Search

Background: One-stage, bilateral, short-stem total hip arthroplasty (1B-ssTHA) represents an alternative to staged, unilateral, short-stem total hip arthroplasty (U-ssTHA); however, the safety and reliability of 1B-ssTHA remain unknown. The objective of the present study was to compare the functional outcomes, complications, and mortality rates between 1B-ssTHA and U-ssTHA at mid-term., Methods: A retrospective, matched-pair study was performed, including 216 short stems implanted in 162 patients. Among the study population, 54 patients were treated with 1B-ssTHA. Patients were matched by gender, age, body mass index (BMI), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification. A total of 46 full matches could be accomplished. The mean follow-up time for the 1B-ssTHA group was 61.7 months (standard deviation [SD] 6.2 months), compared with was 63.4 months (SD 8.0 months) for the U-ssTHA group. Mortality, complication, and revision rates were documented. For clinical examinations, the visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate satisfaction, rest pain, and load pain, and the Harris Hip Score (HHS) was determined., Results: No surgery-related deaths were observed. At mid-term, none of the 1B-ssTHA patients required stem revision. The rate of complications for both groups was low. The mean drop in haemoglobin measured in the 1B-ssTHA group was 4.42 mg/dl, compared with 3.18 mg/dl in the U-ssTHA group. The mean HHS in the 1B-ssTHA group was 98.3 points (SD 2.80), whereas, in the U-ssTHA group, the mean HHS was 97.9 points (SD 3.44) (p = 0.478). Satisfaction rates were significantly higher in the 1B-ssTHA group (p = 0.04) than in the U-ssTHA group, whereas no significant differences were found for pain at rest and pain at load (p = 0.56 and p = 0.26, respectively)., Conclusion: Our findings indicate that 1B-ssTHA is an effective and beneficial procedure for a select population. Mortality, complications, implant survival, and clinical outcomes were comparable to those for a matched group with unilateral osteoarthritis treated with U-ssTHA. However, an increase in blood loss must be acknowledged for the 1B-ssTHA procedure., Competing Interests: KPK and PR serve as instructors for Mathys Ltd., Bettlach, Switzerland. PR also serves as medical advisor. All other authors declare that they have no competing interests., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Background: The usage of short stems in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) has constantly gained popularity over the last decade, however, to date, short stems are not eligible to be used as revision implants. The aim of this study was to retrospectively evaluate the outcome of revision surgery of failed hip resurfacing arthroplasty (HRA) using short-stem THA., Methods: In a single center, retrospective analysis, 6 consecutive patients who were treated with a calcar-guided short stem after failure of HRA were evaluated. The mean follow-up was 3.25 years (SD 0.45). Patient reported outcome measurements (PROMs) were recorded using the Harris hip score (HHS) and The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC). The health status was evaluated by the EQ-5D-5L score. Pain and satisfaction were obtained using the visual analogue scale (VAS). Radiographic analysis was performed by evaluating osteolysis, stress shielding, alignement and signs of aseptic loosening. Complications were documented., Results: At last follow-up, clinical outcome was excellent (HHS ≥ 90) in 5 patients and good (HHS = 87) in 1 patient. The mean WOMAC score was 5.73% (SD 3.66%). The mean EQ-5D-5L index was 0.914 (SD 0.07). Pain and satisfaction on VAS was 1.83 (SD 5.18) and 8.67 (SD 0.94), respectively. Radiologically, no signs of subsidence, aseptic loosening, stress shielding and fracture were obvious. No major complications occurred. To date, no further revision surgery was needed., Conclusions: The outcomes of the present case series propose that HRA can be safely revised using short-stem THA in a selected patient group. Clinical and radiological results are encouraging. Based on the present data, short stems may be considered as a revision implant for failed HRA for experienced surgeons., Competing Interests: The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: KPK and PR are medical advisors for Mathys Ltd., Bettlach, Switzerland. All other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (© 2021 The Authors.)