Minimum ten-year results of a 28-mm metal-on-metal bearing in cementless total hip arthroplasty in patients fifty years of age and younger

Purpose

Concerns have been raised in relation to metal-on-metal (MoM) articulations with catastrophic soft-tissue reactions due to metal debris. We reviewed how small head MoM articulations perform in primary uncemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) in young patients at a minimum of ten years.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated the clinical and radiographic results of the first 100 consecutive primary cementless THAs using the 28-mm Metasul MoM articulation in 91 patients younger than 50 years of age at the time of surgery.

Results

After 13 years, survival for the endpoint revision due to any reason was 90.9 % and 98.9 % for revision due to aseptic implant loosening. The cumulative incidence of MoM related revisions was 1.2 %. Small proximal femoral osteolysis was found in 18 % of hips. No acetabular osteolysis or loosening was detected. Two hips showed signs of femoral neck impingement with severe damage to the neck.

Conclusions

Early in the second decade, MoM-associated complications were rare using the 28-mm Metasul articulation, and aseptic loosening was not a major mode of failure in this cohort of young patients.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic Level IV.     

Hip Resurfacing versus Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review Comparing Standardized Outcomes

Background

Metal-on-metal hip resurfacing was developed for younger, active patients as an alternative to THA, but it remains controversial. Study heterogeneity, inconsistent outcome definitions, and unstandardized outcome measures challenge our ability to compare arthroplasty outcomes studies.

Questions/purposes

We asked how early revisions or reoperations (within 5 years of surgery) and overall revisions, adverse events, and postoperative component malalignment compare among studies of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing with THA among patients with hip osteoarthritis. Secondarily, we compared the revision frequency identified in the systematic review with revisions reported in four major joint replacement registries.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review of English language studies published after 1996. Adverse events of interest included rates of early failure, time to revision, revision, reoperation, dislocation, infection/sepsis, femoral neck fracture, mortality, and postoperative component alignment. Revision rates were compared with those from four national joint replacement registries. Results were reported as adverse event rates per 1000 person-years stratified by device market status (in use and discontinued). Comparisons between event rates of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing and THA are made using a quasilikelihood generalized linear model. We identified 7421 abstracts, screened and reviewed 384 full-text articles, and included 236. The most common study designs were prospective cohort studies (46.6%; n = 110) and retrospective studies (36%; n = 85). Few randomized controlled trials were included (7.2%; n = 17).

Results

The average time to revision was 3.0 years for metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (95% CI, 2.95–3.1) versus 7.8 for THA (95% CI, 7.2–8.3). For all devices, revisions and reoperations were more frequent with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing than THA based on point estimates and CIs: 10.7 (95% CI, 10.1–11.3) versus 7.1 (95% CI, 6.7–7.6; p = 0.068), and 7.9 (95% CI, 5.4–11.3) versus 1.8 (95% CI, 1.3–2.2; p = 0.084) per 1000 person-years, respectively. This difference was consistent with three of four national joint replacement registries, but overall national joint replacement registries revision rates were lower than those reported in the literature. Dislocations were more frequent with THA than metal-on-metal hip resurfacing: 4.4 (95% CI, 4.2–4.6) versus 0.9 (95% CI, 0.6–1.2; p = 0.008) per 1000 person-years, respectively. Adverse event rates change when discontinued devices were included.

Conclusions

Revisions and reoperations are more frequent and occur earlier with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing, except when discontinued devices are removed from the analyses. Results from the literature may be misleading without consistent definitions, standardized outcome metrics, and accounting for device market status. This is important when clinicians are assessing and communicating patient risk and when selecting which device is most appropriate for individual patients.     

Survival and functional outcome of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing system in patients aged 65 and older at up to ten years of follow-up

Purpose

Limited evidence exists regarding the outcomes of hip resurfacing in elderly patients. The primary study aims were to determine the survival and functional outcome following Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) in patients ≥65 years at up to ten years of follow-up. Secondary aims were to explore factors affecting survival and functional outcome.

Methods

Between 1997 and 2012, data were prospectively collected on 180 BHR (162 patients; mean age 69.2 years; 62 % male) implanted by one designing surgeon. Mean follow-up was six (range one to 14.4) years with no loss to follow-up. Outcomes of interest were implant survival, functional outcome [Oxford Hip Score (OHS)] and radiological evidence of implant failure.

Results

Three hips were revised, giving an overall cumulative survival of 96.4 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 90.3–100] at ten years. Survival of 111 male BHR was 98.9 % (95 % CI 94.8–100) at ten years (one revision) compared with 91.9 % (95 % CI 77.0–100) in 69 female BHR (two revisions). Survival was affected by age (p?=?0.014) and femoral head size (p?=?0.024) but not by gender (p?=?0.079). Median pre-operative OHS was 50.0 % [interquartile range (IQR) 37.5–68.8], improving to 4.4 % (IQR 0–10.4) postoperatively. Men had significantly better postoperative OHSs compared with women (median male OHS 2.1 % versus 6.3 % female OHS; p?=?0.021).

Conclusions

Good survival and functional outcomes were achieved with the BHR at ten years in men and women ≥65 years. Despite registry findings to the contrary, age alone should not be a contraindication for hip resurfacing in centres with expertise in this procedure.     

Revisional Bariatric Surgery for Unsuccessful Weight Loss and Complications

Background

There are growing numbers of patients who require revisional bariatric surgery due to the undesirable results of their primary procedures. The aim of this study was to review our experience with bariatric patients undergoing revisional surgery.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective analysis to review the indications for revisional bariatric procedures and assess their postoperative outcomes.

Results

From 04/04 to 01/11, 2,918 patients underwent bariatric surgery at our institution. A total of 154 patients (5.3 %) of these cases were coded as revisional procedures. The mean age at revision was 49.1?±?11.3 and the mean BMI was 44.0?±?13.7 kg/m². Revisional surgery was performed laparoscopically in 121 patients (78.6 %). Laparoscopic revisions had less blood loss, shorter length of hospital stay, and fewer complications compared to open revisions. Two groups (A and B) were defined by the indication for revision: patients with unsuccessful weight loss (group A, n?=?106) and patients with complications of their primary procedures (group B, n?=?48). In group A, 74.5 % of the patients were revised to a bypass procedure and 25.5 % to a restrictive procedure. Mean excess weight loss was 53.7?±?29.3 % after revision of primary restrictive procedures and 37.6?±?35.1 % after revision of bypass procedures at >1-year follow-up (p?<?0.05). In group B, the complications prompting revision were effectively treated by revisional surgery.

Conclusions

Revisional bariatric surgery effectively treated the undesirable results from primary bariatric surgery. Laparoscopic revisional surgery can be performed after both failed open and laparoscopic bariatric procedures without a prohibitive complication rate. Carefully selected patients undergoing revision for weight regain have satisfactory additional weight loss.     

Allergic reactions in arthroplasty: myth or serious problem?

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of sensitisation to chromium, cobalt, nickel, or a cement component in patients who received endoprosthetic surgery at our institution. Also, we aimed to assess the portion related to allergic reactions in endoprosthetic revisions and to follow-up those patients after allergic reaction related revisions.

Methods

We selected patients with a pre-operative known sensitisation to chromium, cobalt, nickel, or a cement component for a post-operative allergic reaction. All patients who received revision surgery because of a potential allergic reaction were followed up post revision surgery.

Results

Eight hundred fifty-five patients were pre-operative known to have a sensitisation to chromium, cobalt, nickel, or a cement component. Six hundred eighty-two patients (79.8 %) received a primary arthroplasty, and 173 patients (20.2 %) received a revision surgery. Seventeen patients (2.0 %) were revised because of allergic reactions. Allergic reactions were the cause for approximately 0.2 % of all endoprosthetic revisions and for 9.8 % of revisions in patients with sensitisation to one of the reviewed components. Potential allergens were strictly avoided in the replaced prosthesis. Outcome scores improved post-operatively.

Conclusions

The allergic patient should be thoroughly informed about potential reactions resulting from implant choice. Our study can serve as risk assessments by quantifying the incidence of allergic reactions due to endoprosthetic treatment.

     

The effect of a manufacturer recall on the threshold to revise a metal-on-metal hip

Purpose

Management of the unexplained, painful large diameter metal-on-metal (MOM) hip replacement is difficult. Although there are guidelines for surgeons, there is no clear documented evidence describing the overall threshold for revision surgery. The 2010 product recall of the DePuy Articular Surface Replacement (ASR) and subsequent media coverage may have increased patient and surgeon apprehension, resulting in earlier intervention, i.e. at a greater Oxford hip score (OHS) than expected. Our aim was to investigate whether the threshold for revision using known parameters was affected by the ASR recall. These parameters include poor clinical results (persistent pain or mechanical symptoms), pseudotumour or other progressive soft tissue involvement, osteolysis and high or rising metal ion levels.

Methods

We used our national referral database of MOM hips, which were revised between 2008 and 2012. Once inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, we identified 240 patients—71 patients in the pre-recall group and 169 patients in the post-recall group.

Results

The ASR product recall did not seem to affect the threshold for revision of a MOM hip, with no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the functional (median OHS = 17 pre-recall and 20 post-recall; p?=?0.2109) and radiological (median inclination angle = 50 pre-recall and 48 post-recall; p?=?0.3221) markers used to guide management. We did however discover that blood metal ion levels were higher in the post-recall group.

Conclusion

Issue of a product recall did not change the hip function threshold for revision surgery. The decision to revise a metal-on-metal hip is complex and should follow published guidelines, encompassing metal ion measurement and cross-sectional imaging where appropriate.     

The Copeland resurfacing humeral head implant does not restore humeral head anatomy. A retrospective study

Purpose

Recently, there has been concern that the Copeland resurfacing humeral head implant (RHHI) leaves the shoulder joint overstuffed. The purpose of this study was in a selected cohort of patients operated with a Copeland RHHI (1) to evaluate the Length of the Gleno-Humeral Offset (LGHO), (2) to assess the patient-reported quality of life and functional outcome measured by Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS) and (3) to determine the number of revisions in the cohort.

Methods

Pre- and postoperative radiographs were retrieved from 71 of 91 possible patients operated with a Copeland RHHI from 2005 to 2009. The cohort consisted of 30 males and 41 females at a mean age of 61 (38–89) years. One radiologist measured the LGHO and performed double measurements. The WOOS score 1 year after surgery and the number of revisions from all patients operated with a Copeland RHHI in Denmark was requested from the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry.

Results

The mean LGHO was 4.99 ± 0.53 cm before surgery and 5.39 ± 0.58 cm after surgery, (p < 0.001). 95 % limits of agreement for measurements of LGHO were ± 0.11 cm. One year after surgery, the WOOS score was 67 for the cohort and 64 for all patients operated with a Copeland RHHI in Denmark. 13 of 71 RHHI in the cohort were revised.

Conclusion

The Copeland RHHI causes significantly increased LGHO and leads to overstuffing in the shoulder joint. The WOOS score in the cohort was comparable to that for all other Danish patients operated with a Copeland RHHI.     

Gravity assisted vs. medium pressure valves for communicating hydrocephalus show similar valve-revision rates

Background

Two common valve types used to treat hydrocephalus include gravity assisted valves (GAV) and medium pressure valves (MPV). Despite their different mechanism of action, differentiated surgical indications per type are not well defined. One could assume that due to a higher complexity of the GAV system, it may be more prone to valve-related malfunction. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the valve-related complication rates of GAV and MPV in patients with communicating hydrocephalus.

Method

Patients aged 16 years or older undergoing their first shunt implantation using GAV or MPV were included. We recorded demographic data, implantation diagnosis, outcome, complications, valve type and valve adjustments. Symptoms were documented at discharge and follow-up. Valve-related malfunctions were distinguished from other shunt complications.

Results

N?=?252 patients (range 16.6–88.4, mean 65.0 years, 116 male and 136 female) underwent shunt placement for the first time. N?=?122 GAV (48.4 %) and n?=?130 MPV were implanted (51.6 %) over a period of 5 years. The most frequent diagnoses were normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH) in 86 cases (34.1 %) and posthemorrhagic hydrocephalus in 114 cases (45.2 %). About two thirds of patients were free of hydrocephalus-related symptoms at follow-up. N?=?66 subjects (26.2 %) underwent at least one shunt revision. N?=?29 revisions (11.5 %) were due to valve-related malfunction. Valve-related revisions were the main cause for revision in 18/37 cases (48.6 %) in the GAV group and in 11/29 (37.9 %) in the MPV group. Neither clinical improvement nor valve-related malfunctions were found to be statistically different among groups.

Conclusions

Despite their technical differences, GAV and MPV show similar valve-related revision rates in the treatment of communicating hydrocephalus.     

The benefit of the systematic revision of the acetabular implant in favor of a dual mobility articulation during the treatment of periprosthetic fractures of the femur: a 49 cases prospective comparative study

Introduction

The SOFCOT symposium (2005) on periprosthetic fractures of the femur (PFFs) highlighted a high rate of dislocation (15.6% at 6 months) after change of prosthesis. So far, no study has ever proved the benefit of dual-mobility articulation during PFFs revisions. We conducted a comparative study on two prospective cohorts in order to (1) assess the influence of systematic acetabular revision in favor of a double mobility on dislocation rate (2) and in order to evaluate the rate of morbidity associated with this extra surgical procedure.

Hypothesis

A systematic replacement of the cup in favor of a dual-mobility articulation enables to reduce the dislocation rate in PFFs revisions without increasing morbidity.

Methodology

We compared two prospective multicenter cohorts over a year (2005 and 2015) using the same methodology. Any fracture around hip prosthesis which occurred 3 months at least after surgery was included. Data collection was clinical and radiological on preoperative, intraoperative and 6 months after surgery. The 2015 “bipolar” group (n = 24) included patients who had a bipolar revision (both femoral and dual-mobility articulation). The 2005 “unipolar” group (n = 25) included patients who had only a femoral implant revision. Patients were comparable by age (p = 0.36), sex (p = 0.91), ASA score (p = 0.36), history of prosthetic revision (p = 1.00), Katz score (p = 0.50) and the type of fracture according to the Vancouver classification (p = 0.55).

Results

There was a 4% rate of dislocation in the “bipolar group” while there was 21% rate of dislocation in the “unipolar group” (8% of recurrent dislocation) (p = 0.19). The rate of all-cause complications 6 months after surgery was not significantly different (p = 0.07): 12.5% in the 2015 “bipolar” cohort (one dislocation, one non-symptomatic cup migration and one pseudarthrosis of the major trochanter) versus 35% in the “unipolar” cohort (5 dislocations, 1 major trochanter fracture and 1 femur pseudarthrosis, 1 secondary displacement associated with a superficial infection). The surgical revision after 6 months was not significantly different (1/23 or 4% vs. 4/25 or 16%, p = 0.35).

Conclusion

We confirm the low rate of dislocations after fitting a dual-mobility cup in case of revision of the femoral side in case of periprosthetic femoral fracture, as well as the need for additional cases to be carried out upon further studies to significantly confirm the interest of preventing instability after femoral revision.

     

Robotically Assisted Revision of Bariatric Surgeries Is Safe and Effective to Achieve Further Weight Loss

Background

As more bariatric operations are being performed in the USA every year, the number of revisions has increased. These operations are challenging and have a higher morbidity than the initial operation. We have reviewed our series of robotically assisted revisions.

Methods

At the University of Texas Medical School at Houston, we reviewed robotic revision cases from 2004 through 2011 and found 99 bariatric revisions using robotic assistance. Selected endpoints included body mass index (BMI) at follow-up, percent excess weight loss (%EWL), complications, intubation time, operative time, and length of hospital stay.

Results

The average BMI at the time of revision was 44.8 kg/m² and fell to 29 kg/m² after 3 years. BMI was significantly lower at all time intervals (3, 12, 24, and 36 months) compared to initial BMI (p < 0.001). The %EWL was also significant at 1, 3, 12, 24, and 36 months post-revision (p < 0.001). There was a 24 % (13/55) 90-day readmission rate. The overall complication rate was 17 %, with each individual complication rate between 2 and 4 %. There were no deaths. The average operative time was 204 min, and the average length of hospital stay was 2.3 days.

Conclusions

Revising previous bariatric operations to gastric bypass is difficult and time consuming. Although robotically assisted revision can be done safely and can result in effective further weight loss, the high postoperative complication rate is an issue that warrants further attention.     

Bone graft incorporation after revision hip arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis, seventy eight revisions using bone allografts with or without metal reinforcements

Purpose

The aim of the study was to assess bone graft incorporation after revision hip arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

Methods

We report an acetabular reconstruction using impacted, morselized, frozen, radiation sterilized bone allografts in 71 patients suffering from RA. There were sixty-six women and five men at a mean age of 57.5 years. Reconstruction was performed in 78 revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) for aseptic loosening of acetabular component. The mean follow-up was five years and four months. In 38 cases, a revision was done with use of reinforcement devices.

Results

In four revised hips (10 %) without reinforcement implants, resorption of the allografts was noticed. All Mueller rings and 50 % of unscrews cages (Link, Howmedica) were revised because of aseptic loosening and bone graft resorption. In all of 17 hips with the Burch-Schneider cage, no measurable migration or bone allografts resorption occurred. There were no major general complications.

Conclusions

Acetabular reconstruction with use of morselized, frozen, radiation sterilized bone allografts and the Burch-Schneider cage can be highly successful in managing massive deficiency of acetabular bone stock in revision hip arthroplasty in RA patients.     

Modular acetabular reconstructive cup in acetabular revision total hip arthroplasty at a minimum ten year follow-up

Purpose

Modular acetabular reconstructive cups have been introduced in an attempt to offer initial rigid fixation by iliac lag screws and ischial pegs, to support bone grafts with a flanged metal socket, and to restore original hip center in acetabular revision. The purpose of this study was to clarify minimum ten year follow-up results of this cup system with morsellised allografts in revision cases.

Methods

We retrospectively investigated 54 acetabular revisions at a mean of 11 years (range, ten to 14 years). The indications were Paprosky’s type 2B (eight hip), 2C (eight hips), 3A (23 hips), 3B (nine hips), and 4 (six hips).

Results

Using aseptic loosening as the endpoints, the survival rate was 89.3 % (95 % CI 81–98). Radiographically, one type 3A hip, three type 3B hips and one type 4 hip showed aseptic loosening while no type 2 hips or no cemented cups showed loosening.

Conclusions

The modular reconstructive cups for acetabular revision showed bone stock restoration and stable implantation.