Search

Background: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a recognized cause of hip pain and decreased quality of life and has been linked to primary idiopathic hip osteoarthritis (OA). Although the operative indications for FAI have expanded to include older patients, we do not know whether there is an increased risk of conversion to THA after femoroacetabular osteoplasty (FAO) via the mini-open approach for FAI in patients older than 40 years compared with younger patients, after controlling for other confounding variables.Questions/purposes: (1) After matching for gender, BMI, preoperative symptomatic period, surgeon experience, Tönnis grade, and degree of chondral lesion, are patients older than 40 years who undergo FAO for FAI more likely to be revised to THA at a minimum of 2 years' follow-up than are patients younger than 40? (2) Is there a difference in delta (postoperative minus preoperative) improvement in functional outcome scores in those patients who did not go on to THA between patients older than and younger than 40 years?Methods: Between 2003 and 2017, one surgeon performed 281 FAOs via the mini-open approach in patients older than 40 years and 544 of the same procedure in patients younger than 40 years. During that period, the general indications for FAO were the same in both age groups: (1) history and physical exam consistent with FAI, (2) radiographic evidence of focal impingement (cam, pincer, or both), (3) evidence of labral or chondrolabral tears, and (4) minimal to no arthritic changes (all four criteria required). In general, age was not used as a contraindication for surgery. A total of 86% (241 of 281) of patients older than 40 and 91% (494 of 544) of those younger than 40 were available for minimum of 2 years' follow-up, had complete datasets (radiographs as well as preoperative and most recent patient-reported outcomes scores) at a minimum of 2 years after surgery, and were considered eligible for the match. Propensity score matching was used to match for BMI, gender, preoperative symptomatic period, surgeon experience, Tönnis grade, and degree of intraoperative chondral lesion. We matched at a 1:2 ratio 130 patients older than age 40 with 260 patients younger than age 40. The mean ± SD follow-up duration for both groups was 5 ± 2 years. The mean age of the cohort of interest was 47 ± 5 years compared with 28 ± 7 years in the control. Fifty-four percent (70 of 130) of patients older than 40 years were women and 46% (60 of 130) were men; for those younger than 40, 51% (133 of 260) of participants were women and 49% (127 of 260) were men. Tönnis grade distribution for patients older than 40 was as follows: 46% (60 of 130) had Grade 0, 42% (55 of 130) had Grade 1, and 12% (15 of 130) had Grade 2. In comparison, Tönnis grade for patients younger than 40 was as follows: 52% (136 of 260) had Grade 0, 38% (100 of 260) had Grade 1, and 9% (24 of 260) had Grade 2 (p = 0.49). Chondral lesion degree was determined intraoperatively as none, a partial-thickness tear, or a full-thickness tear. Tönnis grade was determined based on preoperative plain AP hip radiographs. We then compared the percentage of patients who converted to THA during the surveillance period (our primary study outcome). We also compared the difference in delta (preoperative minus postoperative) improvement in functional outcome scores using the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) between the groups, excluding those who had already been converted to THA.Results: In patients older than 40 years, 16% (21 of 130) converted to THA at a mean time to conversion of 2 ± 1 years compared with 7% (17 of 260) at a mean time of 2 ± 2 years in patients younger than 40 years (p = 0.01). At a mean of 5 ± 2 years after FAO, among those patients who had not undergone conversion to THA, the mean delta mHHS score for patients older than 40 was 11 ± 17, compared with 20 ± 26 for patients younger than 40 (p = 0.04).Conclusion: Since approximately 1 in 6 patients older than 40 years in this series who underwent FAO for FAI opted for early conversion to THA at a mean time of 2 years after the osteoplasty procedure, and the remaining patients who did not undergo THA reported lower improvement in functional outcomes, we recommend surgeons avoid this procedure in patients in this age group until or unless we can better refine our indications. This is especially true because loss to follow-up causes us to believe that, if anything, our estimates of the risk of conversion to THA are conservative.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Classifying hips with structural deformity on the spectrum from impingement to dysplasia is often subjective and frequently inexact. Currently used radiographic measures may inaccurately predict a hip's morphological stability in borderline hips. A recently described radiographic measure, the Femoro-Epiphyseal Acetabular Roof (FEAR) index, has demonstrated an ability to predict stability in the borderline hip. This measure is attractive to clinicians because procedures can be used on the basis of a hip's pathomechanics. This study was designed to further validate and characterize the FEAR index in a skeletally immature population, in hips with dysplasia/femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), and in asymptomatic hips.Questions/purposes: (1) What are the characteristics of the FEAR index in children and how does the index change with skeletal maturation? (2) How does the FEAR index correlate with clinical diagnosis and surgical treatment in a large cohort of symptomatic hips and asymptomatic controls? (3) How does the FEAR index correlate with clinical diagnosis in the borderline hip (lateral center-edge angle [LCEA] 20°-25°) group?Methods: A total of 220 participants with symptomatic investigational hips with a clinical diagnosis of dysplasia or FAI between January 2008 and January 2018 were retrospectively collected from the senior author's practice. Investigational hips were excluded if they had any femoral head abnormalities preventing LCEA measurement (for example, Perthes disease), Tönnis osteoarthritis grade greater than 1, prior hip surgery, or prior femoral osteotomy. In the 220 participants, 395 hips met inclusion criteria. Once exclusion criteria were applied, 15 hips were excluded due to prior hip surgery or prior femoral osteotomy, and 12 hips were excluded due to femoral head deformity. A single hip was then randomly selected from each participant, resulting in 206 investigational hips with a mean age of 13 ± 3 years. Between January 2017 and December 2017, 70 asymptomatic control participants were retrospectively collected from the senior author's institutional trauma database. Control hips were included if the AP pelvis film had the coccyx centered over the pubic symphysis and within 1 to 3 cm of the superior aspect of the symphysis. Control hips were excluded if there was any fracture to the pelvis or ipsilateral femur or the participant had prior hip/pelvis surgery. After exclusion criteria were applied, 16 hips were excluded due to fracture. One hip was then randomly selected from each participant, resulting in 65 control hips with a mean age of 16 ± 8 years. Standardized standing AP pelvis radiographs were used to measure the FEAR index, LCEA, and Tönnis angle in the investigational cohort. Standardized false-profile radiographs were used to measure the anterior center-edge angle (ACEA) in the investigational cohort. Two blinded investigators measured the FEAR index with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.92 [95% CI 0.84 to 0.96]. Question 1 was answered by comparing the above radiographic measures in age subgroups (childhood: younger than 10 years; adolescence: 10 to 14 years old; maturity: older than 14 years) of dysplastic, FAI, and control hips. Question 2 was answered by comparing the radiographic measures in all dysplastic, FAI, control hips, and a subgroup of operatively or nonoperatively managed dysplasia and FAI hips. Question 3 was answered by comparing the radiographic measures in borderline (LCEA 20°-25°) dysplastic, FAI, and control hips.Results: The FEAR index was lower in older dysplastic of hips (younger than 10 years, 6° ± 9°; 10 to 14 years, 4° ± 10°; older than 14 years, 5° ± 9°; p < 0.001) and control hips (younger than 10 years, -6° ± 5°; 10 to 14 years, -15° ± 4°; older than 14 years, -16° ± 7°; p < 0.001). The diagnosis and age groups were independently correlated with the FEAR index (p < 0.001). The relationship between the FEAR index and diagnosis remained consistent in each age group (p = 0.11). The FEAR index was higher in all dysplastic hips (mean 5° ± 10°) than in asymptomatic controls (mean -13° ± 7°; p < 0.001) and FAI hips (mean -10° ± 11°; p < 0.001). Using -1.3° as a cutoff for FAI/control hips and dysplastic hips, 81% (112 of 139) of hips with values below this threshold were FAI/control, and 89% (117 of 132) of hips with values above -1.3° were dysplastic. The receiver operator characteristics area under the curve (ROC-AUC) was 0.91. Similarly, the FEAR index was higher in borderline dysplastic hips than in both asymptomatic borderline controls (p < 0.001) and borderline FAI hips (p < 0.001). Eighty-nine percent (33 of 37) of hips with values below this threshold were FAI/control, and 90% (37 of 41) of hips with values above -1.3° were dysplastic. The ROC-AUC for borderline hips was 0.86.Conclusion: The FEAR index was associated with the diagnosis of hip dysplasia and FAI in a patient cohort with a wide age range and with varying degrees of acetabular deformity. Specifically, a FEAR index greater than -1.3° is associated with a dysplastic hip and a FEAR index less than -1.3° is associated with a hip displaying FAI. Using this reliable, developmentally based radiographic measure may help hip preservation surgeons establish a correct diagnosis and more appropriately guide treatment.Level Of Evidence Level: III, diagnostic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although femoral retroversion has been linked to the onset of slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE), and may result from a rotation of the femoral epiphysis around the epiphyseal tubercle leading to femoral retroversion, femoral version has rarely been described in patients with SCFE. Furthermore, the prevalence of actual femoral retroversion and the effect of different measurement methods on femoral version angles has yet to be studied in SCFE.Questions/purposes: (1) Do femoral version and the prevalence of femoral retroversion differ between hips with SCFE and the asymptomatic contralateral side? (2) How do the mean femoral version angles and the prevalence of femoral retroversion change depending on the measurement method used? (3) What is the interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility of these measurement methods?Methods: For this retrospective, controlled, single-center study, we reviewed our institutional database for patients who were treated for unilateral SCFE and who had undergone a pelvic CT scan. During the period in question, the general indication for obtaining a CT scan was to define the surgical strategy based on the assessment of deformity severity in patients with newly diagnosed SCFE or with previous in situ fixation. After applying prespecified inclusion and exclusion criteria, we included 79 patients. The mean age was 15 ± 4 years, 48% (38 of 79) of the patients were male, and 56% (44 of 79) were obese (defined as a BMI > 95th percentile (mean BMI 34 ± 9 kg/m2). One radiology resident (6 years of experience) measured femoral version of the entire study group using five different methods. Femoral neck version was measured as the orientation of the femoral neck. Further measurement methods included the femoral head's center and differed regarding the level of landmarks for the proximal femoral reference axis. From proximal to distal, this included the most-proximal methods (Lee et al. and Reikerås et al.) and most-distal methods (Tomczak et al. and Murphy et al.). Most proximally (Lee et al. method), we used the most cephalic junction of the greater trochanter as the landmark and, most distally, we used the center base of the femoral neck superior to the lesser trochanter (Murphy et al.). The orientation of the distal femoral condyles served as the distal reference axis for all five measurement methods. All five methods were compared side-by-side (involved versus uninvolved hip), and comparisons among all five methods were performed using paired t-tests. The prevalence of femoral retroversion (< 0°) was compared using a chi-square test. A subset of patients was measured twice by the first observer and by a second orthopaedic resident (2 years of experience) to assess intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability; for this assessment, we used intraclass correlation coefficients.Results: The mean femoral neck version was lower in hips with SCFE than in the contralateral side (-2° ± 13° versus 7° ± 11°; p < 0.001). This yielded a mean side-by side difference of -8° ± 11° (95% CI -11° to -6°; p < 0.001) and a higher prevalence of femoral retroversion in hips with SCFE (58% [95% CI 47% to 69%]; p < 0.001) than on the contralateral side (29% [95% CI 19% to 39%]). These differences between hips with SCFE and the contralateral side were higher and ranged from -17° ± 11° (95% CI -20° to -15°; p < 0.001) based on the method of Tomczak et al. to -22° ± 13° (95% CI -25° to -19°; p < 0.001) according to the method of Murphy et al. The mean overall femoral version angles increased for hips with SCFE using more-distal landmarks compared with more-proximal landmarks. The prevalence of femoral retroversion was higher in hips with SCFE for the proximal methods of Lee et al. and Reikerås et al. (91% [95% CI 85% to 97%] and 84% [95% CI 76% to 92%], respectively) than for the distal measurement methods of Tomczak et al. and Murphy et al. (47% [95% CI 36% to 58%] and 60% [95% CI 49% to 71%], respectively [all p < 0.001]). We detected mean differences ranging from -19° to 4° (all p < 0.005) for 8 of 10 pairwise comparisons in hips with SCFE. Among these, the greatest differences were between the most-proximal methods and the more-distal methods, with a mean difference of -19° ± 7° (95% CI -21° to -18°; p < 0.001), comparing the methods of Lee et al. and Tomczak et al. In hips with SCFE, we found excellent agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] > 0.80) for intraobserver reproducibility (reader 1, ICC 0.93 to 0.96) and interobserver reliability (ICC 0.95 to 0.98) for all five measurement methods. Analogously, we found excellent agreement (ICC > 0.80) for intraobserver reproducibility (reader 1, range 0.91 to 0.96) and interobserver reliability (range 0.89 to 0.98) for all five measurement methods in healthy contralateral hips.Conclusion: We showed that femoral neck version is asymmetrically decreased in unilateral SCFE, and that differences increase when including the femoral head's center. Thus, to assess the full extent of an SCFE deformity, femoral version measurements should consider the position of the displaced epiphysis. The prevalence of femoral retroversion was high in patients with SCFE and increased when using proximal anatomic landmarks. Since the range of femoral version angles was wide, femoral version cannot be predicted in a given hip and must be assessed individually. Based on these findings, we believe it is worthwhile to add evaluation of femoral version to the diagnostic workup of children with SCFE. Doing so may better inform surgeons as they contemplate when to use isolated offset correction or to perform an additional femoral osteotomy for SCFE correction based on the severity of the slip and the rotational deformity. To facilitate communication among physicians and for the design of future studies, we recommend consistently reporting the applied measurement technique.Level Of Evidence: Level III, prognostic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Short-length stems were developed to reduce bone loss of the proximal femur and potentially decrease the incidence of thigh pain after cementless THA. However, it remains unknown whether short stems indeed reduce bone loss or the frequency of thigh pain.Questions/purposes: Is there a difference between short- and standard-length stems in terms of: (1) the frequency or severity of thigh pain, (2) modified Harris hip scores, (3) implant loosening, or (4) bone mineral density as measured by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry?Methods: Between March 2013 and January 2014, three surgeons performed 205 primary THAs. To be eligible, patients needed to be at least 20 years of age, have not undergone previous history of hip surgery, and have no metabolic bone disease. A total of 100 patients were randomized to receive THA either with a short stem (n = 56) or with a standard-length stem (n = 44). Both stems were proximally coated, tapered, cementless stems. Compared with standard stems, short stems typically were 30- to 35-mm shorter. A total of 73% (41 of 56) and 77% (34 of 44) of those groups, respectively, were accounted for at a minimum of 5 years and were analyzed. The presence of thigh pain during activity was evaluated using a 10-point VAS, and the modified Harris hip score was calculated by research assistants who were blinded to the treatment groups. Plain radiographs were taken at 6 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively, and every 1 year thereafter; loosening was defined as subsidence > 3 mm or a position change > 3° on serial radiographs. Radiological assessment was performed by two researchers who did not participate in the surgery and follow-up evaluations. Bone mineral density of the proximal femur was measured using dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry at 4 days, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years postoperatively. The primary endpoint of our study was the incidence of thigh pain during 5-year follow-up. Our study was powered at 80% to detect a 10% difference in the proportion of patients reporting thigh pain at the level of 0.05.Results: With the numbers available, we found no difference between the groups in the proportion of patients with thigh pain; 16% (9 of 56) of patients in the short-stem group and 14% (6 of 44) of patients in the standard-stem group experienced thigh pain during the follow-up period (p = 0.79). In all patients, the pain was mild or moderate (VAS score of 4 or 6 points). Among the 15 available patients who reported thigh pain, there was no difference between the implant groups in mean severity of thigh pain (4.3 ± 0.8 versus 4.2 ± 0.7; p = 0.78). There were no between-group differences in the short versus standard-length stem groups in terms of mean modified Harris hip score by 5 years after surgery (89 ± 13 versus 95 ± 7 points; p = 0.06). No implant was loose and no hip underwent revision in either group. Patients in the short-stem group showed a slightly smaller decrease in bone mineral density in Gruen Zones 2, 3, and 5 than those in the standard-stem group did; the magnitude of the difference seems unlikely to be clinically important.Conclusion: We found no clinically important differences (and few differences overall) between short and standard-length THA stems 5 years after surgery in a randomized trial. Consequently, we recommend that clinicians use standard-length stems in general practice because standard-length stems have a much longer published track record in other studies, and short stems can expose patients to the uncertainty associated with novelty, without any apparent offsetting benefit.Level Of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Correct quantification of femoral torsion is crucial to diagnose torsional deformities, make an indication for surgical treatment, or plan the amount of correction. However, no clear evaluation of different femoral torsion measurement methods for hips with excessive torsion has been performed to date.Questions/purposes: (1) How does CT-based measurement of femoral torsion differ among five commonly used measurement methods? (2) Do differences in femoral torsion among measurement methods increase in hips with excessive femoral torsion? (3) What is the reliability and reproducibility of each of the five torsion measurement methods?Methods: Between March and August 2016, we saw 86 new patients (95 hips) with hip pain and physical findings suggestive for femoroacetabular impingement at our outpatient tertiary clinic. Of those, 56 patients (62 hips) had a pelvic CT scan including the distal femur for measurement of femoral torsion. We excluded seven patients (seven hips) with previous hip surgery, two patients (two hips) with sequelae of Legg-Calvé-Perthes disease, and one patient (one hip) with a posttraumatic deformity. This resulted in 46 patients (52 hips) in the final study group with a mean age of 28 ± 9 years (range, 17-51 years) and 27 female patients (59%). Torsion was compared among five commonly used assessment measures, those of Lee et al., Reikerås et al., Jarrett et al., Tomczak et al., and Murphy et al. They differed regarding the level of the anatomic landmark for the proximal femoral neck axis; the method of Lee had the most proximal definition followed by the methods of Reikerås, Jarrett, and Tomczak at the base of the femoral neck and the method of Murphy with the most distal definition at the level of the lesser trochanter. The definition of the femoral head center and of the distal reference was consistent for all five measurement methods. We used the method described by Murphy et al. as our baseline measurement method for femoral torsion because it reportedly most closely reflects true anatomic femoral torsion. With this method we found a mean femoral torsion of 28 ± 13°. Mean values of femoral torsion were compared among the five methods using multivariate analysis of variance. All differences between two of the measurement methods were plotted over the entire range of femoral torsion to evaluate a possible increase in hips with excessive femoral torsion. All measurements were performed by two blinded orthopaedic residents (FS, TDL) at two different occasions to measure intraobserver reproducibility and interobserver reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).Results: We found increasing values for femoral torsion using measurement methods with a more distal definition of the proximal femoral neck axis: Lee et al. (most proximal definition: 11° ± 11°), Reikerås et al. (15° ± 11°), Jarrett et al. (19° ± 11°), Tomczak et al. (25° ± 12°), and Murphy et al. (most distal definition: 28° ± 13°). The most pronounced difference was found for the comparison between the methods of Lee et al. and Murphy et al. with a mean difference of 17° ± 5° (95% confidence interval, 16°-19°; p < 0.001). For six of 10 possible pairwise comparisons, the difference between two methods increased with increasing femoral torsion and decreased with decreasing femoral torsion. We observed a fair-to-strong linear correlation (R range, 0.306-0.622; all p values < 0.05) for any method compared with the Murphy method and for the Reikerås and Jarrett methods when compared with the Tomczak method. For example, a hip with 10° of femoral antetorsion according Murphy had a torsion of 1° according to Reikerås, which corresponds to a difference of 9°. This difference increased to 20° in hips with excessive torsion; for example, a hip with 60° of torsion according to Murphy had 40° of torsion according to Reikerås. All five methods for measuring femoral torsion showed excellent agreement for both intraobserver reproducibility (ICC, 0.905-0.973) and interobserver reliability (ICC, 0.938-0.969).Conclusions: Because the quantification of femoral torsion in hips with excessive femoral torsion differs considerably among measurement methods, it is crucial to state the applied methods when reporting femoral torsion and to be consistent regarding the used measurement method. These differences have to be considered for surgical decision-making and planning the degree of correction. Neglecting the differences among measurement methods to quantify femoral torsion can potentially lead to misdiagnosis and surgical planning errors.Level Of Evidence: Level IV, diagnostic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The direct lateral approach to THA provides good exposure and is associated with a low risk of dislocations, but can result in damage to the abductor muscles. The direct anterior approach does not incise muscle, and so recovery after surgery may be faster, but it has been associated with complications (including fractures and nerve injuries), and it involves a learning curve for surgeons who are unfamiliar with it. Few randomized trials have compared these approaches with respect to objective endpoints as well as validated outcome scores.Questions/purposes: The purpose of this study was to compare the direct anterior approach with the direct lateral approach to THA with respect to (1) patient-reported and validated outcomes scores; (2) frequency and persistence of abductor weakness, as demonstrated by the Trendelenburg test; and (3) major complications such as infection, dislocation, reoperation, or neurovascular injury.Methods: We performed a randomized controlled trial recruiting patients from January 2012 to June 2013. One hundred sixty-four patients with end-stage osteoarthritis were included and randomized to either the direct anterior or direct lateral approach. Before surgery and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months, a physiotherapist recorded the Harris hip score (HHS), 6-minute walk distance (6MWD), and performed the Trendelenburg test directly after the 6MWD. The patients completed the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and the EQ-5D. The groups were not different at baseline with respect to demographic data and preoperative scores. Both groups received the same pre- and postoperative regimes. Assessors were blinded to the approach used. One hundred fifty-four patients (94%) completed the 2-year followup; five patients from each group were lost to followup.Results: There were few statistical differences and no clinically important differences in terms of validated or patient-reported outcomes scores (including the HHS, 6MWD, OHS, or EQ-5D) between the direct anterior and the lateral approach at any time point. A higher proportion of patients had a persistently positive Trendelenburg test 24 months after surgery in the lateral approach than the direct anterior approach (16% [12 of 75] versus 1% [one of 79]; odds ratio, 15; p = 0.001). Irrespective of approach, those with a positive Trendelenburg test had statistically and clinically important worse HHS, OHS, and EQ-5D scores than those with a negative Trendelenburg test. There were four major nerve injuries in the direct anterior group (three transient femoral nerve injuries, resolved by 3 months after surgery, and one tibial nerve injury with symptoms that persist 24 months after surgery) and none in the lateral approach.Conclusions: Based on our findings, no case for superiority of one approach over the other can be made, except for the reduction in postoperative Trendelenburg test-positive patients using the direct anterior approach compared with when using the direct lateral approach. Irrespective of approach, patients with a positive Trendelenburg test had clinically worse scores than those with a negative test, indicating the importance of ensuring good abductor function when performing THA. The direct anterior approach was associated with nerve injuries that were not seen in the group treated with the lateral approach.Level Of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Cup malposition is a common cause of impingement, limitation of ROM, acceleration of bearing wear, liner fracture, and instability in THA. Previous studies of the safe zone based on plain radiographs have limitations inherent to measuring angles from two-dimensional projections. The current study uses CT to measure component position in stable and unstable hips to assess the presence of a safe zone for cup position in THA.Questions/purposes: (1) Does acetabular component orientation, when measured on CT, differ in stable components and those revised for recurrent instability? (2) Do CT data support historic safe zone definitions for component orientation in THA?Methods: We identified 34 hips that had undergone revision of the acetabulum for recurrent instability that also had a CT scan of the pelvis between August 2003 and February 2017. We also identified 175 patients with stable hip replacements who also had a CT study for preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation of the contralateral side. For each CT study, one observer analyzed major factors including acetabular orientation, femoral anteversion, combined anteversion (the sum of femoral and anatomic anteversion), pelvic tilt, total offset difference, head diameter, age, sex, and body mass index. These measures were then compared among stable hips, hips with cup revision for anterior instability, and hips with cup revision for posterior instability. We used a clinically relevant measurement of operative anteversion and inclination as opposed to the historic use of radiographic anteversion and inclination. The percentage of unstable hips in the historic Lewinnek safe zone was calculated, and a new safe zone was proposed based on an area with no unstable hips.Results: Anteriorly unstable hips compared with stable hips had higher operative anteversion of the cup (44° ± 12° versus 31° ± 11°, respectively; mean difference, 13°; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5°-21°; p = 0.003), tilt-adjusted operative anteversion of the cup (40° ± 6° versus 26° ± 10°, respectively; mean difference, 14°; 95% CI, 10°-18°; p < 0.001), and combined tilt-adjusted anteversion of the cup (64° ± 10° versus 54° ± 19°, respectively; mean difference, 10°; 95% CI, 1°-19°; p = 0.028). Posteriorly unstable hips compared with stable hips had lower operative anteversion of the cup (19° ± 15° versus 31° ± 11°, respectively; mean difference, -12°; 95% CI, -5° to -18°; p = 0.001), tilt-adjusted operative anteversion of the cup (19° ± 13° versus 26° ± 10°, respectively; mean difference, -8°; 95% CI, -14° to -2°; p = 0.014), pelvic tilt (0° ± 6° versus 4° ± 6°, respectively; mean difference, -4°; 95% CI, -7° to -1°; p = 0.007), and anatomic cup anteversion (25° ± 18° versus 34° ± 12°, respectively; mean difference, -9°; 95% CI, -1° to -17°; p = 0.033). Thirty-two percent of the unstable hips were located in the Lewinnek safe zone (11 of 34; 10 posterior dislocations, one anterior dislocation). In addition, a safe zone with no unstable hips was identified within 43° ± 12° of operative inclination and 31° ± 8° of tilt-adjusted operative anteversion.Conclusions: The current study supports the notion of a safe zone for acetabular component orientation based on CT. However, the results demonstrate that the historic Lewinnek safe zone is not a reliable predictor of future stability. Analysis of tilt-adjusted operative anteversion and operative inclination demonstrates a new safe zone where no hips were revised for recurrent instability that is narrower for tilt-adjusted operative anteversion than for operative inclination. Tilt-adjusted operative anteversion is significantly different between stable and unstable hips, and surgeons should therefore prioritize assessment of preoperative pelvic tilt and accurate placement in operative anteversion. With improvements in patient-specific cup orientation goals and acetabular component placement, further refinement of a safe zone with CT data may reduce the incidence of cup malposition and its associated complications.Level Of Evidence: Level III, diagnostic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bone loss in patients undergoing revision THA poses a considerable challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Often, to achieve better fixation in remaining bone, larger diameter acetabular components and reaming superiorly may be necessary. However, this is likely to raise the hip center of rotation, which may lead to altered biomechanics, specifically, insufficiency of the abductor muscles, altered gait, and increased risk of dislocation from impingement. More recently, a newer acetabular shell has been designed to more closely replicate the native hip center of rotation in these circumstances while maintaining adequate fixation.Questions/purposes: The purpose of this study was to compare the radiographic parameters of this newer design with conventional hemispheric cups in revision THA. Specifically, we assessed the differences in (1) vertical center of rotation (COR) displacement and (2) horizontal COR displacement.Methods: Between January 2016 and April 2016, five reconstructive surgeons at five institutions utilized a newer highly porous acetabular shell designed with peripheral screw holes and vertically eccentric COR to allow for restoration of center of hip rotation in revision THA. We included all patients who received this device. During this time, the general indications at these sites for using the new device included Paprosky Stage IIA, IIB, IIC, or IIIA acetabular defects. This yielded 29 patients who were subsequently matched (one to two) by cup size and sex to a cohort who underwent revision THA with conventional hemispheric cups between January 2015 and May 2016. To determine hip COR, radiographic measurements were performed. A circle contiguous to the acetabulum was drawn and the center was determined as the hip COR. All measurements were made from the interteardrop line for both the revised and native hips. A line through the teardrops was used for all horizontal measurements. Center position adjustments were made based on the manufacturer-specified values. Comparisons were performed using chi-square tests for categorical and t-tests for continuous variables. There was no difference in the severity of bone loss before the revision in the groups, as evidenced by Paprosky staging of preoperative radiographs.Results: The mean vertical COR displacement was smaller in patients who had the novel cup (3.5 mm; range, -12 to 15 mm; mean difference, -7.3 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI], -13.2 to -1.5) as compared with those who had the conventional cup (10.5 mm; range, -4 to 50 mm; mean difference, 7.3 mm; 95% CI, -12.5 to -2.2; p = 0.003). There was no difference in mean horizontal displacement between the two groups (-0.06 ± 6.1 versus 1.7 ± 7.1; mean difference, -1.8; p = 0.903).Conclusions: Although hip COR was improved based on radiographic measurements with the use of this novel acetabular design, and although this may improve hip biomechanics, more studies are required before its widespread adoption for revision cases of this nature can be recommended. Both implant costs and the risks associated with using a new design in practice will have to be justified by studies that evaluate fixation, clinical function and implant survival, and patient-reported outcome scores, all of which were beyond the scope of this preliminary report.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dislocation is one of the most common complications after revision THA. Dual-mobility constructs and large femoral heads (ie, 40 mm) are two contemporary, nonconstrained bearing options used in revision THA to minimize the risk of dislocation; however, it is not currently established if there is a clear benefit to using dual-mobility constructs over large femoral heads in the revision setting.Questions/purposes: We sought to determine if dual-mobility constructs would provide a reduction in dislocation, rerevision for dislocation, and reoperation or other complications as compared with large femoral heads in revision THA.Methods: From 2011 to 2014, a series of 355 THAs underwent revision for any reason and received either a dual-mobility construct (146 THAs) or a 40-mm large femoral head (209 THAs). Indications for either construct were based on surgeon judgment; however, there is a preference to use dual-mobility constructs in patients believed to be at higher risk of dislocation. In the dual-mobility group, 20 of 146 (14%) were excluded because of loss of followup before 2 years or because they had a dual-mobility shell cemented into a preexisting acetabular component. In the large head group, 33 of 209 (16%) were lost to followup before 2 years. Followup in the dual-mobility group was 3.3 ± 0.8 years and followup in the large head group was 3.9 ± 0.9 years. Primary endpoints included dislocation, rerevisions for dislocation, and reoperations, which were determined through our institution's total joint registry and verified by individual patient chart review. Age and body mass index were not different with the numbers available between the groups, but there was a slight predominance of females in the dual-mobility group (52% [66 of 126] female) versus the 40-mm large head group (41% [72 of 176] female) (p = 0.05). Notably, 33% (41 of 126) of patients receiving the dual-mobility constructs had the index revision THA done for a diagnosis of recurrent dislocation versus 9% (17 of 176) in the 40-mm large head group. Mean effective head size in the dual-mobility group was 47 mm (range, 38-58 mm).Results: The subsequent frequency of dislocation in the dual-mobility construct group was less (3% [four of 126] dual-mobility versus 10% [17 of 176] in the 40-mm large head group; hazard ratio, 3.2 [1.1-9.4]; p = 0.03). Rerevision for dislocation in the dual-mobility construct group was less frequent (1% [one of 126] dual-mobility versus 6% [10 of 176] in the 40-mm large head group; hazard ratio, 7.1 [0.9-55.6]; p = 0.03). Reoperation for any cause in the dual-mobility construct group was less frequent (6% [eight of 126] dual-mobility versus 15% [27 of 176] in the 40-mm large head group; hazard ratio, 2.5 [1.1-5.5]; p = 0.02); there were no differences between the groups in terms of the overall percentage of complications in each group.Conclusions: When compared with patients treated with a 40-mm large femoral head, patients undergoing revision THA who received a dual-mobility construct had a lower risk of subsequent dislocation, rerevision for dislocation, and reoperation for any reason in the first several years postoperatively. Those findings were present despite selection bias in this study to use the dual-mobility construct in patients at the highest risk for subsequent dislocation. Given the lower risk of subsequent dislocation, rerevision, and reoperation with the dual-mobility construct, some surgeons may wish to consider whether the role of dual-mobility should be judiciously expanded in contemporary revision THA.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The choice of surgical approach for THA remains controversial. Some studies suggest that the direct anterior approach (DAA) leads to less muscle damage than the miniposterior approach (MPA), but there is little high-quality evidence indicating whether this accelerates recovery, or whether this approach-which may be technically more demanding-is associated with component malposition or more complications.Questions/purposes: (1) Does the DAA result in faster return to activities of daily living than the MPA? (2) Does the DAA have superior patient-reported outcome measures than the MPA? (3) Does the DAA result in improved radiographic outcomes than the MPA? (4) Does the DAA have a higher risk of complications than the MPA?Methods: Between March 1, 2013, and May 31, 2016, 116 patients undergoing primary unilateral THA were randomized to either the DAA or MPA; 15 patients withdrew after randomization, and one died 6 months after surgery from a stroke unrelated to the procedure. Recruitment stopped when 52 patients had been randomized into the DAA group and 49 in the MPA group (n = 101). After patient randomization, one high-volume surgeon performed all of the DAAs and three high-volume surgeons performed the MPA THAs. The groups did not differ in age (65 years; SD 11; range, 38-86 years), sex (52% women), or body mass index (mean 29 kg/m; SD 6 kg/m; range, 21-40 kg/m; all p > 0.40). Functional results included time to discontinue gait aids, discontinue all narcotics, and independence with various activities of daily living; accelerometer data evaluated activity level. Clinical and radiographic outcomes, Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, SF-12, and Harris hip scores to 1 year were also tabulated. The minimum followup was 365 days (mean ± SD, 627 ± 369 days).Results: There were slight differences in early functional recovery that favored the DAA versus the MPA: time to discontinue walker use (10 versus 15 days, p = 0.01) and time to discontinue all gait aids (17 versus 24 days, p = 0.04). There were no other differences in early functional milestones, although at 2 weeks after surgery, mean steps per day were 3897 (SD 2258; range, 737-11,010) for the DAA versus 2235 for the MPA (SD 1688; range, 27-7450; p < 0.01). There was no difference in activity monitoring at 1 year. There were no differences in patient-reported outcome scores between the groups. There was no difference in the radiographic parameters measured in the two groups, including leg length discrepancy, component position, or offset, and there was no subsidence observed in any hip. There was no difference in complications between the DAA and the MPA groups (8% [four of 52] versus 10% [five of 49]; p = 0.33).Conclusions: Both the DAA and MPA approaches provided excellent early recovery with a low risk of complications. Patients undergoing the DAA had a slightly faster recovery, as measured by milestones of function and quantified by activity monitor data, but no substantive differences were evident at 2 months. Because the DAA is the less studied approach, longer term (> 1 year) complications may yet accrue, will be important to quantify, and may offset early benefits.Level Of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: As length of stay decreases for total joint arthroplasty, much of the patient preparation and teaching previously done in the hospital must be performed before surgery. However, the most effective form of preparation is unknown. This randomized trial evaluated the effect of a one-time, one-on-one preoperative physical therapy education session coupled with a web-based microsite (preopPTEd) on patients' readiness to discharge from physical therapy (PT), length of hospital stay, and patient-reported functional outcomes after total joint arthroplasty.Questions/purposes: Was this one-on-one preoperative PT education session coupled with a web- based microsite associated with (1) earlier achievement of readiness to discharge from PT; (2) a reduced hospital length of stay; and (3) improved WOMAC scores 4 to 6 weeks after surgery?Methods: Between February and June 2015, 126 typical arthroplasty patients underwent unilateral TKA or THA. As per our institution's current guidelines, all patients attended a preoperative group education class taught by a multidisciplinary team comprising a nurse educator, social worker, and physical therapist. Patients were then randomized into two groups. One group (control; n = 63) received no further education after the group education class, whereas the intervention group (experimental; n = 63) received preopPTEd. The preopPTEd consisted of a one-time, one-on-one session with a physical therapist to learn and practice postoperative precautions, exercises, bed mobility, and ambulation with and negotiation of stairs. After this session, all patients in the preopPTEd group were given access to a lateralized, joint-specific microsite that provided detailed information regarding exercises, transfers, ambulation, and activities of daily living through videos, pictures, and text. Outcome measures assessed included readiness to discharge from PT, which was calculated by adding the number of postoperative inpatient PT visits patients had to meet PT milestones. Hospital length of stay (LOS) was assessed for hospital discharge criteria and 6-week WOMAC scores were gathered by study personnel. At our institution, to meet PT milestones for hospital discharge criteria, patients have to be able to (1) independently transfer in and out of bed, a chair, and a toilet seat; (2) independently ambulate approximately 150 feet; (3) independently negotiate stairs; and (4) be independent with a home exercise program and activities of daily living. Complete followup was available on 100% of control group patients and 100% patients in the intervention group for all three outcome measures (control and intervention of 63, respectively).Results: The preopPTEd group had fewer postoperative inpatient PT visits (mean, 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0-3.6 versus 4.4; 95% CI, 4.1-4.7; p < 0.001) and achieved readiness to discharge from PT faster (mean, 1.6 days; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9 days versus 2.7 days; 95% CI, 2.4-3.0; p < 0.001) than the control group. There was no difference in hospital LOS between the preopPTEd group and the control group (2.4 days; 95% CI, 2.1-2.6; p = 0.082 versus 2.6 days; 95% CI, 2.4-2.8; p = 0.082). There were no clinically relevant differences in 6-week WOMAC scores between the two groups.Conclusions: Although this protocol resulted in improved readiness to discharge from PT, there was no effect on LOS or WOMAC scores at 6 weeks. Preoperative PT was successful in improving one of the contributors to LOS and by itself is insufficient to make a difference in LOS. This study highlights the need for improvement in other aspects of care to improve LOS.Level Of Evidence: Level II, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Movement asymmetries during walking are common after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury and reconstruction and may influence the early development of posttraumatic osteoarthritis. Preoperative neuromuscular training (like perturbation training, which is neuromuscular training requiring selective muscle activation in response to surface perturbations) improves gait asymmetries and functional outcomes among people who are ACL-deficient, but the effect of postoperative perturbation training on gait mechanics after ACL reconstruction is unknown.Questions/purposes: Among men undergoing ACL reconstruction, we sought to compare strength, agility, and secondary prevention (SAP) treatment with SAP plus perturbation training (SAP+PERT) with respect to (1) gait mechanics; and (2) elimination of gait asymmetries 1 and 2 years after ACL reconstruction.Methods: Forty men were randomized into a SAP group or a SAP+PERT group after ACL reconstruction and before returning to preinjury activities. Participants were required to achieve ≥ 80% quadriceps muscle strength symmetry, minimal knee effusion, full ROM, no reports of pain, and completion of a running progression (all between 3 and 9 months postoperatively) before enrollment. Of 94 potentially eligible athletic male patients evaluated < 9 months after ACL reconstruction, 54 were excluded for prespecified reasons. Participants underwent motion analysis during overground walking at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. Variables of interest included (1) sagittal and frontal plane hip and knee angles and moments at peak knee flexion angle; (2) sagittal plane hip and knee angles and moments at peak knee extension angle; (3) sagittal plane hip and knee excursion during weight acceptance; and (4) sagittal plane hip and knee excursion during midstance. We also calculated the proportion of athletes in each group who walked with clinically meaningful interlimb asymmetry in sagittal plane hip and knee variables and compared these proportions using odds ratios. There was no differential loss to followup between groups.Results: There were no differences between the SAP or SAP+PERT groups for the biomechanical gait variables. The involved limb's knee excursion during midstance for the SAP (mean ± SD: 1 year: 15° ± 5°; 2 years: 16° ± 5°) and SAP+PERT (1 year: 16° ± 5°; 2 years: 15° ± 4°) athletes was not different between groups at 1 year (mean difference: -1°; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5° to 2°; p = 0.49) or 2 years (mean difference: 1°; 95% CI, -2° to 4°; p = 0.54). There were no differences between SAP and SAP+PERT athletes regarding the elimination of gait asymmetries, and gait asymmetries persisted to a large degree in both groups 1 and 2 years postoperatively. At 1 year, 11 of 18 SAP and 11 of 20 SAP+PERT athletes walked with truncated knee excursions during weight acceptance (odds ratio: 0.8, p = 0.70) and midstance (SAP 12 of 18, SAP+PERT 12 of 20; odds ratio: 0.8, p = 0.67), whereas at 2 years postoperatively, truncated knee excursions during weight acceptance (SAP seven of 17, SAP+PERT eight of 19; odds ratio: 1.0, p = 0.96) and midstance (SAP five of 17, SAP+PERT 11 of 19; odds ratio: 3.3, p = 0.09) remained prevalent.Conclusions: We found that a comprehensive, progressive return-to-sport training program with or without perturbation was not effective at restoring interlimb symmetry among men 1 or 2 years after ACL reconstruction. Although gait asymmetries improved from 1 to 2 years postoperatively, meaningful asymmetries persisted in both groups. To restore gait symmetry after ACL reconstruction, additional interventions likely are necessary.Level Of Evidence: Level II, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Since the importance of an intact labrum for normal hip function has been shown, labral reattachment has become the standard method for open or arthroscopic treatment of hips with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI). However, no long-term clinical results exist evaluating the effect of labral reattachment. A 2-year followup comparing open surgical treatment of FAI with labral resection versus reattachment was previously performed at our clinic. The goal of this study was to report a concise followup of these patients at a minimum of 10 years.Questions/purposes: We asked if patients undergoing surgical hip dislocation for the treatment of mixed-type FAI with labral reattachment compared with labral resection had (1) improved hip pain and function based on the Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score; and (2) improved survival at 10-year followup.Methods: Between June 1999 and July 2002, we performed surgical hip dislocation with femoral neck osteoplasty and acetabular rim trimming in 52 patients (60 hips) with mixed-type FAI. In the first 20 patients (25 hips) until June 2001, a torn labrum or a detached labrum in the area of acetabular rim resection was resected. In the next 32 patients (35 hips), reattachment of the labrum was performed. The same indications were used to perform both procedures during the periods in question. Of the 20 patients (25 hips) in the first group, 19 patients (95%) (24 hips [96%]) were available for clinical and/or radiographic followup at a minimum of 10 years (mean, 13 years; range, 12-14 years). Of the 32 patients (35 hips) in the second group, 29 patients (91%) (32 hips [91%]) were available for clinical and/or radiographic followup at a minimum of 10 years (mean, 12 years; range, 10-13 years). We used the anterior impingement test to assess pain. Function was assessed using the Merle d'Aubigné- Postel score and ROM. Survivorship calculation was performed using the method of Kaplan-Meier with failure defined as conversion to THA, progression of osteoarthritis (of one grade or more on the Tönnis score), and a Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score < 15.Results: At the 10-year followup, hip pain in hips with labral reattachment was slightly improved for the postoperative Merle d'Aubigné-Postel pain subscore (5.0 ± 1.0 [3-6] versus 3.9 ± 1.7 [0-6]; p = 0.017). No difference existed for the prevalence of hip pain assessed using the anterior impingement test with the numbers available (resection group 52% [11 of 21 hips] versus reattachment group 27% [eight of 30 hips]; odds ratio, 3.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-9.83; p = 0.062). Function was slightly better in the reattachment group for the overall Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score (16.7 ± 1.5 [13-18] versus 15.3 ± 2.4 [9-18]; p = 0.028) and hip abduction (45° ± 13° [range, 30°-70°] versus 38° ± 8° [range, 25°-45°]; p = 0.001). Hips with labral reattachment showed a better survival rate at 10 years than did hips that underwent labral resection (78%; 95% CI, 64%-92% versus 46%, 95% CI, 26%-66%; p = 0.009) with the endpoints defined as conversion to THA, progression of osteoarthritis, and a Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score < 15. With isolated endpoints, survival at 10 years was increased for labral reattachment and the endpoint Merle d'Aubigné score < 15 (83%, 95% CI, 70%-97% versus 48%, 95% CI, 28%-69%; p = 0.009) but did not differ for progression of osteoarthritis (83%, 95% CI, 68%-97% versus 81%, 95% CI, 63%-98%; p = 0.957) or conversion to THA (94%, 95% CI, 86%-100% versus 87%, 95% CI, 74%-100%; p = 0.366).Conclusions: The current results suggest the importance of preserving the labrum and show that resection may put the hip at risk for early deterioration. At 10-year followup, hips with labral reattachment less frequently had a decreased Merle d'Aubigné score but no effect on progression of osteoarthritis or conversion to THA could be shown.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The modified Dunn procedure facilitates femoral capital realignment for slipped capital femoral epiphysis (SCFE) through a surgical hip dislocation approach. Iatrogenic postoperative hip instability after this procedure has not been studied previously; however, we were concerned when we observed several instances of this serious complication, and we wished to study it further.Questions/purposes: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the frequency, timing, and clinical presentation (including complications) associated with iatrogenic instability after the modified Dunn procedure for SCFE.Methods: Between 2007 and 2014, eight international institutions performed the modified Dunn procedure through a surgical dislocation approach in 406 patients. During the period in question, indications varied at those sites, but the procedure was used only in a minority of their patients treated surgically for SCFE (31% [406 of 1331]) with the majority treated with in situ fixation. It generally was performed for patients with severe deformity with a slip angle greater than 40°. Institutional databases were searched for all patients with SCFE who developed postoperative hip instability defined as hip subluxation or dislocation of the involved hip during the postoperative period. We reviewed in detail the clinical notes and operative records of those who presented with instability. We obtained demographic information, time from slip to surgery, type of fixation, operative details, and clinical course including the incidence of complications. Followup on those patients with instability was at a mean of 2 years (range, 1-5 years) after the index procedure. Complications were graded according to the modified Dindo-Clavien classification. Radiographic images were reviewed to measure the preoperative slip angle and the presence of osteonecrosis.Results: A total of 4% of patients treated with the modified Dunn procedure developed postoperative hip instability (17 of 406). Mean age of the patients was 13 years (range, 9-16 years). Instability presented as persistent hip pain in the postoperative period or was incidentally identified radiographically during the postoperative visit and occurred at a median of 3 weeks (range, 1 day to 2 months) after the modified Dunn procedure. Eight patients underwent revision surgery to address the postoperative instability. Fourteen of 17 patients developed femoral head avascular necrosis and three of 17 patients underwent THA during this short-term followup.Conclusions: Anterolateral hip instability after the modified Dunn procedure for severe, chronic SCFE is an uncommon yet potentially devastating complication. Future studies might evaluate the effectiveness of maintaining anterior hip precautions for several weeks postoperatively in an abduction brace or broomstick cast to prevent this complication.Level Of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Acetabular retroversion can cause impaction-type femoroacetabular impingement leading to hip pain and osteoarthritis. It can be treated by anteverting periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) or acetabular rim trimming with refixation of the labrum. There is increasing evidence that acetabular retroversion is a rotational abnormality of the entire hemipelvis and not a focal overgrowth of the anterior acetabular wall, which favors an anteverting PAO. However, it is unknown if this larger procedure would be beneficial in terms of survivorship and Merle d'Aubigné scores in a midterm followup compared with rim trimming.Questions/purposes: We asked if anteverting PAO results in increased survivorship of the hip compared with rim trimming through a surgical hip dislocation in patients with symptomatic acetabular retroversion.Methods: We performed a retrospective, comparative study evaluating the midterm survivorship of two matched patient groups with symptomatic acetabular retroversion undergoing either anteverting PAO or acetabular rim trimming through a surgical hip dislocation. Acetabular retroversion was defined by a concomitantly present positive crossover, posterior wall, and ischial spine sign. A total of 279 hips underwent a surgical intervention for acetabular retroversion at our center between 1997 and 2012 (166 periacetabular osteotomies, 113 rim trimmings through surgical hip dislocation). A total of 99 patients (60%) were excluded from the PAO group and 56 patients (50%) from the rim trimming group because they had any of several prespecified conditions (eg, dysplasia or pediatric conditions 61 [37%] for the PAO group and two [2%] for the rim trimming group), matching (10 [6%]/10 [9%] hips), deficient records (10 [6%]/13 [12%] hips), or the patient declined or was lost to followup (18 [11%]/31 [27%] hips). This left 67 hips (57 patients) that underwent anteverting PAO and 57 hips (52 patients) that had acetabular rim trimming. The two groups did not differ in terms of age, sex, body mass index, preoperative ROM, preoperative Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score, radiographic morphology of the acetabulum (except total and anterior acetabular coverage), alpha angle, Tönnis grade of osteoarthritis, and labral and chondral lesions on the preoperative MRI. During the period in question, we generally performed PAO from 1997 to 2003. With the availability of surgical hip dislocation and labral refixation, we generally performed rim trimming from 2004 to 2010. With growing knowledge of the underlying pathomorphology, anteverting PAOs became more common again around 2007 to 2008. A minimum followup of 2 years was required for this study. Failures were included at any time. The median followup for the anteverting PAO group was 9.5 years (range, 2-17.4 years) and 6.8 years (range, 2.2-10.5 years) for the rim trimming group (p < 0.001). Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed using the following endpoints at 5 and 10 years: THA, radiographic progression of osteoarthritis by one Tönnis grade, and/or Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score < 15 points.Results: Although the 5-year survivorship of the two groups was not different with the numbers available (86% [95% confidence interval {CI}, 76%-94%] for anteverting PAO versus 86% [95% CI, 76%-96%] for acetabular rim trimming), we found increased survivorship at 10 years in hips undergoing anteverting PAO for acetabular retroversion (79% [95% CI, 68%-90%]) compared with acetabular rim trimming (23% [95% CI, 6%-40%]) at 10 years (p < 0.001). The drop in the survivorship curve for the acetabular rim trimming through surgical hip dislocation group started at Year 6. The main reason for failure was a decreased Merle d'Aubigné score.Conclusions: Anteverting PAO may be the more appropriate treatment for hips with substantial acetabular retroversion. This may be the result of reduction of an already smaller lunate surface of hips with acetabular retroversion through rim trimming. However, rim trimming may still benefit hips with acetabular retroversion in which only one or two of the three signs are positive. Future randomized studies should compare these treatments.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite widespread use of ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) during the past 10 years, little is known about why revisions are performed in hips with this bearing or the time elapsed before revision.Questions/purposes: The purposes of this study were: (1) Do the reasons for first revision differ between CoC bearings and other bearing couples? (2) Does the time to revision differ between CoC and other bearing couples? (3) Are there unique reasons for revisions of CoC bearings?Methods: All members of the Société Française de Chirurgie Orthopédique et Traumatologique (SoFCOT) who performed ≥ 30 revisions per year were invited to participate in this multicenter, prospective, observational study. Our data represent 12% of the revision procedures performed in France. A total of 2107 first revisions of THA (from January 2010 to December 2011) were done in 2107 patients (1201 females [57%] and 906 males [43%]; median age, 73 years; age range, 17-104 years) at the time of surgery after a median of 11 years (range, 0 day-42 years) after the primary THA. There were 238 of 2107 (11%) CoC, 148 of 2107 (7%) metal-on-metal (MoM), and 1721 of 2017 (82%) metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) bearings.Results: The reasons for reoperation differed according to the bearing component: (1) for the MoP reference bearing (odds ratio [OR]; 95% confidence interval), cup loosening occurred in 698 of 1721 hips (41%), periprosthetic fracture in 220 of 1721 hips (13%), and osteolysis in 213 of 1721 hips (12%); (2) for CoC, cup loosening occurred in 41 of 238 hips (17%) (OR, 0.31 [0.22-0.43; p < 0.001), infection in 39 of 238 hips (16%) (OR, 1.63 [1.12-2.37]; p = 0.01), and dislocation in 23 of 238 hips (10%) (OR, 0.9 [0.57-1.42]; p = 0.9); (3) for MoM, cup loosening occurred in 28 of 148 hips (19%) (OR, 0.34 [0.22-0.52]; p < 0.001), adverse reaction to metallic debris in 26 of 148 hips (18%) (OR, 18.12 [9.84-33.4]; p < 0.001), and infection in 16 of 148 hips (11%) (OR, 1 [0.59-1.73]; p = 0.9). In comparison with MoP, osteolysis was rarely the reason for revision in CoC (four of 238 hips [2%]; OR, 0.12 [0.05-0.33]; p < 0.001), but this bearing was frequently revised because of iliopsoas irritation (18 of 238 hips [8%]; OR, 4.9 [2.7-9]; p < 0.001). The time elapsed before revision differed between bearings: median of 3 years (range, 3 days to 28 years) for CoC and 4 years (range, 14 days to 37 years) for MoM versus a median 13 years (range, 0 day to 42 years) for MoP (p < 0.001). Thirty-seven of the 238 revisions (16%) were directly related to ceramic use (ceramic breakage [n = 23], squeaking [n = 6], impingement [n = 7], incorrect ceramic insert insertion [n = 1]). No factors were identified that contributed to breakage of the 12 bulk ceramic components (eight heads, four inserts, four of 12 Delta ceramic). No factors were associated with squeaking, iliopsoas irritation, or impingement, but component orientation was not assessed.Conclusions: The reasons and time to first revision differed between CoC and other bearings. CoC THAs are revised earlier and are sensitive to mechanical problems such as impingement, squeaking, and ceramic rupture that did not disappear with introduction of Delta ceramics and large-diameter (≥ 36 mm) bearings. CoC was rarely revised for osteolysis, but a high rate of iliopsoas irritation requires further investigation.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are increasingly in demand for outcomes evaluation by hospitals, administrators, and policymakers. However, assessing total hip arthroplasty (THA) through such instruments is challenging because most existing measures of hip health are lengthy and/or proprietary.Questions/purposes: The objective of this study was to derive a patient-relevant short-form survey based on the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), focusing specifically on outcomes after THA.Methods: We retrospectively evaluated patients with hip osteoarthritis who underwent primary unilateral THA and who had completed preoperative and 2-year postoperative PROMs using our hospital's hip replacement registry. The 2-year followup in this population was 81% (4308 of 5351 patients). Of these, 2371 completed every item on the HOOS before surgery and at 2 years, making them eligible for the formal item reduction analysis. Through semistructured interviews with 30 patients, we identified items in the HOOS deemed qualitatively most important to patients with hip osteoarthritis. The original HOOS has 40 items, the four quality-of-life items were excluded a priori, five were excluded for being redundant, and one was excluded based on patient-relevance surveys. The remaining 30 items were evaluated using Rasch modeling to yield a final six-item HOOS, Joint Replacement (HOOS, JR), representing a single construct of "hip health." We calculated HOOS, JR scores for the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) cohort and validated this new score for internal consistency, external validity (versus HOOS and WOMAC domains), responsiveness to THA, and floor and ceiling effects. Additional external validation was performed using calculated HOOS, JR scores in collaboration with the Function and Outcomes Research for Comparative Effectiveness in Total Joint Replacement (FORCE-TJR) nationally representative joint replacement registry (n = 910).Results: The resulting six-item PROM (HOOS, JR) retained items only from the pain and activities of daily living domains. It showed high internal consistency (Person Separation Index, 0.86 [HSS]; 0.87 [FORCE]), moderate to excellent external validity against other hip surveys (Spearman's correlation coefficient, 0.60-0.94), very high responsiveness (standardized response means, 2.03 [95% CI, 1.84-2.22] [FORCE]; and 2.38 [95% CI, 2.27-2.49] [HSS]), and favorable floor (0.6%-1.9%) and ceiling (37%-46%) effects. External validity was highest for the HOOS pain (Spearman's correlation coefficient, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.86-0.89] [HSS]; and 0.87 [95% CI, 0.84-0.90] [FORCE]) and HOOS activities of daily living (Spearman's correlation coefficient, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.93-0.95] [HSS]; and 0.94 [95% CI, 0.93-0.96] [FORCE]) domains in the HSS validation cohort and the FORCE-TJR cohort.Conclusions: The HOOS, JR provides a valid, reliable, and responsive measure of hip health for patients undergoing THA. This short-form PROM is patient relevant and efficient.Level Of Evidence: Level III, diagnostic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Reporting of complications after total hip arthroplasty (THA) is not standardized, and it is done inconsistently across various studies on the topic. Advantages of standardizing complications include improved patient safety and outcomes and better reporting in comparative studies.Questions/purposes: The purpose of this project was to develop a standardized list of complications and adverse events associated with THA, develop standardized definitions for each complication, and stratify the complications. A further purpose was to validate these standardized THA complications.Methods: The Hip Society THA Complications Workgroup proposed a list of THA complications, definitions for each complication, and a stratification scheme for the complications. The stratification system was developed from a previously validated grading system for complications of hip preservation surgery. The proposed complications, definitions, and stratification were validated with an expert opinion survey of members of The Hip Society, a case study evaluation, and analysis of a large administrative hospital system database with a focus on readmissions.Results: One hundred five clinical members (100%) of The Hip Society responded to the THA complications survey. Initially, 21 THA complications were proposed. The validation process reduced the 21 proposed complications to 19 THA complications with definitions and stratification that were endorsed by The Hip Society (bleeding, wound complication, thromboembolic disease, neural deficit, vascular injury, dislocation/instability, periprosthetic fracture, abductor muscle disruption, deep periprosthetic joint infection, heterotopic ossification, bearing surface wear, osteolysis, implant loosening, cup-liner dissociation, implant fracture, reoperation, revision, readmission, death).Conclusions: Acceptance and use of these standardized, stratified, and validated THA complications and adverse events could advance reporting of outcomes of THA and improve assessment of THA by clinical investigators.Level Of Evidence: Level V, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Polyethylene liner dissociation is a rare but catastrophic event in total hip arthroplasty (THA), and certain implant designs are known to be at greater risk. Although the DePuy Pinnacle (Warsaw, IN, USA) modular acetabular construct has an excellent record of fixation and wear, an unexpectedly high number of liner dissociations has been noted.Questions/purposes: The purposes of this study were (1) to characterize the clinical parameters observed in a large group of patients who have experienced liner dissociations with the DePuy Pinnacle acetabular component; (2) to describe the radiographic findings in this group of patients; and (3) to calculate a minimum frequency of this complication.Methods: Since 2001, 23 patients with previously well-functioning THAs presented with sudden atraumatic polyethylene liner dissociation at four separate institutions. These THAs were performed between 2001 and 2013. Eight different arthroplasty specialists had performed the index hip arthroplasties using the DePuy Pinnacle acetabular component with a polyethylene liner. Polyethylene failures were evaluated for liner type and radiographic cup position. For three of the surgeons who contributed cases, institutional registries allowed the calculation of the number of components of this type that they used during the period in question, which provided a conservative estimate of the frequency of this type of failure.Results: All 23 liner failures occurred atraumatically in previously asymptomatic THAs at a mean of 48 months (range, 3-138 months). Patients characteristically reported a new and sudden onset of discomfort with audible, reproducible squeaking. Surgical inspection of dissociated liners demonstrated displacement of polyethylene with shearing of the peripheral locking tabs. Radiographic evaluation demonstrated that 14 cups were well positioned and nine cups were malpositioned outside the so-called safe zone. Conservative estimates of the frequency of this complication from the three surgeons' practices whose institutional registries allowed calculation of the lowest possible frequency were 0.32% (six of 1888), 0.77% (three of 391), and 0.82% (three of 367).Conclusions: With this report of 23 additional liner dissociations, we suggest that surgeons should be aware of the problem and take extra precautions when using this implant to ensure locking mechanism integrity at the time of surgery. We caution that the frequency of liner dissociation may be higher than previously reported.Level Of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hard-on-hard bearings for total hip arthroplasty continue to warrant analysis even though crosslinked polyethylene is performing very well. Ceramic-on-metal (CoM) has low in vitro wear and did well in an early clinical trial. We report on a prospective, randomized, multicenter investigational device trial comparing CoM with metal-on-metal (MoM).Questions/purposes: (1) Is there a difference in the number or type of revisions comparing CoM with MoM? (2) Are cobalt and chromium metal levels different for CoM and MoM THA?Methods: Between August 2005 and October 2006, of 1015 patients screened, 390 patients were enrolled at 11 centers and randomized to 194 CoM and 196 MoM bearings. There was no difference in the preoperative patient demographics between the study groups. Mean followup was 50 months (range, 22-75 months). Seventy-two patients from two centers had metal level analysis.Results: With the numbers available, there was no difference in the proportion of patients undergoing revisions between the MoM and the CoM cohorts (MOM: 3% [six of 196]; COM: 1.5% [three of 194]; p = 0.50). Four MoM revisions were unrelated to the bearing surface. Two had bearing surface-related reoperations, one for an aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis-associated lesion and one for elevated metal levels with acetabular malposition. None of the CoM revisions were related to the bearing surface. The metal level analysis revealed that in contrast to the CoM, the MoM bearing group had increasing values of erythrocyte and serum cobalt from 1 to 5 years (CoM erythrocyte 0.45-0.55 ppb, p = 0.11 and CoM serum 0.88-0.85, p = 0.55, and MoM erythrocyte 0.32-0.51 ppb, p < 0.01 and MoM serum 0.65-1.01 ppb, p < 0.01). In addition, the MoM cobalt levels in erythrocytes and serum at 5 years were more variable than at 1 year (erythrocyte interquartile range [IQR], 0.26-0.44 to 0.31-1.21 ppb and serum IQR, 0.42-0.80 to 0.64-2.20 ppb, p < 0.02 for both).Conclusions: Although both bearings performed well at short-term followup, the CoM bearing group had no wear-related revisions and maintained consistently low metal levels. The MoM cobalt elevations may be important considering recent reports of taper corrosion. This CoM bearing was approved by the FDA but withdrawn from the market because of low sales. If it were available, the authors would not use CoM until long-term data were available. The bearing would have to outperform crosslinked polyethylene because it is unlikely that CoM metal levels will return to normal.Level Of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Modular revision femoral components allow the surgeon to make more precise intraoperative adjustments in anteversion and sizing, which may afford lower dislocation rates and improved osseointegration, but may not offer distinct advantages when compared with less expensive monoblock revision stems.Questions/purposes: We compared modular and monoblock femoral components for revision of Paprosky Type I to IIIA femoral defects to determine (1) survivorship of the stems; and (2) complications denoted as intraoperative fracture, dislocation, or failure of osseointegration.Methods: Between 2004 and 2010, participating surgeons at three centers revised 416 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) with Paprosky Type I to IIIA femoral defects. Of those with minimum 2-year followup (343 THAs, mean followup 51 ± 13 months), 150 (44%) were treated with modular stems and 193 (56%) were treated with monoblock, cylindrical, fully porous-coated stems. During this time, modular stems were generally chosen when there was remodeling of the proximal femur into retroversion and/or larger canal diameters (usually > 18 mm). A total of 27 patients died (6%) with stems intact before 2 years, 46 THAs (13%) were lost to followup before 2 years for reasons other than death, and there was no differential loss to followup between the study groups. The modular stems included 101 with a cylindrical distal geometry (67%) and 49 with a tapered geometry (33%). Mean age (64 versus 68 years), percentage of women (53% versus 47%), and body mass index (31 versus 30 kg/m(2)) were not different between the two cohorts, whereas there was trend toward a slightly greater case complexity in the modular group (55% versus 65% Type 3a femoral defects, p = 0.06). Kaplan-Meier survivorship was calculated for the endpoint of aseptic revision. Proportions of complications in each cohort (dislocation, intraoperative fracture, and failure of osseointegration) were compared.Results: Femoral component rerevision for any reason (including infection) was greater (OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.63-2.57; p = 0.03) in the monoblock group (27 of 193 [14%]) compared with the modular cohort (10 of 150 [7%]). Femoral component survival free from aseptic rerevision was greater in the modular group with 91% survival (95% CI, 89%-95%) at 9 years compared with 86% survival (95% CI, 83%-88%) for the monoblock group in the same timeframe. There was no difference in the proportion of mechanically relevant aseptic complications (30 of 193 [16%] in the monoblock group versus 34 of 150 [23%] in the modular group, p = 0.10; OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 0.86-2.53). There were more intraoperative fractures in the modular group (17 of 150 [11%] versus nine of 193 [5%]; OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.68-2.73; p = 0.02). There were no differences in the proportions of dislocation (13 of 193 [7%] monoblock versus 14 of 150 [9%] modular; OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.67-1.16; p = 0.48) or failure of osseointegration (eight of 193 [4%] monoblock versus three of 150 [2%] modular; OR, 1.92; 95% CI, 0.88-2.84; p = 0.19) between the two groups with the number of hips available for study.Conclusions: Although rerevisions were less common in patients treated with modular stems, aseptic complications such as intraoperative fractures were more common in that group, and the sample was too small to evaluate corrosion-related or fatigue concerns associated with modularity. We cannot therefore conclude from this that one design is superior to the other. Larger studies and pooled analyses will need to be performed to answer this question, but we believe modularity should be avoided in more straightforward cases if possible.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although it is understood that backside damage occurs in polyethylene acetabular liners, the effect of highly crosslinked polyethylene, which has completely replaced conventional polyethylene, has yet to be examined.Questions/purposes: The purpose of this study was to answer the following questions: (1) With conventional polyethylene (CPE), did the acetabular design make a difference in backside wear? (2) Is there a difference in backside damage between CPE and crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) liners? (3) With XLPE, is the difference in backside wear between designs still present? (4) Is there any difference in backside damage in various zones on backside of individual liners?Methods: This single-institution retrieval analysis involved visual damage scoring on the backside of 233 polyethylene liners implanted between 2002 and 2011. The liners were retrieved from either polished/dovetail cups (PD) or roughened/wire cups (RW) made by two different manufacturers. The inserts were divided into four groups: PD-CPE (n = 105), PD-XLPE (n = 16), RW-CPE (n = 99), and RW-XLPE (n = 13). Aseptic loosening and polyethylene wear were the predominant reasons for revision of CPE liners, whereas instability and infection were the common reasons for revision of XLPE liners. The time in situ (TIS) was shorter for the XLPE liners as compared with the CPE liners (PD-CPE: 8.5 years [SD 4.4]; RD-CPE: 9.5 [SD 4.8]; PD-CPE: 3.8 [SD 3.7]; RD-XLPE: 4.0 [SD 4.3]). The backside of each liner was divided into five zones and graded initially from a scale of 0 to 3 for seven different damage modes by one observer. There was substantial interobserver (kappa 0.769) and intraobserver (0.736) reliability on repeat scoring. To compare the effects of crosslinking, a subset of the conventional polyethylene liners was matched to the crosslinked liners based on TIS, resulting in 16 per group for the two PD types and 13 per group for the two RW types.Results: Total damage scores in the RW-CPE (19 ± 7) group were greater (p < 0.001) than the PD-CPE group (8 ± 4). Damage was reduced with XLPE (p = 0.02) only for the RW-XLPE (9 ± 9) versus RW-CPE-type sockets (4 ± 4). There was no difference (p = 0.16) between the RW-XLPE group and the PD-XLPE group. Damage scores in the peripheral zone of the locking mechanisms were higher for RW-CPE (4 ± 3) compared with PD-CPE (1.4 ± 1.0, p < 0.001) and RW-XLPE (1.3 ± 1.3, p = 0.02). Damage was greater (p < 0.001) within the superior zones (7 ± 4) compared with the inferior zones (3.0 ± 2.8) of all liners.Conclusions: The current study shows greater backside damage for CPE in the roughened, wire lock cups. XLPE was shown to be more resistant to backside damage for both socket designs.Clinical Relevance: Although the polished/dovetail cups seem to cause less backside damage in the CPE liners than roughened/wire cups, the use of XLPE liners has been shown to protect the liner from backside damage in either cup design. If an acetabular shell has a functional locking mechanism, surgeons should not worry about cup design when undertaking isolated liner revision using XLPE liners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Adverse local tissue reactions (ALTRs) around hip arthroplasties are an important reason for failure of metal-on-metal (MoM) hip implants. Little is known about capsular dehiscence patterns as ALTRs decompress from the hip into the surrounding tissue planes; these patterns may also influence the onset and severity of patient symptoms.Questions/purposes: Through a multicenter study approach, we asked: (1) Is ALTR location related to the surgical approach used for arthroplasty in patients who underwent hip arthroplasty (resurfacing or THA) with a single, recalled hip arthroplasty system? (2) Do ALTR severity and location affect patient-reported outcomes in these patients? (3) Is ALTR severity different between patients who received the resurfacing version of this component (Articular Surface Replacement [ASR]) and those who received the THA implant in this system (ASR XL)?Methods: In a multicenter prospective study of patients who had undergone surgery with use of the ASR and ASR XL hip system (DePuy Orthopaedics, Warsaw, IN, USA), 288 patients (333 hips) from two centers had a metal artifact reduction sequence MRI of the hip performed at a mean time of 6 years postsurgery. Procedures included 166 hips (50%) with ASR resurfacing and 167 hips (50%) with ASR XL THA performed between 2004 and 2010. One hundred twenty-nine hips (39%) had been operated on using a direct lateral approach and 204 using a posterior approach (61%). The EQ-5D, Harris hip score, UCLA activity score, and visual analog scale pain score were obtained for each patient. ALTRs were classified using the Anderson ALTR grading system, and the location, synovial thickness, and diameter of the ATLRs were assessed. The relationship between ALTR location and surgical approach as well as for ALTR severity and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated, and logistic regression was used to identify predictors for moderate-to-severe ALTRs.Results: Moderate or severe ALTRs were identified in 79 hips (24%); 41 of these hips had been operated on using the direct lateral approach and 38 using the posterior approach. In patients in whom the lateral approach was used, 83% had an anterior ALTR. Similarly, 71% of patients in the posterior approach group had posterior ALTRs. There were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures between patients with moderate-to-severe ALTRs and those with no ALTR findings on MRI (p > 0.09). Use of ASR XL was an independent risk factor for moderate-to-severe ALTRs (odds ratio, 2.8; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-5.5 p = 0.004) and patients with ASR XL also had a thicker synovium (median ASR XL = 3.6 mm [1.2-10.6 mm], median ASR = 2.6 mm [1.2-10.7 mm], p < 0.001) and larger maximal ALTR diameter (median ASR XL = 47.6 mm [14-109.70 mm], median ASR = 38.4 [17.2-118.0 mm], p = 0.02) than patients treated with ASR.Conclusions: The location of ALTRs can be predicted based on the previous surgical approach to the hip. Patients with ASR XL are more likely to develop moderate-to-severe ALTRs compared with ASR patients. An extensive range of patient-reported outcome measures may not identify all patients with ALTRs further supporting the use of MRI as a screening measure for ALTRs.Level Of Evidence: Level II, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The bimodular femoral neck implant (modularity in the neck section and prosthetic head) offers several implant advantages to the surgeon performing THAs, however, there have been reports of failure of bimodular femoral implants involving neck fractures or adverse tissue reaction to metal debris. We aimed to assess the results of the bimodular implants used in the THAs we performed.Questions/purposes: We asked: (1) What is the survivorship of the PROFEMUR(®) bimodular femoral neck stems? (2) What are the modes of failure of this bimodular femoral neck implant? (3) What are the major risk factors for the major modes of failure of this device?Methods: Between 2003 and 2009, we used one family of bimodular femoral neck stems for all primary THAs (PROFEMUR(®) Z and PROFEMUR(®) E). During this period, 277 THAs (in 242 patients) were performed with these implants. One hundred seventy were done with the bimodular PROFEMUR(®) E (all are accounted for here), and when that implant was suspected of having a high risk of failure, the bimodular PROFEMUR(®) Z was used instead. One hundred seven THAs were performed using this implant (all are accounted for in this study). All bearing combinations, including metal-on-metal, metal-on-polyethylene, and ceramic-on-ceramic, are included here. Data for the cohort included patient demographics, BMI, implant dimensions, type of articular surface, length of followup, and C-reactive protein serum level. We assessed survivorship of the two stems using Kaplan-Meier curves and determined the frequency of the different modes of stem failure. For each of the major modes of failure, we performed binary logistic regression to identify associated risk factors.Results: Survivorship of the stems, using aseptic revision as the endpoint, was 85% for the patients with the PROFEMUR(®) E stems with a mean followup of 50 months (range, 1-125 months) and 85% for the PROFEMUR(®) Z with a mean followup of 50 months (range, 1-125 months)(95% CI, 74-87 months). The most common modes of failure were loosening (9% for the PROFEMUR(®) E), neck fracture (6% for the PROFEMUR(®) Z and 0.6% for the PROFEMUR(®) E), metallosis (1%), and periprosthetic fracture (1%). Only the bimodular PROFEMUR(®) E was associated with femoral stem loosening (odds ratio [OR] =1.1; 95% CI, 1.04-1.140; p = 0.032). Larger head (OR = 3.2; 95% CI, 0.7-14; p = 0.096), BMI (OR = 1.19; 95% CI, 1-1.4; p = 0.038) and total offset (OR = 1.83; 95% CI, 1.13-2.9; p = 0.039) were associated with neck fracture.Conclusion: Bimodular neck junctions may be potentiated by long neck lengths, greater offset, and larger head diameters. These factors may contribute to bimodular neck failure by creating a larger moment about the neck's insertion in the stem. The PROFEMUR(®) E implant is associated with high periprosthetic loosening. Based on our experience we cannot recommend the use of bimodular femoral neck implants.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Many studies report differences in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for men and women undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Few studies have evaluated whether these are explained by corresponding differences in important preoperative factors.Questions/purposes: (1) Are there differences between men and women in PROM scores preoperatively and 12 months after THA? (2) Do baseline differences in comorbidity, age, body mass index (BMI), and mental health status explain these differences in PROM scores?Methods: Preoperatively, 300 patients completed the Oxford Hip Score (OHS), WOMAC, and SF-12; 261 (86%) of them (129 women, 64 ± 11 years; 132 men, 66 ± 10 years) completed the same questionnaires 12 months postoperatively and also rated the acceptability of their current symptoms and change in general health.Results: Preoperatively, women showed worse scores than men in the OHS (-1.9; 95% confidence interval, -3.6 to -0.3) and WOMAC (-6.3; -10.9 to -1.7). At 12 months postoperatively, the absolute scores for all PROMs were not significantly different. After controlling for BMI, age, comorbidity, SF-12 mental health scores, and sociodemographic characteristics, the baseline differences remained.Conclusions: Surgeons may be more reluctant to operate on women than men because they perceive that, because of their worse baseline status, women are likely to have worse outcomes; however, given that we found no evidence for differences in patient-reported outcomes at 12 months, these suspicions would appear to be unfounded. Women and men can be expected to benefit to a similar extent from THA.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Dislocation is a common complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although the etiology of dislocation is multifactorial, longer-term changes in muscle such as atrophy may influence the risk of prosthetic dislocation. Biological differences in wear products generated by different bearing surfaces may influence differences in the appearance of periarticular muscle after THA; however, such bearing-associated differences to our knowledge have not been studied in vivo, and few studies have evaluated bearing-associated differences in dislocation risk.Questions/purposes: (1) Is there a correlation between the postoperative risk of dislocation at revision and the bearing surfaces of the primary arthroplasty? (2) Is there a higher extent of fatty muscle atrophy on CT scan in hips with osteolysis (polyethylene hips) as compared with hips without osteolysis (ceramic-on-ceramic hips)? (3) Are these two abnormalities (bone osteolysis and fatty atrophy) associated with a decrease of mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) in bone and in muscle?Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 240 patients (240 hips) who had a THA revision (98% of which, 235 of the 240, were isolated acetabular revisions) and a normal contralateral hip. All patients had received the same implants for the primary arthroplasty (32-mm head) except for bearing surfaces (80 hips with ceramic-on-ceramic, 160 with polyethylene). No differences were noted between the groups in terms of age, sex, body mass index, proportion of patients who had a dislocation after the index arthroplasty but before the revision, and proportion of the patients with stem loosening in addition to acetabular loosening. Indications for revision generally were cup loosening. The revisions in the hips with polyethylene bearings generally had more acetabular bone loss, but the position of the center of the cup and the orientation of the cup were similar after reconstruction in the two groups. Before revision, osteolysis, muscle atrophy, and fatty degeneration were evaluated on CT scan and compared with the contralateral side. Bone muscle progenitors were evaluated by bone marrow MSCs and satellite cells for muscle. At revision, all the hips received the same implants with the same head diameter (32 mm) and a standard liner. Revisions were performed between 1995 and 2005. The followup after revision was at a mean of 14 years (range, 10-20 years) for ceramic revision and 12 years (range, 10-20 years) for polyethylene hips, and there was no differential loss to followup between the groups.Results: More hips with polyethylene liners at the time of index arthroplasty dislocated after revision than did hips with ceramic liners (18% [29 of 160] compared with 1% [one of 80]; odds ratio, 17.5; 95% confidence interval, 2.3363-130.9100; p = 0.005). For the 80 hips with ceramic-on-ceramic, no osteolysis was detected before revision; there was no muscle fatty degeneration of the gluteus muscles on CT scan or histology. For the 160 hips with polyethylene liners, osteolytic lesions on the acetabulum and femur were observed in 100% of the hips. The increased atrophy of the gluteus muscles observed on CT scan correlated with the increase of osteolysis (r = 0.62; p = 0.012). The surgical limbs in the patients with polyethylene hips as compared with ceramic-on-ceramic hips demonstrated a greater reduction in cross-sectional area (respectively, 11.6% compared with 3%; odds ratio, 3.82; p < 0.001) and radiological density (41% [14.1/34.1] compared with 9%; odds ratio, 6.8; p = 0.006) of gluteus muscles when compared with the contralateral normal side. (41% compared with 9%; odds ratio, 6.8; p = 0.006).Conclusions: Ceramic bearing surfaces were associated with fewer dislocations after revision than polyethylene bearing surfaces. The reasons of the lower rate of dislocation with ceramic-on-ceramic bearings may be related to observed differences in the periarticular muscles (fat atrophy or not) with the two bearing surfaces.Level Of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Osteoarthritis may result from abnormal mechanics leading to biochemically mediated degradation of cartilage. In a dysplastic hip, the periacetabular osteotomy (PAO) is designed to normalize the mechanics and our initial analysis suggests that it may also alter the cartilage biochemical composition. Articular cartilage structure and biology vary with the depth from the articular surface including the concentration of glycosaminoglycans (GAG), which are the charge macromolecules that are rapidly turned over and are lost in early osteoarthritis. Delayed gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of cartilage (dGEMRIC) enables noninvasive measurement of cartilage GAG content. The dGEMRIC index represents an indirect measure of GAG concentration with lower values indicating less GAG content. GAG content can normally vary with mechanical loading; however, progressive loss of GAG is associated with osteoarthritis. By looking at the changes in amounts of GAG in response to a PAO at different depths of cartilage, we may gain further insights into the types of biologic events that are occurring in the joint after a PAO.Questions/purposes: We (1) measured the GAG content in the superficial and deep zones for the entire joint before and after PAO; and (2) investigated if the changes in the superficial and deep zone GAG content after PAO varied with different locations within the joint.Methods: This prospective study included 37 hips in 37 patients (mean age 26 ± 9 years) who were treated with periacetabular osteotomy for symptomatic acetabular dysplasia and had preoperative and 1-year follow up dGEMRIC scans. Twenty-eight of the 37 also had 2-year scans. Patients were eligible if they had symptomatic acetabular dysplasia with lateral center-edge angle < 20° and no or minimal osteoarthritis. The change in dGEMRIC after surgery was assessed in the superficial and deep cartilage zones at five acetabular radial planes.Results: The mean ± SD dGEMRIC index in the superficial zone fell from 480 ± 137 msec preoperatively to 409 ± 119 msec at Year 1 (95% confidence interval [CI], -87 to -54; p < 0.001) and recovered to 451 ± 115 msec at Year 2 (95% CI, 34-65; p < 0.001), suggesting that there is a transient event that causes the biologically sensitive superficial layer to lose GAG. In the deep acetabular cartilage zone, dGEMRIC index fell from 527 ± 148 msec preoperatively to 468 ± 143 msec at Year 1 (95% CI, -66 to -30; p < 0.001) and recovered to 494 ± 125 msec at Year 2 (95% CI, 5-32; p = 0.008). When each acetabular radial plane was looked at separately, the change from before surgery to 1 year after was confined to zones around the superior part of the joint. The only significant change from 1 to 2 years was an increase in the superficial layer of the superior zone (1 year 374 ± 123 msec, 2 year 453 ± 117 msec, p < 0.006).Conclusions: This study suggests that PAO may alter the GAG content of the articular cartilage with a greater effect on the superficial zone compared with the deeper acetabular cartilage zone, especially at the superior aspect of the joint. Some surgeons have observed that surgery itself can be a stressor that can accelerate joint degeneration. Perhaps the decrease in dGEMRIC index seen in the superficial layer may be a catabolic response to postsurgical inflammation given that some recovery was seen at 2 years. The decrease in dGEMRIC index in the deep layer seen mainly near the superior part of the joint is persistent and may represent a response of articular cartilage to normalization of increased mechanical load seen in this region after osteotomy, which may be a normal response to alteration in loading.Clinical Relevance: This study looks at the biochemical changes in the articular cartilage before and after a PAO for dysplastic hips using MRI in a similar manner to using histological methods to study alterations in articular cartilage with mechanical loading. Although PAO alters alignment and orientation of the acetabulum, its effects on cartilage biology are not clear. dGEMRIC provides a noninvasive method of assessing these effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]