Search

Introduction: Performing total hip arthroplasty (THA) after failed internal fixation of proximal femoral fractures (PFF) is known to be associated with high rates of complications. Dual mobility cups (DMC) are known to lower dislocation events in high-risk patients. Very few reports investigated the outcomes of THA using DMC following failure of internal fixation for PFF. Methods: This is a retrospective monocentric continuous study of 31 patients who underwent THA with DMC after failed internal fixation of PFF. The clinical assessment was based on the modified Harris hip score (mHHS) at the last follow-up. The complication rates and radiological analyses were recorded. Results: The mean follow-up period was 5.96 ± 4.2 years. At the last follow-up, the mean mHHS was 92.9 ± 9.1 with 71% of the patients describing their operated hip as a forgotten hip. No dislocation or aseptic loosening events were noted. One patient developed a septic loosening of the implant. No significant radiological changes were recorded. Sixteen stems (51.6%) were placed in a neutral position, 13 (42%) in valgus (2.74 ± 1.72°), and 2 (6.4%) in varus (6.94 ± 2.02°). Conclusion: This study emphasizes the advantage of using DMC following failed internal fixation of PFF in reducing dislocation and complication events in this high-risk population.

Every time a paper is submitted to the journal, we realize the effort and amount of work it takes for performing the study, writing, formatting, and submitting the paper for peer review. However, how many of these papers are suitable for publication? Medical writing considerations, including an understandable text that does not confuse reading, formality, and ethics in writing, should be kept in mind when preparing and writing a paper to be submitted for publication to a journal. This editorial note offers useful advice for the authors submitting their papers to a journal on what to keep in mind before submission, how to prepare a quality submission, how to win the editor for their paper to avoid rejection, and how to make it to the review process and maybe to get published. It is our belief that these tips and advice on medical writing apply to any author and any journal.

Introduction: Total hip replacement provides mostly fair functional and clinical results. Many factors play an essential role in hip stability and long-term outcomes. Surgical positioning remains fundamental for obtaining accurate implant fit and prevent hip dislocation or impingement. Different categories of robotic assistance have been established throughout the previous years and all of the technologies target accuracy and reliability to reduce complications, and enhance clinical outcomes. Materials and methods: An overview is proposed over the principles of robotic assistance in hip arthroplasty surgery. Accuracy, reliability, management of the bone stock, clinical outcomes, constraints and limits of this technology are reported, based on recent literature. Results: Potential advantages regarding pre-operative planning accuracy, cup positioning, maintenance of the center of rotation, preservation of an adequate bone stock nay clinical short- and mid-term outcomes are balanced with some reported disadvantages and limits like hip anatomical specificity, cost-effectiveness, engineering dependence. Discussion: The use of robotic-assisted THA presents clear and evident benefits related to accurate implant positioning and maintenance of a minimal bone while allowing. For some authors, an early improvement in functional results and patient’s recovery. This technology demonstrated a shorter surgical time and a short learning curve required to optimize its use and this technology presents promising outcomes and results and potential use in routine clinical application but its limitation of use is still present especially the cost of the robot, the need for the presence of an engineer during the surgery, its availability of use in all hospitals as well as the difficulty presented in dysplastic or dysmorphic hip joints.

Introduction: In 1979, in his first book dealing with low-friction arthroplasty (LFA), Charnley highlighted the use of a cement restrictor. Breusch and Malchau described in 2005 the “second-generation cementing technique.” The main objective of this study was to report on the clinical survival of 100 cases of Charnley femoral component implanted in 2007 and 2008 using a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and a low-viscosity antibiotic-loaded cement. The secondary objectives were to analyze the complications and side effects and the accuracy of the device positioning. Material and methods: This was a monocentric retrospective review of a prospectively compiled database. Diaphyseal restrictor was biodegradable and permeable to gas, blood, and fluids to avoid intramedullary over pression during cementation. The cement was a low-viscosity antibiotic-loaded cement. Among 3555 patients, we selected the first continuous 100 cases of patients where we implanted the device. Survival probability was computed according to Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Mean follow-up was 6.55 ± 2.6 (range 1–11). Considering femoral component revision as the endpoint, survival rate was 100%. No patients died intraoperatively, none in the first month and the first year after surgery. No early periprosthetic fractures have been reported. Discussion: As described initially by Charnley, the use of a cement restrictor was highly recommended through the different generations of cementing techniques. Hypotensive episodes and cardiac arrest have been reported during cement insertion. In our series, we did not deplore any adverse effect related to the cementation. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates a 100% survival rate of a cemented femoral component without adverse effects when using routinely a resorbable and permeable cement restrictor and a low-viscosity cement. Bone cement is still a fantastic ally for the surgeon and the patients.

Acetabular reconstruction aims at filling bony defects and positioning the acetabular component in its anatomical place. To this, the use of Kerboull plate would give an automatic optimal positioning while reconstructing the acetabular cavity. We developed a technique, the cross technique, that approaches acetabular reconstruction in a systematic way. It consists of placing the KP following its cross design, in reference to a vertical plane (hook, center, palette) and a horizontal plane (horizontal flanges). The cross technique has three steps; the preparation of the acetabular cavity, the cross technique itself and cementation. We recommend a downsizing of the plate in relation to the size of the acetabular cavity in addition to another downsizing of the acetabular implant in relation to the plate size whenever a dual mobility cup is used.