Comparing modern uncemented, hybrid and cemented implant combinations in older patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty, a New Zealand Joint Registry study.

BACKGROUND: Multiple joint registries have reported better implant survival for patients aged > 75 years undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) with cemented implant combinations when compared to hybrid or uncemented implant combinations. However, there is considerable variation within these broad implant categories, and it has therefore been suggested that specific implant combinations should be compared. We analysed the most common contemporary uncemented (Corail/Pinnacle), hybrid (Exeter V40/Trident) and cemented (Exeter V40/Exeter X3) implant combinations in the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR) for patients aged > 75 years. METHODS: All THAs performed using the selected implants in the NZJR for patients aged > 75 years between 1999 and 2018 were included. Demographic data, implant type, and outcome data including implant survival, reason for revision, and post-operative Oxford Hip Scores were obtained from the NZJR, and detailed survival analyses were performed. Primary outcome was revision for any reason. Reason for revision, including femoral or acetabular failure, and time to revision were recorded. RESULTS: 5427 THAs were included. There were 1105 implantations in the uncemented implant combination group, 3040 in the hybrid implant combination group and 1282 in the cemented implant combination group. Patient reported outcomes were comparable across all groups. Revision rates were comparable between the cemented implant combination (0.31 revisions/100 component years) and the hybrid implant combination (0.40 revisions/100 component years) but were statistically significantly higher in the uncemented implant combination (0.80/100 component years). Femoral-sided revisions were significantly greater in the uncemented implant combination group. CONCLUSION: The cemented implant and hybrid implant combinations provide equivalent survival and functional outcomes in patients aged over 75 years. Caution is advised if considering use of the uncemented implant combination in this age group, predominantly due to a higher risk of femoral-sided revisions. The authors recommend comparison of individual implants rather than broad categories of implants.

Anatomic factors associated with partial distal biceps tendon tears: a comparative control study.

BACKGROUND: There is minimal literature on the anatomic factors associated with partial distal biceps tendon (DBT) tears. It has been proposed that a larger radial tuberosity size-and, therefore, a smaller radioulnar space during pronation-may cause mechanical impingement of the DBT predisposing to tears. We sought to investigate the anatomic factors that may be associated with partial DBT tears by retrospectively reviewing the DBT anatomy using 3-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans of elbows with partial DBT tears and a comparison group of normal elbows. METHODS: Two independent observers retrospectively reviewed 3-T MRI scans of elbows with partial DBT tears and elbows without visible pathology. Basic demographic data were collected, and measurements of radial tuberosity length, radial tuberosity thickness, radioulnar space, and radial tuberosity-ulnar space were made using simultaneous tracker lines and a standardized technique. The ratio of radial tuberosity thickness to radial diameter and the ratio of radioulnar space to radial tuberosity-ulnar space were calculated. The presence or absence of enthesophytes and the presence of a single DBT vs. double DBTs were noted. RESULTS: This study included twenty-six 3-T MRI scans of 26 elbows with partial DBT tears and thirty 3-T MRI scans of 30 elbows without pathology. Basic demographic data were comparable between the 2 groups. The tear group showed statistically significantly larger mean measurements for radial tuberosity length (24.3 mm vs. 21.3 mm, P = .002) and radial tuberosity thickness (5.5 mm vs. 3.7 mm, P < .0001). The tear group also showed statistically significantly smaller measurements for radioulnar space (8.2 mm vs. 10.0 mm, P = .010) and radial tuberosity-ulnar space (7.2 mm vs. 9.1 mm, P = .013). The ratio of radial tuberosity thickness to radial diameter was statistically significantly larger in the tear group (0.389 vs. 0.267, P < .0001). There was a statistically significant positive correlation between partial DBT tears and the presence of enthesophytes (P = .007), as well as between partial DBT tears and the presence of 2 discrete DBTs rather than a single tendon or 2 DBTs that interdigitated prior to insertion (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Larger radial tuberosities and smaller radioulnar and radial tuberosity-ulnar spaces are associated with partial DBT tears. Larger tuberosities and a smaller functional space for the DBT may lead to chronic impingement, tendon delamination, and consequent weakness, which ultimately lead to tears. Enthesophytes may be associated with tears for the same reason. The presence of 2 discrete DBTs that do not interdigitate prior to insertion is also associated with partial tears. This study will help clinicians understand the pathogenesis of partial DBT tears.

Anatomy of the distal biceps tendon: an in vivo 3-T magnetic resonance imaging study.

BACKGROUND: On the basis of the current literature, the optimal surgical technique for distal biceps tendon tears remains controversial. Cadaveric studies have investigated distal biceps anatomy but are limited by cohort size and tissue factors. We sought to investigate distal biceps anatomy in vivo by retrospectively reviewing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. An improved understanding of the anatomy of the distal biceps tendon will lead to better definition of the optimal anatomic surgical repair. METHODS: Two independent observers retrospectively reviewed 3-T MRI scans of elbows. Basic demographic data were collected, and measurements of tendon length, footprint width, footprint length, and footprint angle were taken using simultaneous tracker lines and a standardized technique. From the biceps muscle belly distally, the presence of a single tendon or double tendons was recorded and the tendon interdigitation point was measured if relevant. RESULTS: A total of 106 3-T MRI scans of 106 elbows of 103 patients were included. There were 71 male and 32 female patients, and the mean age was 44.7 years. Most distal biceps tendons exited the biceps muscle belly as separate entities (91%, 96 of 106 elbows) and then coalesced prior to insertion on the radial tuberosity (91%, 87 of 96 elbows). There was a positive correlation between tendon length and footprint length (P < .05), as well as between tendon length and footprint width (P < .05). The mean tendon length was 65.2 mm (95% confidence interval [CI], 63.3-66.8 mm; range, 44.3-86.8 mm), the mean distance from the musculotendinous junction to the interdigitation point was 38.3 mm (95% CI, 35.8-40.9 mm; range, 8.9-64.8 mm), the mean footprint width was 10.3 mm (95% CI, 9.9-10.7 mm; range, 5.9-16.3 mm), the mean footprint length was 16.2 mm (95% CI, 15.6-16.9; range, 7.3-25.4 mm), and the mean footprint angle was 32.1° (95% CI, 29.5°-34.6°; range, 8.5°-84.3°). CONCLUSION: An in vivo, high-resolution study of the anatomy of the distal biceps tendon improves our understanding of its complex morphology and hence our ability to perform an anatomic "footprint repair."

Comparing uncemented, hybrid and cemented primary total hip arthroplasty in young patients, a New Zealand Joint Registry study.

BACKGROUND: Despite increasing use of uncemented implants in young patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA), there is minimal evidence for specific implant combinations in this group. We analysed the most commonly used uncemented (Corail-Pinnacle), hybrid (Exeter-Trident/Tritanium), and fully cemented (Exeter) implant combinations in the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR) in patients aged under 40 and between 40 and 55 years. METHODS: All THAs recorded in the NZJR between 1999 and 2018 were included. The 40-55 and < 40 age groups were analysed separately. Demographic data, implant type, and outcome data including implant survival, reason for revision, and post-operative Oxford Hip Scores were obtained from the NZJR, and detailed survival analyses were performed. The primary outcome was revision for any reason. RESULTS: We identified 4152 THAs in the 40-55 group and 422 in the < 40 group. In the 40-55 group, revision rates and patient-reported outcome measure scores were comparable between the uncemented implant combination (0.70/100 component years) and the hybrid implant combination (0.62/100 component years), whereas the cemented implant combination exhibited a statistically significant higher revision rate (1.75/100 component years) (p < 0.001). In the < 40 group, revision rate for the hybrid implant combination (0.46/100 component years) was significantly lower than the uncemented implant combination (1.54/100 component years). CONCLUSION: The most commonly used hybrid and uncemented implant combinations provided equivalent survival and functional outcomes in patients aged 40-55 years. More research is required to guide implant selection in patients aged < 40 years. The authors suggest a transition away from comparing classes of implants (cemented, uncemented, hybrid) given the diverse product range within these categories.

Repeatability and Agreement of Horizontal Corneal Diameter Measurements Between Scanning-Slit Topography, Dual Rotating Scheimpflug Camera With Placido Disc Tomography, Placido Disc Topography, and Optical Coherence Tomography.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to assess the repeatability and agreement of horizontal white-to-white (WTW) measurements using 4 different imaging modalities including a slit-scanning elevation topographer, dual rotating Scheimpflug camera and Placido Disc tomographer, Placido Disc topographer, and anterior segment optical coherence (OCT) tomographer. METHODS: In this prospective study, 33 eyes of 33 healthy subjects were scanned 3 times using each of the Orbscan IIz, Sirius, Nidek OPD III, and DRI OCT Triton devices and WTW measurements were recorded. Repeatability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and agreement was analyzed using Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: Mean WTW values obtained from the Orbscan IIz, Sirius, Nidek, and DRI OCT Triton devices were 11.76 ± 0.41, 12.10 ± 0.45, 12.14 ± 0.41, and 12.40 ± 0.48 mm, respectively. Overall, there was high repeatability, with the ICC >0.86 for all devices. The Sirius showed the highest repeatability (ICC = 0.993), and the Nidek the lowest (ICC = 0.870). All pairwise comparison showed significant differences in the mean WTW measurements ( P < 0.01) except between Sirius and Nidek ( P = 0.27). Mean differences showed that the DRI OCT Triton had the highest WTW values, followed by Nidek, Sirius, and finally by Orbscan, which provided the lowest measurements. All pairwise comparisons had wide limits of agreements (between 0.60 and 0.80 mm). CONCLUSIONS: In healthy subjects the 4 devices demonstrated high repeatability in WTW measurement. However, a poor agreement between the devices suggests that they should not be used interchangeably for WTW measurements in clinical practice.