately supervised trainees achieve comparable THA survival to consultants. Trainees who are supervised by a scrubbed consultant achieve superior outcomes compared to trainees who are not supervised by a scrubbed consultant, particularly in terms of revision for instability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(3):341-351.

Association between surgeon grade and implant survival following hip and knee replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the association between surgeon grade (trainee vs consultant) and implant survival following primary hip and knee replacement.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE and Embase from inception to 6 October 2021.

SETTING

Units performing primary hip and/or knee replacements since 1990.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients undergoing either a primary hip or knee replacement, predominantly for osteoarthritis.

INTERVENTION

Whether the surgeon recorded as performing the procedure was a trainee or not.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was net implant survival reported as a Kaplan-Meier survival estimate. The secondary outcome was crude revision rate. Both outcomes were reported according to surgeon grade.

RESULTS

Nine cohort studies capturing 4066 total hip replacements (THRs), 936 total knee replacements (TKRs) and 1357 unicompartmental knee replacements (UKRs) were included (5 THR studies, 2 TKR studies and 2 UKR studies). The pooled net implant survival estimates for THRs at 5 years were 97.9% (95% CI 96.6% to 99.2%) for trainees and 98.1% (95% CI 97.1% to 99.2%) for consultants. The relative risk of revision of THRs at 5 and 10 years was 0.88 (95% CI 0.46 to 1.70) and 0.68 (95% CI 0.37 to 1.26), respectively. For TKRs, the net implant survival estimates at 10 years were 96.2% (95% CI 94.0% to 98.4%) for trainees and 95.1% (95% CI 93.0% to 97.2%) for consultants. We report a narrative summary of UKR outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no strong evidence in the existing literature that trainee surgeons have worse outcomes compared with consultants, in terms of the net survival or crude revision rate of hip and knee replacements at 5-10 years follow-up. These findings are limited by the quality of the existing published data and are applicable to countries with established orthopaedic training programmes.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42019150494.

The Use of Cement in Hip Arthroplasty: A Contemporary Perspective

Notable advances in hip arthroplasty implants and techniques over the past 60 years have yielded excellent survivorship of fully cemented, hybrid, and reverse hybrid total hip replacements as demonstrated in joint registries worldwide. Major advances in noncemented implants have reduced the use of cement, particularly in North America. Noncemented implants predominate today based on procedural efficiency, concern related to thromboembolic risk, and a historic belief that cement was the primary cause of osteolysis and implant loosening. With the decline of cemented techniques, press-fit fixation has become common even in osteoporotic elderly patients. Unfortunately, there is a troubling rise in intraoperative, as well as early and late postoperative periprosthetic fractures associated with the use of noncemented implants. Despite the success of noncemented fixation, an understanding of modern cement techniques and cemented implant designs is useful to mitigate the risk of periprosthetic fractures. Cemented acetabular components can be considered in elderly patients with osteoporotic or pathologic bone. Cemented stems should be considered with abnormal proximal femoral morphology, conversion of failed hip fixation, inflammatory arthritis, patient age over 75 (especially women), osteoporotic bone (Dorr C), and in the treatment of femoral neck fractures.