Does Surgeon Fellowship Training Influence Outcomes in Hemiarthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture?

BackgroundThe aim of this study is to compare the outcomes (90 days and 1 year) of patients with femoral neck fracture undergoing hemiarthroplasty by surgeons with different fellowship training: trauma, arthroplasty, and general orthopedics.MethodsThis study is a retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing hip hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture from 2010 to 2018. Comorbidities, perioperative details, demographics, injury variables, and time-to-surgery were compared between the fellowship training cohorts, in addition to outcomes including dislocation, periprosthetic joint infection, and mortality at 90 days and 1 year.ResultsA total of 298 hips with an average age of 77.8 years underwent hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fracture. Arthroplasty surgeons had a significantly shorter operative duration (82 minutes, P = .0014) and utilized the anterior approach more frequently (P < .0001). The general orthopedists had a significantly increased total surgical complication risk compared to both the arthroplasty and trauma fellowship-trained cohorts at both 90 days (11.8% vs 1.6% vs 3.9%, P = .015) and 1 year (18.2% vs 4.9% vs 7.1%, P = .008). The overall mortality risk was 11.7% at 90 days and 22.8% at 1 year. When adjusted for covariates, including comorbidities, gender, age, and preoperative walking capacity, both the arthroplasty fellowship-trained cohort (odds ratio 0.381, 95% confidence interval 0.159-0.912, P = .030) and the general orthopedist cohort (odds ratio 0.495; 95% confidence interval 0.258-0.952, P = .035) had reduced risk of 1-year mortality compared to the trauma fellowship-trained cohort.ConclusionHemiarthroplasty performed for femoral neck fractures may result in fewer complications when performed by arthroplasty fellowship-trained surgeons. An arthroplasty weekly on-call schedule and adjusted institutional protocols may be utilized to improve outcomes and reduce complications.Level of EvidenceLevel II, retrospective cohort.     

Can Surgeons Reduce the Risk for Dislocation After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Performed Using the Posterolateral Approach?

Background

Hip dislocation is one of the most common postoperative complications after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Potential contributors include patient- and surgical-related factors. We performed a retrospective cohort study to identify risk factors for postoperative dislocation in patients receiving THA via the posterolateral approach.

Does Approach Influence the Dislocation Rate Following Head and Liner Exchange in Revision Hip Arthroplasty?

BackgroundRevision total hip arthroplasty with modular component exchange can limit morbidity by retaining well-fixed components but dislocation has been a relatively frequent postoperative complication. This study evaluated the effect of surgical approach on dislocation rate in a modern revision cohort.MethodsFrom 2010 to 2020, 248 aseptic head and liner exchanges were performed at a single institution. The mean patient age at revision was 64.9 ± 10.4 years and 50% (123/248) were performed among males. Indications for revision included 140 (56%) for polyethylene wear, 68 (27%) for failed metal-on-metal components, and 40 (16%) for instability. The mean follow-up after revision was 2.3 years.ResultsThirty (12%) hips dislocated at a mean of 0.6 years (range 0.01-4.6) postoperatively. The dislocation rate by revision approach was 17% (9/54) for the direct anterior, 6% (5/80) for the direct lateral, and 14% (16/114) for the posterolateral approach (P = .13). Hips revised by the direct anterior approach that dislocated were more abducted (51 ± 8 vs 45 ± 8, P = .05) and more anteverted (26 ± 9 vs 20 ± 7, P = .04) than non-dislocators. Among all 248 hips, cups with more than 48° of abduction were 2.6 times more likely to dislocate (P = .01). Head diameter, neck length, patient age, and gender were not associated with dislocation (P ≥ .20).ConclusionDislocation remains a common complication after head and liner exchange regardless of approach. Cup position is associated with postoperative instability and must be critically evaluated during preoperative planning.     

Does Tibial Rotation Correlate With Femoral Anteversion? Implications for Hip Arthroplasty

The aim of the study was to assess the magnitude and variability of rotation of ipsilateral femur and tibia and to identify the existence of rotational correlations. Femoral rotation (FR) and tibial rotation (TR) were measured with computed tomography in 151 consecutive patients when total hip arthroplasty was planned. Median FR was 14 degrees (range, -23 degrees to 91 degrees ) and median TR was 38 degrees (range, 15 degrees -76 degrees ). Femoral rotation was significantly higher in females, in left femora, in the presence of secondary osteoarthritis, and in hip dysplasia. Tibial rotation was significantly higher in females. Femoral rotation and TR positively correlated (r = 0.2963, P = .0001). The magnitude of TR and FR was found to be dependent on each other. Disregarding the variability and magnitude of TR may result in asymmetrical foot positioning after correction of FR during total hip arthroplasty.     

Can Total Hip Arthroplasty for Hip Fracture Be Safely Performed by Trainees? A Retrospective Cohort Study

BackgroundNo research is available comparing trainee and consultant outcomes for total hip arthroplasty (THA) for hip fracture. The aim of our study is to determine whether trainee-performed and consultant-performed THA produced equivalent radiological outcomes and complication rates for this patient cohort.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study at our institution, with inclusion of patients who underwent a primary THA for hip fracture between March 30, 2017 and February 07, 2019. Relevant perioperative and outcome data were collected through electronic records. Radiological outcomes were assessed by 2 independent reviewers. Follow-up was performed until August 07, 2019.ResultsEighty-seven patients were included in the study. The mean length of follow-up was 13 months (range, 6-29). Forty-three patients underwent consultant-led operations and 44 underwent trainee-performed (ST3-ST8) operations under consultant supervision. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups regarding complication risk (no recorded dislocation, infection requiring reoperation, revision or 30-day mortality in either group). There were also no significant differences between trainees and consultants regarding the radiological outcomes of mean acetabular component inclination (37.2° vs 36.7°, respectively, P = .74); offset difference (+7.1 mm vs +7.2 mm, respectively, P = .91); leg length difference (+6.4 mm vs +5.7 mm, respectively, P = .56); and barrack grade for femoral cement mantle.ConclusionThis study suggests that radiological and safety outcomes for trainees performing THA for hip fracture with appropriate supervision are equivalent to consultant surgeons. However, given the low event rate of complications, a larger study is required to determine whether there is any statistically significant difference.     

Are Ceramic-on-ceramic Bearings in Total Hip Arthroplasty Associated With Reduced Revision Risk for Late Dislocation?

Background

Dislocation is a major complication after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), but little is known about the potential relationships between bearing materials and risk of dislocation. Dislocation within the first year after surgery is typically related to either surgical error or patient inattention to precautions, but the reasons for dislocation after the first year are often unclear, and whether ceramic bearings are associated with an increased or decreased likelihood of late dislocation is controversial.

Questions/purposes

The purpose of this study was to use a national registry to assess whether the choice of bearings–metal-on-polyethylene (MoP), ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP), ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC), or metal-on-metal (MoM)–is associated with differences in the risk of late dislocation.

Methods

Data from primary THAs were extracted from the New Zealand Joint Registry over a 10-year period. The mean age of patients was 69 years (SD ± 12 years), and 53% were women. The median followup in this population was 7 years (range, 1–13 years). The surgical approach used was posterior in 66% of THAs, lateral in 29%, and anterior in 5%. The primary endpoint was late revision for dislocation with “late” defined as greater than 1 year postoperatively. A total of 73,386 hips were available for analysis: 65% MoP, 17% CoP, 10% CoC, and 7% MoM. In general, patients receiving CoC and MoM bearings were younger compared with patients receiving CoP and MoP bearings.

Results

Four percent of the hips were revised (3130 THAs); 867 THAs were revised for dislocation. Four hundred seventy THAs were revised for dislocation after the first postoperative year. After adjusting for head size, age, and surgical approach, only CoP (hazard ratio [HR], 2.10; p = 0.021) demonstrated a higher proportion of revision, whereas MoP did not (HR, 1.76; 95% p = 0.075). There were no differences of revisions for dislocation in the CoC (HR, 1.60; p = 0.092) and MoM cohorts (HR, 1.54; p = 0.081).

Conclusions

Dislocation is a common reason for revision after THA. The relationships between bearing materials and risk of revision for late dislocation remain controversial. This large registry study demonstrated that bearing surface had little association with the incidence of late dislocation. Future studies with longer followups should continue to investigate this question.

Level of Evidence

Level III, therapeutic study.     

Rates and Risk Factors of Conversion Hip Arthroplasty After Closed Reduction Percutaneous Hip Pinning for Femoral Neck Fractures—A Population Analysis

Background

Closed reduction with percutaneous pinning (CRPP) for nondisplaced or valgus impacted femoral neck fractures is a relatively low-risk operation that can produce excellent union rates in some patients; however, failure can occur in selected patients requiring conversion to arthroplasty. The primary aim of this study was to perform a population-level analysis to determine the rate and timeframe of conversion from CRPP to total hip arthroplasty (THA) or hemiarthroplasty.

Does Osteoporosis Increase Early Subsidence of Cementless Double-Tapered Femoral Stem in Hip Arthroplasty?

Among 320 hip arthroplasties performed between January 2007 and March 2008, patients younger than 50 years old and patients older than 70 with a T-score at the proximal femur less than -2.5 made up the control and study group, respectively. There were 40 patients in each group. We measured stem subsidence, both digital and manual methods. Measurements were made from radiographs taken serially from 2 weeks to 1 year after surgery. The amount of mean subsidence for each group was not different, and all stems showed stable fixation in the final radiographs. Our study suggests that even in osteoporotic proximal femurs, press-fit fixation of double-tapered stems for hip arthroplasty can be safe and effective without excessive early subsidence.     

Risk Factors for Dislocation and Re-revision After First-Time Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty due to Recurrent Dislocation – A Study From the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register

BackgroundPersistent instability after hip revision is a serious problem. Our aim was to analyze surgical and patient-related risk factors for both a new dislocation and re-revision after first-time hip revision due to dislocation.MethodsWe included patients with a primary THA due to osteoarthritis and a first-time revision due to dislocation registered in the Danish Hip Arthroplasty Register (DHR) from 1996 to 2016. We identified dislocations in the Danish National Patient Register and re-revisions in the DHR. Risk factors were analyzed by a multivariable regression analysis adjusting for the competing risk of death. Results are presented as subdistribution hazard ratios (sHR).ResultsWe identified 1678 first-time revisions due to dislocation. Of these, 22.4% had a new dislocation. 19.8% were re-revised for any reason. With new dislocations treated by closed reduction as the endpoint, the sHR was 0.36 (95% CI, 0.27-0.48) for those who had a constrained liner (CL) during revision and 0.21 (0.08-0.58) for dual mobility cups (DMC), thereby lowering the risk of dislocation compared to regular liners. Changing only the head/liner increased the risk of dislocation (sHR = 2.65; 2.05-3.42) compared to full cup revisions. The protective effect of CLs and DMCs on dislocations vanished when re-revisions became the endpoint. The head/liner exchange was still found inferior compared to cup revision (sHR = 1.73; 1.34-2.23).ConclusionPatients revised with DMCs and CLs were associated with a lower risk of dislocation after a first-time revision but not re-revision, whereas only changing the head/liner was associated with a higher risk of dislocation and re-revision of any cause compared to cup revision.     

Does Age Influence Patient-Reported Outcomes in Unilateral Primary Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty?

BackgroundTotal hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are used to treat patients with end-stage arthritis. Previous studies have not demonstrated a consistent relationship between age and patient-reported outcomes. The purpose of this study is to assess the impact of age on patient-reported outcomes after unilateral primary THA or TKA.MethodsA retrospective review of available data in Alberta Bone and Joint Health Institute (ABJHI) Data Repository was performed. We identified 53,498 unilateral primary THA and TKA between April 2011 and 2017. Patients were divided by age into 3 categories: <55, 55-70, and >70. Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and EuroQoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D) Canada scores were obtained at presurgery, 3 and 12 months postoperatively.ResultsFor TKA, younger patients had larger improvements in WOMAC scores at 3 and 12 months (P = <.001-.033), and in EQ-5D scores at 3 months (P < .001). When adjusted, patients <55 had lower WOMAC and EQ-5D scores at 3 months postoperatively compared to those 55-70 or >70 (all P < .01). Outcomes at 12 months did not differ between age-groups.For THA, younger patients had larger improvements in WOMAC at 3 months (P = .03). When adjusted, patients <55 had higher WOMAC scores at 12 months postoperatively compared to those 55-70 or >70, and higher EQ-5D scores compared to those 55-70 (all P < .05).ConclusionWhile a multitude of factors go in to quantifying successful THA or TKA, this study suggests that patient age should not be a deterrent when considering the impact of age on patient-reported outcomes.     

Hip Osteonecrosis: Does Prior Hip Surgery Alter Outcomes Compared to an Initial Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

The purpose of this study was to assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in patients who had osteonecrosis to see if prior hip preserving surgery affected outcomes. Implant survivorship, Harris hip scores, and radiographic outcomes were compared between 87 patients (92 hips) who had undergone prior hip preserving procedures and 105 patients (121 hips) who had only undergone THA. Patients were also sub-stratified into low- and high-risk groups for osteonecrosis. At a mean follow-up of 75 months, there were no significant differences in survivorship, clinical, and radiographic outcomes among the cohorts. Higher revision rates were associated with patients who were in the high-risk group. The authors believe that hip joint preserving procedures may not adversely affect the outcomes of later THA in patients with osteonecrosis.     

Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients With Previous Lumbar Fusion Surgery: Are There More Dislocations and Revisions?

Background

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the risk of dislocation and/or revision following THA is increased in patients with a history of prior lumbar fusion given the alterations in dynamic pelvic motion following LSF.