Search

The scientific literature suggests that, if periprosthetic osteolysis (PPO) is not treated, it may have a negative impact on the results of a total hip replacement and possibly result in failure. This systematic review aimed to determine the efficacy of using bisphosphonates preventatively to limit PPO after a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A PICOS template was developed to ensure a structured approach. A search for relevant studies was performed across four databases, including Pubmed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane. They were all last searched on March 1st and were assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised studies. Results: The final analysis included seven studies with a total of 126 study group participants and 144 control group participants. The studies looked at Bony Mass Density in terms of bone loss on Gruen's femoral zones after THA in a bisphosphonate (treatment) and control group (placebo/no treatment). The analysis revealed a statistically significant difference (p < 0.05) in favour of the bisphosphonate group in many of the included studies at 6, 12, and 24 postoperative months. Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis, using the most recent applicable studies, showed the efficacy of bisphosphonates in limiting periprosthetic osteolysis after THA in a period between 6 and 24 postoperative months. Future studies should focus increasing group sizes and collecting results beyond the 2-year mark. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This registry study aims to assess the prevalence and demographic characteristics of patients with lumbar spine (LS) surgical procedures who undergo total hip arthroplasty (THA), to compare the long-term survival and causes of failure of THA in patients who previously underwent LS fusion and non-fusion surgical procedures, and to evaluate the risk of undergoing a revision LS surgery after THA. Materials and methods: Patients who underwent LS surgery followed by THA were identified by cross-referencing data from the Orthopedic Prosthetic Implants Registry and the Regional Hospital Discharge Database. Three groups of THA patients were identified: patients who underwent previous lumbar surgery with fusion (LS fusion-THA), without fusion (LS non-fusion-THA), and a control group with only THA (No LS surgery–THA). Demographic data, THA survival, number and causes of failure, and data on revision procedures on THA and LS were collected. Results: Of the total of 79,984 THA, 2.2% of patients had a history of LS procedures. THA only patients showed better results, while patients in the LS fusion-THA group had worse implant survival at 5-year follow-up. In the LS fusion-THA and LS non-fusion-THA, mechanical THA failures were more frequent in the first two years after implantation. There were no differences between groups regarding the risk of undergoing LS revision surgery. Conclusions: LS surgery negatively affects THA survivorship. In patients who previously underwent LS fusion and non-fusion surgical procedures, most THA failure occurs in the first two years after implant. The study contributes to the understanding of the relationship between the hip and the LS and provides useful guidance for clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and objectives: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) in obese patients (BMI > 30) is considered technically demanding, and it is associated with higher rates of general and specific complications including infections, component malpositioning, dislocation, and periprosthetic fractures. Classically, the Direct Anterior Approach (DAA) has been considered less suitable for performing THA surgery in the obese patient, but recent evidence produced by high-volume DAA THA surgeons suggests that DAA is suitable and effective in obese patients. At the authors' institution, DAA is currently the preferred approach for primary and revision THA surgery, accounting for over 90% of hip surgeries without specific patient selection. Therefore, the aim of the current study is to evaluate any difference in early clinical outcomes, perioperative complications, and implant positioning after primary THAs performed via DAA in patients who were divided according to BMI. Material and methods: This study is a retrospective review of 293 THA implants in 277 patients that were performed via DAA from 1 January 2016 to 20 May 2020. Patients were further divided according to BMI: 96 patients were normal weight (NW), 115 were overweight (OW), and 82 were obese (OB). All the procedures were performed by three expert surgeons. The mean follow-up was 6 months. Patients' data, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, surgical time, days in rehab unit, pain at the second post-operative day recorded by using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), and number of blood transfusions were recorded from clinical charts and compared. Radiological evaluation of cup inclination and stem alignment was conducted on post-operative radiographs; intra- and post-operative complications at latest follow-up were recorded. Results: The average age at surgery of OB patients was significantly lower compared to NW and OW patients. The ASA score was significantly higher in OB patients compared to NW patients. Surgical time was slightly but significantly higher in OB patients (85 ± 21 min) compared to NW (79 ± 20 min, p = 0.05) and OW patients (79 ± 20 min, p = 0.029). Rehab unit discharge occurred significantly later for OB patients, averaging 8 ± 2 days compared to NW patients (7 ± 2 days, p = 0.012) and OW patients (7 ± 2 days; p = 0.032). No differences in the rate of early infections, number of blood transfusions, NRS pain at the second post-operative day, and day of post-operative stair climbing were found among the three groups. Acetabular cup inclination and stem alignment were similar among the three groups. The perioperative complication rate was 2.3%; that is, perioperative complication occurred in 7 out of 293 patients, with a significantly higher incidence of surgical revisions required in obese patients compared to the others. In fact, OB patients showed a higher revision rate (4.87%) compared to other groups, with 1.04% for NW and 0% for OW (p = 0.028, Chi-square test). Causes for revision in obese patients were aseptic loosening (2), dislocation (1), and clinically significant post-operative leg length discrepancy (1), with a revision rate of 4/82 (4.87%) during follow-up. Conclusions: THA performed via DAA in obese patients could be a solid choice of treatment, given the relatively low rate of complications and the satisfying clinical outcomes. However, surgical expertise on DAA and adequate instrumentation for this approach are required to optimise the outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The impact of age and sex on femoral component choices in modular total hip arthroplasty (THA) is still unknown. A regional arthroplasty registry was interrogated about a modular stem in THA performed for primary osteoarthritis, with the aims to assess the influence of age and sex on stems sizes and neck choices. A total of 6830 THAs were included: all THAs had a modular stem (with 15 necks and 27 combinations per side). Patients were stratified by age in decades and sex. Necks were grouped according to the type of correction. The percentage of larger stem sizes increased in males and in elder patients (p < 0.001). Standard necks were overrepresented in males aged 40–59 and underrepresented in males aged 70 or older (p < 0.001). Half of the necks provided other corrections than standard or offset, especially in males aged 40–49 and females aged 70 or older (p < 0.001). Offset necks were predominant in elder patients (p < 0.001). Version-correcting necks were prevalent in younger males and older females (p < 0.001). Varus necks were implanted in one-third of the cases. The four commonest necks showed age and sex specific patterns. In the registry, age and sex impacted stem size and neck choices in THA performed for primary osteoarthritis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is one of the most common surgical procedures in orthopedics; however, it is subjected to different kinds of failures, one of them being dislocation. Many different prosthetic designs have been developed to overcome this problem, such as dual mobility coupling. The main purpose of this article is to determine whether there are differences regarding the revision surgery of unstable THA comparing the risk of failure between dual mobility cup (DMC) implants, standard implants, and among different head sizes. A registry-based population study has been conducted by analyzing data collected by the Emilia Romagna Registry of Orthopedic Prosthetic Implants (RIPO), including a total of 253 implants failed for dislocation and instability that were operated on by cup revision surgery between 2000 and 2019. The selected population has been divided into two groups based on the insert type: standard and DMC. The age at revision surgery was significantly lower in the standard cup group with respect to DMC (p = 0.014 t-test), with an average age of 71.2 years (33–96 years range) for the standard cups and 74.8 years (48–92 years range) for the DMC group. The cumulative survival of DMC implants was 82.0% at 5-years, decreasing to 77.5% at a 10-year follow-up, which is not significantly different from standard cups (p = 0.676, Log-Rank test). DMC implants showed a significantly lower risk of re-revision for dislocation compared to standard cups (p = 0.049). Femoral heads ≥36 mm had a higher overall survival compared to smaller femoral heads (p = 0.030). This study demonstrated that DMC or femoral heads ≥36 mm are a valid choice to manage THA instability and to reduce the revision rate for dislocation at a mid-term follow-up; in those selected and targeted patients, these options should be taken into consideration because they are associated with better outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Noise in ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) total hip arthroplasty (THA) is a potential symptom of abnormal bearing wear. Squeaking and other prosthetic hip noises are multi-factorial phenomena that can be analysed and may provide prognostic information. Methods: 46 patients with noisy CoC bearings were investigated using X-ray, computed tomography and joint fluid analysis, and classified into either high or low risk of ceramic liner fracture groups according to previously published guidelines. Noise events from the bearings of 16 high risk cases which were subsequently revised were compared with 30 patients in the low risk control group who did not undergo revision. Noise events were analysed for their physical characteristics using a standardised protocol and classified as either low frequency and short duration 'clicking' or long duration and high frequency 'squeaking'. Results: The peak frequency of squeaking during forward walking was significantly higher for patients in the case group who were revised, compared with the control group. The patient-reported onset of squeaking (46 months postoperatively) was earlier than short-noise emissions (82 months). In the standardised sequence of movements, short-noise always occurred more frequently than squeaking. Small heads (28 mm) were more likely to develop short-noise, while large heads (⩾32 mm) were more likely to develop squeaking. Discussion: Noise evaluation may provide additional value for predicting failure of CoC bearings, though some questions should be better investigated in a dedicated prospective trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large diameter heads (LDH) are connected to the stem by means of a Morse taper. An adapter sleeve may be also used to adjust the head offset intraoperatively and/or to change the bearing couple and size. This paper explains the effect of head diameter and friction coefficient on the frictional torque acting on the tapers. A greater frictional torque tends to increase the micromotion occurring with in the tapered junction. Other crucial parameters are those that determine the distance between the center of the head and the tapered junction engagement level (e.g. head offset, adapter sleeve). Caution must be paid in using LDH coupled to small tapered junction, with or without an adapter sleeve. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]