Total hip replacement after femoral neck fractures in elderly patients : Results of 8,577 fractures reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register

Background?A total hip arthroplasty (THA) is often used as treatment for failed osteosynthesis of femoral neck fractures and is now also used for acute femoral neck fractures. To investigate the results of THA after femoral neck fractures, we used data from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR).

Patients and methods?The results of primary total hip replacements in patients with acute femoral neck fractures (n = 487) and sequelae after femoral neck fractures (n = 8,090) were compared to those of total hip replacements in patients with osteoarthrosis (OA) (n = 55,109). The hips were followed for 0–18 years. The Cox multiple regression model was used to construct adjusted survival curves and to adjust for differences in sex, age, and type of cement among the diagnostic groups. Separate analyses were done on the subgroups of patients who were operated with Charnley prostheses.

Results?The survival rate of the implants after 5 years was 95% for the patients with acute fractures, 96% for the patients with sequelae after fracture, and 97% for the OA patients. With adjustment for age, sex, and type of cement, the patients with acute fractures had an increased risk of revision compared to the OA patients (RR 1.6, 95% CI: 1.0–2.6; p = 0.05) and the sequelae patients had an increased risk of revision (RR 1.3, 95% CI: 1.2–1.5; p < 0.001). Sequelae hips had higher risk of revision due to dislocation (RR 2.0, 95% CI: 1.6–2.4; p < 0.001) and periprosthetic fracture (RR 2.2, 95% CI: 1.5–3.3; p < 0.001), and lower risk of revision due to loosening of the acetabular component (RR 0.72, 95% CI; 0.57–0.93; p = 0.01) compared to the OA patients. The increased risk of revision was most apparent for the first 6 months after primary operation.

Interpretation?THA in fracture patients showed good results, but there was an increased risk of early dislocations and periprosthetic fractures compared to OA patients.     

The Effect of Electric Current on the Healing time of Crural Fractures

Background and purpose — Uncemented stems are increasingly used in revision hip arthroplasty, but only a few studies have analyzed the outcomes of uncemented and cemented revision stems in large cohorts of patients. We compared the results of uncemented and cemented revision stems.

Patients and methods — 1,668 uncemented and 1,328 cemented revision stems used in first-time revisions due to aseptic loosening between 1999 and 2016 were identified in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to investigate unadjusted implant survival with re-revision for any reason as the primary outcome. Hazard ratios (HR) for the risk of re-revision were calculated using a Cox regression model adjusted for sex, age, head size, concomitant cup revision, surgical approach at primary and at index revision surgery, and indication for primary total hip arthroplasty.

Results — Unadjusted 10-year survival was 85% (95% CI 83–87) for uncemented and 88% (CI 86–90) for cemented revision stems. The adjusted HR for re-revision of uncemented revision stems during the first year after surgery was 1.3 (CI 1.0–1.6), from the second year the HR was 1.1 (CI 0.8–1.4). Uncemented stems were most often re-revised early due to infection and dislocation, whereas cemented stems were mostly re-revised later due to aseptic loosening.

Interpretation — Both uncemented and cemented revision stems had satisfactory long-term survival but they differed in their modes of failure. Our conclusions are limited by the fact that femoral bone defect size could not be investigated within the setting of the current study.     

Lower reoperation rate for cemented hemiarthroplasty than for uncemented hemiarthroplasty and internal fixation following femoral neck fracture

Background and purpose Elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures are commonly treated with a hemiarthroplasty (HA), but little is known about the long-term failure of this treatment. We compared reoperation rates for patients aged at least 75 years with displaced femoral neck fractures treated with either internal fixation (IF), cemented HA, or uncemented HA (with or without hydroxyapatite coating), after 12–19 years of follow-up.

Methods 4 hospitals with clearly defined guidelines for the treatment of 75+ year-old patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture were included. Cohort 1 (1991–1993) with 180 patients had undergone IF; cohort 2 (1991–1995) with 203 patients had received an uncemented bipolar Ultima HA stem (Austin-Moore); cohort 3 (1991–1995) with 209 patients had received a cemented Charnley-Hastings HA; and cohort 4 (1991–1998) with 158 patients had received an uncemented hydroxyapatite-coated Furlong HA. Data were retrieved from patient files, from the region-based patient administrative system, and from the National Registry of Patients at the end of 2010. We performed survival analysis with adjustment for comorbidity, age, and sex.

Results Cemented HA had a reoperation rate (RR) of 5% and was used as reference in the Cox regression analysis, which showed significantly higher hazard ratios (HRs) for IF (HR = 3.8, 95% CI: 1.9–7.5; RR = 18%), uncemented HA (HR = 2.2, CI: 1.1–4.5; RR = 11%) and uncemented hydroxyapatite-coated HA (HR = 3.6, CI: 1.8–7.4; RR = 16%).

Interpretation Cemented HA has a superior long-term hip survival rate compared to IF and uncemented HA (with and without hydroxyapatite coating) in patients aged 75 years or more with displaced femoral neck fractures.     

Hybrid Fixation for Total Hip Arthroplasty Showed Improved Survival Over Cemented and Uncemented Fixation: A Single-Center Survival Analysis of 2156 Hips at 12-18 Years

BackgroundDespite increased use of uncemented and hybrid fixation, there is little evidence of their superiority over cemented implants. The aim of this study is to compare the long-term survivorship of cemented, hybrid and uncemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) at varying ages.MethodsA total of 2156 hips (1315 cemented, 324 uncemented, and 517 hybrid) were performed in a single center between 1999 and 2005 with follow-up through to 2017. Registry and local databases were used to determine revision rates and cause. Unadjusted and adjusted competing risk survival analysis was performed.ResultsThe cumulative incidence of all-cause revision at 18 years was cemented 10.9%, uncemented 8.9%, and hybrid 6.5%. Cemented fixation had a statistically significant higher risk of all-cause revision than hybrid in the adjusted model for all ages to 65 years (subhazard ratios [SHRs], 2.28-4.67) and a higher risk of revision for loosening, wear, or osteolysis at all ages (SHRs, 3.25-6.07). Uncemented fixation showed no advantage over hybrid fixation at any age, but did show advantages over cemented at younger ages (≤60 years) for all-cause revision (SHRs, 2.3-4.3).ConclusionHybrid fixation with conventional polyethylene shows an advantage over cemented hips at all ages. Uncemented THA showed improved survival over cemented only at younger ages and no advantage over hybrid THA.     

Total hip arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis in younger patients: 2,557 replacements in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register followed for 0–24 years

Background?The results of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in young patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been reported in only a few studies. On a nationwide level, the outcome of THA in these patients is unknown. We evaluated the population-based survival of THA in patients under 55 years of age with RA and factors affecting the survival.

Patients?Between 1980 and 2003, 2,557 primary THAs performed for RA in patients less than 55 years of age were reported to the Finnish Arthroplasty Register.

Results?Proximally circumferentially porous-coated uncemented stems had a 15-year survival rate of 89% (95% CI 83–94) with aseptic loosening as endpoint. The risk of stem revision due to aseptic loosening was higher with cemented stems than with proximally porouscoated uncemented stems implanted during the same period (RR 2.4; p < 0.001). In contrast, Cox regression analysis showed that the risk of cup revision was significantly higher for all uncemented cup concepts than for all-polyethylene cemented cups with any cup revision as endpoint. There were no significant differences in survival between the THR concepts.

Interpretations?Uncemented proximally circumferentially porous-coated stems and cemented all-poly-ethylene cups are currently the implants of choice for young patients with RA.     

Implant survival of the most common cemented total hip devices from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association database

Background and purpose — According to previous Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) data, the 10-year implant survival of cemented total hip arthroplasties (THAs) is 94% in patients aged 65–74 and 96% in patients aged 75 or more. Here we report a brand-level comparison of cemented THA based on the NARA database, which has not been done previously.

Patients and methods — We determined the rate of implant survival of the 9 most common cemented THAs in the NARA database. We used Kaplan-Meier analysis with 95% CI to study implant survival at 10 and 15 years, and Cox multiple regression to assess survival and hazard ratios (HRs), with revision for any reason as endpoint and with adjustment for age, sex, diagnosis, and femoral head material.

Results — Spectron EF THA (89.9% (CI: 89.3–90.5)) and Elite THA (89.8% (CI: 89.0–90.6)) had the lowest 10-year survivorship. Lubinus (95.7% survival, CI: 95.5–95.9), MS 30 (96.6%, CI: 95.8–97.4), and C-stem THA (95.8%, CI: 94.8–96.8) had a 10-year survivorship of at least 95%. Lubinus (revision risk (RR)?=?0.77, CI: 0.73–0.81), Müller (RR =0.83, CI: 0.70–0.99), MS-30 (RR =0.73, CI: 0.63–0.86), C-stem (RR =0.70, CI: 0.55–0.90), and Exeter Duration THA (RR =0.84, CI: 0.77–0.90) had a lower risk of revision than Charnley THA, the reference implant.

Interpretation — The Spectron EF THA and the Elite THA had a lower implant survival than the Charnley, Exeter, and Lubinus THAs. Implant survival of the Müller, MS 30, CPT, and C-stem THAs was above the acceptable limit for 10-year survival.     

Use of diuretics and risk of implant failure after primary total hip arthroplasty: A nationwide population-based study

IntroductionThiazid and loop diuretics have been associated with changes in bone mineral density and fracture risk. However, data on survival of prosthesis implants are lacking. We evaluated the association between diuretic use and the risk of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).Materials and methodsWe conducted a nationwide population-based case-control study using medical databases in Denmark. In the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry, we identified 2491 cases that were revised after primary THA in the period 1995–2005 and who could be matched on age, gender and year of primary operation with 4943 non-revised THA controls. By means of conditional logistic regression, we estimated the relative risk (RR) of revision due to all causes and due to specific causes according to postoperative use of thiazid and loop diuretic, respectively.ResultsThe 10-year cumulated implant revision rate in the underlying cohort of 57,575 THA procedures from the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry was 8.9% (95% CI: 8.4–9.4). Postoperative thiazid diuretic use was not associated with neither the overall risk of revision nor revision due to specific causes compared to non-use. Postoperative loop diuretic use was associated with an adjusted RR of revision of 1.14 (95% CI; 0.98–1.32) compared with non-use. The adjusted RR of revision due to deep infection and periprosthetic fracture in loop diuretic users was 1.71 (1.15–2.55) and 6.39 (1.84–22.21), respectively. Loop diuretic use was not associated with risk of revision due to aseptic loosening, dislocation or miscellaneous causes.DiscussionLoop diuretics but not thiazides may be associated with an increased risk of revision following primary THA. Further studies are warranted in order to confirm this finding and clarify the nature of the association.     

Good stability but high periprosthetic bone mineral loss and late-occurring periprosthetic fractures with use of uncemented tapered femoral stems in patients with a femoral neck fracture

Background and purpose— We previously evaluated a new uncemented femoral stem designed for elderly patients with a femoral neck fracture and found stable implant fixation and good clinical results up to 2 years postoperatively, despite substantial periprosthetic bone mineral loss. We now present the medium-term follow-up results from this study.

Patients and methods— In this observational prospective cohort study, we included 50 patients (mean age 81 (70–92) years) with a femoral neck fracture. All patients underwent surgery with a cemented cup and an uncemented stem specifically designed for fracture treatment. Outcome variables were migration of the stem measured with radiostereometry (RSA) and periprosthetic change in bone mineral density (BMD), measured with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Hip function and health-related quality of life were assessed using the Harris hip score (HHS) and the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D). DXA and RSA data were collected at regular intervals up to 4 years, and data concerning reoperations and hip-related complications were collected during a mean follow-up time of 5 (0.2–7.5) years.

Results— At 5 years, 19 patients had either passed away or were unavailable for further participation and 31 could be followed up. Of the original 50 patients, 6 patients had suffered a periprosthetic fracture, all of them sustained after the 2-year follow-up. In 19 patients, we obtained complete RSA and DXA data and no component had migrated after the 2-year follow-up. We also found a continuous total periprosthetic bone loss amounting to a median of –19% (–39 to 2). No changes in HHS or EQ-5D were observed during the follow-up period.

Interpretation— In this medium-term follow-up, the stem remained firmly fixed in bone despite considerable periprosthetic bone mineral loss. However, this bone loss might explain the high number of late-occurring periprosthetic fractures. Based on these results, we would not recommend uncemented femoral stems for the treatment of femoral neck fractures in the elderly.     

Hemiarthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty in 30,830 patients with hip fractures: data from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register on revision and risk factors for revision

Background and purpose — In the Netherlands about 40% of hip fractures are treated with a hemiarthroplasty (HA) or a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although these procedures are claimed to have fewer complications than osteosynthesis (i.e., reoperation), complications still occur. Analyses of data from national registries with adequate completeness of revision surgery are important to establish guidelines to diminish the risk for revision. We identified risk factors for revision.

Patients and methods — All patients older than 50 years of age with a hip fracture treated with arthroplasty by orthopedic surgeons and registered in the (national) Dutch arthroplasty register (LROI) were included in the study. In this register, patient characteristics and surgical details were prospectively collected. Revision surgery and reasons for revision were evaluated. A proportional hazard ratio model for revision was created using competing risk analysis (with death as competing risk).

Results — 1-year revision rate of HA was (cumulative incidence function [CIF] 1.6% (95% CI 1.4–1.8) and THA 2.4% (CI 2.0–2.7). Dislocation was the most common reason for revision in both groups (HA 29%, THA 41%). Male sex, age under 80 years, posterolateral approach, and uncemented stem fixation were risk factors for revision in both THA and HA. THA patients with ASA classification III/IV were revised more often, whereas revision in the HA cohort was performed more often in ASA I/II patients.

Interpretation — After arthroplasty of hip fractures, both a posterolateral approach and an uncemented hip stem have higher risks for revision surgery compared with an anterolateral approach and an cemented stem.     

Postoperative 30-day complications after cemented/hybrid versus cementless total hip arthroplasty in osteoarthritis patients > 70 years: A multicenter study from the Lundbeck Foundation Centre for Fast-track Hip and Knee replacement database and the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register

Background and purpose — The use of cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) in elderly patients is debated because of increased risk of early periprosthetic femoral fractures. However, cemented femoral components carry a risk of bone cement implantation syndrome. Hence, we compared in-hospital complications, complications leading to readmission and mortality ≤ 30 days postoperatively between hybrid/cemented (cemented femoral component) vs. cementless THA in osteoarthritis patients > 70 years.Patients and methods — This is a prospective observational cohort study in 9 centers from January 2010 to August 2017. We used 30-day follow-up from the Danish National Patient Registry, patient records, and data from the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Only THAs performed as a result of osteoarthritis were included.Results — 3,368 (42%) of the THAs were cemented/hybrid and 4,728 (58%) cementless. The in-hospital complication risk was 7.7% after cemented/hybrid vs. 5.3% after cementless THA (< 0.001), statistically not significant when adjusting for comorbidities (p = 0.1). There were similar risks of complications causing readmission (5.7% vs. 6.2%) and mortality ≤ 30 days (0.2% vs. 0.3%). 15 cases (0.4%) of pulmonary embolism (PE) were found after cemented/hybrid vs. 4 (0.1%) after cementless THA (p = 0.001); none occurred within 24 hours postoperatively. 2 of the PEs after cementless THA led to mortality. Cemented/hybrid THA remained significantly associated with risk of PE (RR 3.9, p = 0.02), when adjusting for comorbidities. BMI > 35 was associated with highest risk of PE (RR 5.7, p = 0.003). The risk of periprosthetic femoral fracture was 0.2% after cemented/hybrid vs. 1.5% after cementless THA (p < 0.001) and the risk of dislocations was 1.2% after cemented/hybrid THA vs. 1.8% after cementless THA (p = 0.04).Interpretation — The higher risk of PE after cemented/hybrid THA and higher risk of periprosthetic femoral fractures and dislocations after cementless THA highlights that both medically and surgically complications are related to fixation technique and have to be considered.

The use of a cementless fixation technique in total hip arthroplasties (THA) is generally preferred compared with a cemented technique in patients with hip osteoarthrosis and age < 70 years in most Western countries. The use of cementless implants in THA has increased in all age groups including the elderly (AOANJRR 2018, DHR 2018, NJR 2018) despite the fact that cementless femoral components are associated with increased risk of early periprosthetic femoral fractures, especially in patients > 70 years (Makela et al. 2014, Thien et al. 2014, Lindberg-Larsen et al. 2017, Tanzer et al. 2018).A concern regarding the use of cemented femoral components is the risk of the so-called bone cement implantation syndrome. The syndrome occurs at the time of bone cementation and prosthesis insertion where the high intra-medullary pressure forces medullary fat emboli into the circulation resulting in risk of pulmonary embolism (Orsini et al. 1987, Donaldson et al. 2009, Segerstad et al. 2019). The clinical presentation of this syndrome may range from hypoxia to fulminatory pulmonary and systemic marrow embolization, right ventricular failure, and circulatory collapse (Issack et al. 2009). The incidence has been difficult to determine due to the variation of severity of the syndrome. In a series of 1,016 cemented hemiarthroplasty patients, the incidence of the most severe grade of the syndrome (grade 3) was 1.7% and associated with mortality of 88%. Risk factors for the syndrome were ASA grade III–IV, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and medication with diuretics or warfarin (Olsen et al. 2014). However, the exact incidence and consequences of bone cement implantation syndrome after total hip arthroplasty remains unknown. As occurrence of severe bone cement implantation syndrome would likely influence postoperative length of hospital stay, readmission risk, or mortality, we compared in-hospital complications, complications leading to readmission, and mortality within 30 days postoperatively between hybrid/cemented (cemented femoral component) versus cementless THA in osteoarthritis patients > 70 years.     

The Comparison between Cemented and Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty in Patients with Femoral Neck Fractures: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Hemiarthroplasty is the standard treatment for patients with femoral neck fractures (FNFs). Controversy exists over the use of bone cement in hip fractures treated with hemiarthroplasty.

Objective

We performed an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to compare cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty in patients with femoral neck fractures.

Methods

A literature review was conducted using Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, CNKI, VIP, Wang Fang, and Sino Med databases. Studies comparing cemented with uncemented hemiarthroplasty for FNFs in elderly patients up to June 2022 were included. Data were extracted, meta-analyzed, and pooled as risk ratios (RRs) and weighted mean differences (WMDs) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

Results

Twenty-four RCTs involving 3471 patients (1749 cement; 1722 uncemented) were analyzed. Patients with cemented intervention had better outcomes regarding hip function, pain, and complications. Significant differences were found in terms of HHS at 6 weeks (WMD 12.5; 95% CI 6.0–17.0; P < 0.001), 3 months (WMD 3.3; 95% CI 1.6–5.0; P < 0.001), 4 months (WMD 7.3; 95% CI 3.4–11.2; P < 0.001), and 6 months (WMD 4.6; 95% CI 3.3–5.8; P < 0.001) postoperatively. Patients with cemented hemiarthroplasty had lower rates of pain (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.39–0.9; P = 0.013), prosthetic fracture (RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.16–0.38; P < 0.001), subsidence/loosening (RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.11–0.78; P = 0.014), revisions (RR 0.59; 95% CI 0.40–0.89; P = 0.012), and pressure ulcers (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.23–0.82; P = 0.01) at the expense of longer surgery time (WMD 7.87; 95% CI 5.71–10.02; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

This meta-analysis demonstrated that patients with cemented hemiarthroplasty had better results in hip function and pain relief and lower complication rates at the expense of prolonged surgery time. Cemented hemiarthroplasty is recommended based on our findings.     

Reverse hybrid total hip arthroplasty

Background and purpose — The use of a cemented cup together with an uncemented stem in total hip arthroplasty (THA) has become popular in Norway and Sweden during the last decade. The results of this prosthetic concept, reverse hybrid THA, have been sparsely described. The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) has already published 2 papers describing results of reverse hybrid THAs in different age groups. Based on data collected over 2 additional years, we wanted to perform in depth analyses of not only the reverse hybrid concept but also of the different cup/stem combinations used.

Patients and methods — From the NARA, we extracted data on reverse hybrid THAs from January 1, 2000 until December 31, 2013. 38,415 such hips were studied and compared with cemented THAs. The Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analyses were used to estimate the prosthesis survival and the relative risk of revision. The main endpoint was revision for any reason. We also performed specific analyses regarding the different reasons for revision and analyses regarding the cup/stem combinations used in more than 500 cases.

Results — We found a higher rate of revision for reverse hybrids than for cemented THAs, with an adjusted relative risk of revision (RR) of 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3–1.5). At 10 years, the survival rate was 94% (CI: 94–95) for cemented THAs and 92% (95% CI: 92–93) for reverse hybrids. The results for the reverse hybrid THAs were inferior to those for cemented THAs in patients aged 55 years or more (RR =1.1, CI: 1.0–1.3; p < 0.05). We found a higher rate of early revision due to periprosthetic femoral fracture for reverse hybrids than for cemented THAs in patients aged 55 years or more (RR =3.1, CI: 2.2–4.5; p < 0.001).

Interpretation — Reverse hybrid THAs had a slightly higher rate of revision than cemented THAs in patients aged 55 or more. The difference in survival was mainly caused by a higher incidence of early revision due to periprosthetic femoral fracture in the reversed hybrid THAs.     

Early postoperative mortality similar between cemented and uncemented hip arthroplasty: a register study based on Finnish national data

Background and purpose — Implant survival of cemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) in elderly patients is higher than that of uncemented THA. However, a higher mortality rate in patients undergoing cemented THA compared with uncemented or hybrid THA has been reported. We assessed whether cemented fixation increases peri- or early postoperative mortality compared with uncemented and hybrid THA.

Patients and methods — Patients with osteoarthritis who received a primary THA in Finland between 1998 and 2013 were identified from the PERFECT database of the National Institute for Health and Welfare in Finland. Definitive data on fixation method and comorbidities were available for 62,221 THAs. Mortality adjusted for fixation method, sex, age group, and comorbidities among the cemented, uncemented, and hybrid THA was examined using logistic regression analysis. Reasons for cardiovascular death within 90 days since the index procedure were extracted from the national Causes of Death Statistics and assessed separately.

Results — 1- to 2-day adjusted mortality after cemented THA was comparable to that of the uncemented THA group (OR 1.2; 95% CI 0.24–6.5). 3- to 10-day mortality in the cemented THA group was comparable to that in the uncemented THA group (OR 0.54; CI 0.26–1.1), and in the hybrid THA group (OR 0.64, CI 0.25–1.6). Pulmonary embolism or cardiovascular reasons as a cause of death were not over-represented in the cemented THA group.

Interpretation — Early peri- and postoperative mortality in the cemented THA group was similar compared with that of the hybrid and uncemented groups.     

Total hip arthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis in younger patients: 2,557 replacements in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register followed for 0-24 years

BACKGROUND: The results of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in young patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) have been reported in only a few studies. On a nationwide level, the outcome of THA in these patients is unknown. We evaluated the population-based survival of THA in patients under 55 years of age with RA and factors affecting the survival. PATIENTS: Between 1980 and 2003, 2,557 primary THAs performed for RA in patients less than 55 years of age were reported to the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. RESULTS: Proximally circumferentially porous-coated uncemented stems had a 15-year survival rate of 89% (95% CI 83-94) with aseptic loosening as endpoint. The risk of stem revision due to aseptic loosening was higher with cemented stems than with proximally porouscoated uncemented stems implanted during the same period (RR 2.4; p < 0.001). In contrast, Cox regression analysis showed that the risk of cup revision was significantly higher for all uncemented cup concepts than for all-polyethylene cemented cups with any cup revision as endpoint. There were no significant differences in survival between the THR concepts. INTERPRETATIONS: Uncemented proximally circumferentially porous-coated stems and cemented all-poly-ethylene cups are currently the implants of choice for young patients with RA.     

High risk of early periprosthetic fractures after primary hip arthroplasty in elderly patients using a cemented,tapered, polished stem

Background and purpose — Postoperative periprosthetic femoral fracture (PPF) after hip arthroplasty is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. We assessed the incidence and characteristics of periprosthetic fractures in a consecutive cohort of elderly patients treated with a cemented, collarless, polished and tapered femoral stem (CPT).

Patients and methods — In this single-center prospective cohort study, we included 1,403 hips in 1,357 patients (mean age 82 (range 52–102) years, 72% women) with primary osteoarthritis (OA) or a femoral neck fracture (FNF) as indication for surgery (367 hips and 1,036 hips, respectively). 64% of patients were ASA class 3 or 4. Hip-related complications and need for repeat surgery were assessed at a mean follow-up time of 4 (1–7) years. A Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate risk factors associated with PPF.

Results — 47 hips (3.3%) sustained a periprosthetic fracture at median 7 (2–79) months postoperatively; 41 were comminute Vancouver B2 or complex C-type fractures. The fracture rate was 3.8% for FNF patients and 2.2% for OA patients (hazard ratio (HR) = 4; 95% CI: 1.3–12). Patients > 80 years of age also had a higher risk of fracture (HR = 2; 95% CI: 1.1–4.5).

Interpretation — We found a high incidence of early PPF associated with the CPT stem in this old and frail patient group. A possible explanation may be that the polished tapered stem acts as a wedge, splitting the femur after a direct hip contusion. Our results should be confirmed in larger, registry-based studies, but we advise caution when using this stem for this particular patient group.     

Comparison of the risk of revision in cementless total hip arthroplasty with ceramic-on-ceramic and metal-on-polyethylene bearings

Background and purpose — Ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings were introduced in total hip arthroplasty (THA) to reduce problems related to polyethylene wear. We compared the 9-year revision risk for cementless CoC THA and for cementless metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) THA.

Patients and methods — In this prospective, population-based study from the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Registry, we identified all the primary cementless THAs that had been performed from 2002 through 2009 (n = 25,656). Of these, 1,773 THAs with CoC bearings and 9,323 THAs with MoP bearings were included in the study. To estimate the relative risk (RR) of revision, we used regression with the pseudo-value approach and treated death as a competing risk.

Results — 444 revisions were identified: 4.0% for CoC THA (71 of 1,773) and 4.0% for MoP THA (373 of 9,323). No statistically significant difference in the risk of revision for any reason was found for CoC and MoP bearings after 9 years of follow-up (adjusted RR = 1.3, 95% CI: 0.72–2.4). Revision rates due to component failure were 0.5% (n = 8) for CoC bearings and 0.1% (n = 6) for MoP bearings (p < 0.001). 6 patients with CoC bearings (0.34%) underwent revision due to ceramic fracture.

Interpretation — When compared to the “standard” MoP bearings, CoC THA had a 33% higher (though not statistically significantly higher) risk of revision for any reason at 9 years.     

Introduction of a New Treatment Algorithm Reduces the Number of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty in Elderly Females

BackgroundIncreasing global usage of cementless prostheses in total hip arthroplasty (THA) presents a challenge, especially for elderly patients. To reduce the risk of early periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs), a new treatment algorithm for females older than 60 years undergoing primary THA was introduced. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of the new treatment algorithm on the early risk of perioperative and postoperative PFFs and guideline compliance.MethodsA total of 2405 consecutive THAs that underwent primary unilateral THA at our institution were retrospectively identified in the period January 1, 2013-December 31, 2018. A new treatment algorithm was introduced on April 1, 2017 with female patients aged older than 60 years intended to receive cemented femoral components. Before this, all patients were scheduled to receive cementless femoral components. Demographic data, number of perioperative and postoperative PFFs, and surgical compliance were recorded, analyzed, and intergroup differences compared.ResultsThe utilization of cemented components in female patients older than 60 years increased from 12.3% (n = 102) to 82.5% (n = 264). In females older than 60 years, a significant reduction in the risk in early postoperative and intraoperative PFF after introduction of the new treatment algorithm was seen (4.57% vs 1.25%; P = .007 and 2.29% vs 0.31%; P = .02, respectively). Overall risk for postoperative and intraoperative fractures combined was also reduced in the entire cohort (4.1% vs 2.0%; P = .01).ConclusionUse of cemented fixation of the femoral component in female patients older than 60 years significantly reduces the number of PFFs. Our findings support use of cemented femoral fixation in elderly female patients.     

Cementing does not increase the immediate postoperative risk of death after total hip arthroplasty or hemiarthroplasty: a hospital-based study of 10,677 patients

Background and purpose — It has been suggested that cemented arthroplasty is associated with increased peri- and postoperative mortality due to bone cement implanting syndrome, especially in fracture surgery. We investigated such an association in elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients and hemiarthroplasty (HA) patients treated for femoral neck fracture.

Patients and methods — All 10,677 patients receiving elective THA or HA for fracture in our hospital between 2004 and 2015 were identified. Mortality rates for cemented and uncemented THA and HA were compared at different times postoperatively using logistic regression analysis. Analysis was adjusted for age, sex, ASA class, and year of surgery.

Results — Adjusted 10- and 30-day mortality after cemented THA was comparable to that of the uncemented THA (OR 1.7; 95% CI 0.3–8.7 and OR 1.6; CI 0.7–3.6, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in the adjusted 2-day mortality in the cemented HA group when compared with the uncemented group. However, in a subgroup analyses of ASA-class IV HA patients there was a difference, statistically not significant, during the first 2 days postoperatively in the cemented HA group compared with the uncemented HA group (OR 2.1; CI 0.9–4.7).

Interpretation — Cementing may still be a safe option in both elective and hip fracture arthroplasty. Excess mortality of cemented THA and HA in the longer term is comorbidity related, not due to bone cement implantation syndrome. However, in the most fragile HA patient group caution is needed at the moment of cementing.     

Cemented primary total hip arthroplasty using a direct anterior approach

Total hip arthroplasty is one of the most successful surgeries used in medicine today. A major complication associated with significant comorbidity for THA is periprosthetic fracture. A number of risk factors associated with periprosthetic fracture have been identified, including the use of uncemented femoral fixation. In patients with significant risk factors, we use a collarless, composite beam cemented stem in order to mitigate the risk of periprosthetic fractures. This article describes the surgical technique utilized to obtain a safe and effective cemented fixation through the direct anterior approach of the hip.