Search

AimsThe aim of this study was to compare the design of the generic OptiStem XTR femoral stem with the established Exeter femoral stem.Materials and MethodsWe obtained five boxed, as manufactured, implants of both designs at random (ten in total). Two examiners were blinded to the implant design and independently measured the mass, volume, trunnion surface topography, trunnion roughness, trunnion cone angle, Caput-Collum-Diaphyseal (CCD) angle, femoral offset, stem length, neck length, and the width and roughness of the polished stem shaft using peer-reviewed methods. We then compared the stems using these parameters.ResultsWe found that the OptiStems were lighter (p < 0.001), had a rougher trunnion surface (p <  0.001) with a greater spacing and depth of the machined threads (p < 0.001), had greater trunnion cone angles (p = 0.007), and a smaller radius at the top of the trunnion (p = 0.007). There was no difference in stem volume (p = 0.643), CCD angle (p = 0.788), offset (p = 0.993), neck length (p = 0.344), stem length (p = 0.808), shaft width (p = 0.058 to 0.720) or roughness of the polished surface (p = 0.536).ConclusionThis preliminary investigation found that whilst there were similarities between the two designs, the generic OptiStem is different to the branded Exeter design.Cite this article: Bone Joint J2017;99-B:310–16.

Electrochemical CO2reduction is a promising technology to capture and convert CO2to valuable chemicals. High Faradaic efficiencies of CO2reduction products are achieved with zero-gap alkaline CO2electrolyzers with a supporting electrolyte at the anode (anolyte). Herein, we investigate the effect of anolyte on the electrode properties such as catalyst utilization, ionic accessibility etc. of a CO2reduction cathode using electrochemical techniques and cell configurations that avoid the complexities related to co-electrolysis. Using 1M KOH as the anolyte and a Cu gas-diffusion-electrode with low Nafion content as the model CO2reduction electrode, we find that electrode capacitance (proxy for electrochemically active surface area) and ionic conductivity inside the cathode increase approximately 4 and 447 times, respectively, in presence of KOH. Liquid anolyte wets the electrode’s pore structure more efficiently than capillary condensation of feed water vapor. The ionomer coverage is very low, and its distribution inside the electrode is highly fragmented. Surface ion conduction mechanisms inside the electrode are orders of magnitude lower than the bulk ion conduction in presence of anolyte. This study shows that when an anolyte (e.g., KOH) is used, catalyst utilization and ionic accessibility inside the electrode increase significantly.

AimsThe National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland (NJR) has extended its scope to report on hospital, surgeon and implant performance. Data linkage of the NJR to the London Implant Retrieval Centre (LIRC) has previously evaluated data quality for hip primary procedures, but did not assess revision records. MethodsWe analysed metal-on-metal hip revision procedures performed between 2003 and 2013. A total of 69 929 revision procedures from the NJR and 929 revised pairs of components from the LIRC were included.ResultsWe were able to link 716 (77.1%) revision procedures on the NJR to the LIRC. This meant that 213 (22.9%) revision procedures at the LIRC could not be identified on the NJR. We found that 349 (37.6%) explants at the LIRC completed the full linkage process to both NJR primary and revision databases. Data completion was excellent (> 99.9%) for revision procedures reported to the NJR.DiscussionThis study has shown that only approximately one third of retrieved components at the LIRC, contributed to survival curves on the NJR. We recommend prospective registry-retrieval linkage as a tool to feedback missing and erroneous data to the NJR and improve data quality.Take home message: Prospective Registry – retrieval linkage is a simple tool to evaluate and improve data quality on the NJR.Cite this article: Bone Joint J2016;98-B:33–9.

Metal-on-metal bearings were re-popularised in the late 1990s with the introduction of modern hip resurfacing. Large diameter (LD) metal-on-metal (MoM) hips became more prevalent and have been the least successful group of hip implants ever used. They were rapidly adopted from 2004 until the British Hip Society stopped their use in 2012. Well functioning MoM hip results (including the BHR and Metasul) are hidden in the mire of poor results from the group of all MoM bearings.We have reviewed what happened and we make 3 observations. Firstly, collaboration between surgeons and then between surgeons and other disciplines, first identified and then solved the clinical management problems. Secondly, the problems with MoM hips occurred because hip simulation was inadequate at predicting performance in patients. They gave no indications of the biological effects of wear in the human environment. Lastly, retrieval of failed implants was essential to understanding why failure occurred.These lessons must never be forgotten and must form the basis by which new or altered implants are introduced and how they should be monitored. This will enable safer innovation for patients, surgeons and manufacturers. The problems with MoM hips will not have been in vain.

Arthroplasty registries are important for the surveillance of joint replacements and the evaluation of outcome. Independent validation of registry data ensures high quality. The ability for orthopaedic implant retrieval centres to validate registry data is not known. We analysed data from the National Joint Registry for England, Wales and Northern Ireland (NJR) for primary metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties performed between 2003 and 2013. Records were linked to the London Implant Retrieval Centre (RC) for validation. A total of 67 045 procedures on the NJR and 782 revised pairs of components from the RC were included. We were able to link 476 procedures (60.9%) recorded with the RC to the NJR successfully. However, 306 procedures (39.1%) could not be linked. The outcome recorded by the NJR (as either revised, unrevised or death) for a primary procedure was incorrect in 79 linked cases (16.6%). The rate of registry-retrieval linkage and correct assignment of outcome code improved over time. The rates of error for component reference numbers on the NJR were as follows: femoral head category number 14/229 (5.0%); femoral head batch number 13/232 (5.3%); acetabular component category number 2/293 (0.7%) and acetabular component batch number 24/347 (6.5%). Registry-retrieval linkage provided a novel means for the validation of data, particularly for component fields. This study suggests that NJR reports may underestimate rates of revision for many types of metal-on-metal hip replacement. This is topical given the increasing scope for NJR data. We recommend a system for continuous independent evaluation of the quality and validity of NJR data.Cite this article: Bone Joint J2015;97-B:10–18.