Continuous periprosthetic bone loss around the TOP® cup and inferior survival rate at an 8-year follow-up: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The trabeculae-oriented pattern (TOP®) cup was designed to minimize acetabular periprosthetic bone loss. In our previous prospective study comprising 30 patients with a two-year follow-up we found a substantial decrease in periprosthetic bone mineral density (pBMD) in the proximal and medial regions of the TOP cup. The present study aims to investigate pBMD changes in the mid-term and how this affects implant survival. METHODS: We followed the previous cohort and estimated implant survival by Kaplan-Meier analysis, evaluated pBMD with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) and clinical outcome using the Harris Hip Score (HHS). RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 8.6 (range 7.8-9.1) years. The eight-year implant survival rate for cup revision for all reasons was 83% (95% confidence interval {CI}: 70-97) and 86% (CI: 74-99) when cup revision due to aseptic loosening was the endpoint. Mean HHS at eight years was 95 (range 77-100). A further 12% (CI: 5-17) loss in pBMD was detected in the proximal Digas zone 1 and 12% (CI: 7-17) loss in Digas zone 2 also between two and eight years after surgery. pBMD continued to decrease up to 30% (CI: 24-36) in Digas zones 1, 2 and 3 compared to pBMD immediately postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: The TOP cup shows inferior mid-term survival rates compared to other uncemented cups, as well as a continuous decrease in pBMD. Periprosthetic bone loss cannot be prevented by this uncemented cup. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.

Incidence of dislocation and associated risk factors in patients with a femoral neck fracture operated with an uncemented hemiarthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Several factors might be associated with risk of dislocating following uncemented hemiarthroplasty (HA) due to femoral neck fracture (FNF). Current evidence is limited with great variance in reported incidence of dislocation (1-15%). Aim of this study was to identify the cumulative incidence of first-time dislocation following HA and to identify the associated risk factors. METHOD: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients receiving an HA (BFX Biomet stem, posterior approach) at Copenhagen University Hospital, Bispebjerg, in 2010-2016. Patients were followed until death or end of study (dec 2018). Dislocation was identified by code extraction from the Danish National Patient Registry. Variables included in the multivariate model were defined pre-analysis to include: age, sex and variables with a p-value < 0.1 in univariate analysis. A regression model was fitted for 90 days dislocation as the assumption of proportional hazard rate (HR) was not met here after. RESULTS: We identified 772 stems (some patients occurred with both right and left hip) and 58 stems suffered 90 dislocations during the observation period, resulting in a 7% (CI 5-9) incidence of dislocation 90 days after index surgery. 55 of the 58 stems (95%) experienced the first dislocation within 90 days after surgery. Only absence of dementia was identified as an independent protective factor in the cause-specific model (HR 0.46 (CI 0.23-0.89)) resulting in a 2.4-fold cumulative risk of experiencing a dislocation in case of dementia. Several other variables such as age, sex, various medical conditions, surgery delay and surgical experience were eliminated as statistical risk factors. We found a decrease in survival probability for patients who experienced a dislocation during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of first-time dislocation of HA (BFX Biomet stem, posterior approach) in patients with a hip fracture is found to be 7% 90 days after surgery. Due to the non-existing attribution bias, we claim it to be the true incidence. Dementia was among several variables identified as the only risk factor for dislocation. In perspective, we may consider treating patients with dementia by other methods than HA e.g., HA with cement or with a more constrained solution. Also, a surgical approach that reduce the risk of dislocation should be considered.

Intracapsular hip fractures: A comparative study of cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasties in the Irish hip fracture database.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyse the association between use of cement for stem fixation in hip hemiarthroplasty and the outcomes of mobility, mortality, and discharge destination. METHODS: The Irish Hip Fracture Database was examined from 2016 to 2020 to assess for any difference in post op mobility, 7-day, 14-day and inpatient mortality, and discharge destination. RESULTS: A total of 7109 hemi-arthroplasties were identified from 2016 to 2020. 71.6 % were cemented (n = 5,172), with 28.4 % uncemented (1,937). There was no difference in day 1 post op mobilisation (79.7 % vs 80.9 %) or cumulative ambulatory score on discharge (2.5 vs 2.4). The mortality rate was equivocal at all time points between the cemented and uncemented groups (7 day (.9 % vs 1.2 %), 14 day (1.9 % vs 2.3 %), inpatient (4 % vs 5.1 %)). There was no difference in length of stay (11 vs 12 days) or discharge to home directly (21 % vs 27 %). CONCLUSION: The use of cement did not have any significant difference on post op mortality, mobility or discharge destination.

Static stability of novel uncemented elbow hemiarthroplasty stabilized with ligament reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to create a model to simulate treatment of unreconstructable distal humerus fractures with hemiarthroplasty. Stability was restored with a latest plate-system that simultaneously tensions medial and lateral collateral ligament grafts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Static varus and valgus elbow stability was tested in 11 cadaver elbows with intact ligaments and capsule at 5 flexion angles (0°, 30°, 60°, 90°, 120°). The elbows were then destabilized via release of all ligaments and capsular attachments. The distal humerus articular cartilage was excised and replaced with an uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Ligament reconstruction was subsequently performed, and elbow stability was measured and compared to the native state. Dimensions of the hemiarthroplasty component were compared to native elbow dimensions to assess and quantify any existing relationship to elbow stability. RESULTS: A hemiarthroplasty was implanted in all specimens. A size mismatch occurred between the distal humerus trochlea and the olecranon fossa in all specimens and averaged 6.3 mm. Following ligament reconstruction, specimens reproduced the flexion angle-dependent stability of native elbows to both varus and valgus stress. On the medial side, elbow joint stability in mid-flexion was approximately 7% tighter after hemiarthroplasty. Laterally, the elbow was approximately 15% tighter after hemiarthroplasty and demonstrated peak stability in full flexion. The 3 assessed hemiarthroplasty components and bony dimensions did not exhibit any relationship between implant-bone mismatch and elbow stability after ligamentous reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Cadaveric elbow specimens underwent uncemented hemiarthroplasty with soft tissue stabilization with a novel technique for ligament reconstruction. Following hemiarthroplasty and ligament reconstruction, these specimens maintained secure fixation between ligament and bone. Static stability was maintained at varying degrees of elbow flexion regardless of variable mismatch between the hemiarthroplasty component and the native olecranon fossa.

A multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing a second-generation uncemented trabecular metal-backed vs. cemented polyethylene glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty: 5-year results.

BACKGROUND: Previously, we reported early (2-year) findings from a randomized controlled trial comparing a second-generation uncemented trabecular metal-backed (TM) glenoid vs. cemented polyethylene glenoid (POLY) in patients undergoing a total shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of the current study is to report disease-specific quality of life, clinical, patient-reported, and radiographic outcomes at midterm (5-year) from this trial. METHODS: Five surgeons from 3 centers participated. Patients 18-79 years with a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis were screened for eligibility. Randomization to an uncemented TM or cemented POLY glenoid was performed intra-operatively after adequate bone stock was confirmed. Study intervals were baseline, 2- and 5-year postoperative. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis Shoulder (WOOS) quality of life score. Secondary outcomes included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, EuroQol-5 Dimensions, and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey scores and clinical and radiographic examinations. Radiographic images were reviewed for metal debris according to Endrizzi. Mixed effects repeated measures analysis of variance for within- and between-group comparisons were performed. RESULTS: Of the 104 patients who consented, 93 were randomized (46 TM; 47 POLY). There were no differences between groups at baseline (TM: mean age 66.5 years [standard deviation (SD) 6.4], 24 male and 22 female; and POLY: mean age 68.4 years [SD 5.5], 23 male / 24 female). Mean (SD) WOOS scores at baseline and 2 and 5 years were as follows: TM, 32 (21), 92 (13), and 93 (11); POLY, 27 (15), 93 (11), and 93 (10), respectively. No statistical or clinically relevant differences were noted with patient-reported outcomes between groups. Metal debris was observed in 11 (23.9%) patients, but outcomes were not negatively impacted, and debris severity was minor (grades 1 and 2). Complication rates were similar between groups (TM: 7 of 46 [15.2%], and POLY: 8 of 47 [17.0%]; P = .813). No aseptic glenoid failures were reported, but 1 patient in the TM group required revision because of infection. CONCLUSIONS: Our short-term (2-year) findings were maintained with longer follow-up. At 5 years postoperation, there were no statistically or clinically significant differences between an uncemented second-generation TM glenoid and a cemented polyethylene glenoid with respect to disease-specific quality of life or patient-reported outcomes. No glenoid implant failures were reported, and complication rates were similar between groups. Only one complication was glenoid related (1 infection in the TM group). Metal debris was observed in 23.9% of patients with a TM glenoid but did not negatively influence implant survival, patient-reported outcomes, or shoulder function.

Impact of fixation method on femoral bone loss: a retrospective evaluation of stem loosening in first-time revision total hip arthroplasty among two hundred and fifty five patients.

PURPOSE: Implant loosening represent the most common indication for stem revision in hip revision arthroplasty. This study compares femoral bone loss and the risk of initial revisions between cemented and uncemented loosened primary stems, investigating the impact of fixation method at primary implantation on femoral bone defects. METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed 255 patients who underwent their first revision for stem loosening from 2010 to 2022, receiving either cemented or uncemented stem implants. Femoral bone loss was preoperatively measured using the Paprosky classification through radiographic evaluations. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated the survival probability of the original stem, and the hazard ratio assessed the relative risk of revision for uncemented versus cemented stems in the first postoperative year and the following two to ten years. RESULTS: Cemented stems showed a higher prevalence of significant bone loss (type 3b and 4 defects: 32.39% vs. 2.72%, p < .001) compared to uncemented stems, which more commonly had type 1 and 2 defects (82.07% vs. 47.89%, p < .001). In our analysis of revision cases, primary uncemented stems demonstrated a 20% lower incidence of stem loosening in the first year post-implantation compared to cemented stems (HR 0.8; 95%-CI 0.3-2.0). However, the incidence in uncemented stems increased by 20% during the subsequent years two to ten (HR 1.2; 95%-CI 0.7-1.8). Septic loosening was more common in cemented stems (28.17% vs. 10.87% in uncemented stems, p = .001). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated a modestly longer revision-free period for cemented stems within the first ten years post-implantation (p < .022). CONCLUSION: During first-time revision, cemented stems show significantly larger femoral bone defects than uncemented stems. Septic stem loosening occurred 17.30% more in cemented stems.

Treatment of femoral neck fractures using actis stem: complication rate in 188 uncemented hemiarthroplasties.

INTRODUCTION: Cemented hemiarthroplasty (HA) is preferred in treating dislocated femoral neck fractures in elderly, osteoporotic patients, since uncemented HA was associated with mechanical complications more frequently. Cementation can conversely cause cardiopulmonary complications, leading to demand on safe, uncemented implants addressing osteoporosis. This study is set up as a retrospective feasibility study on the use of an uncemented, collared wedge implant (Actis®, DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, IN), for HA in elderly patients, focusing on complication rate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 1,194 patients, treated with HA in two study centers between 2017-2022, 188 received Actis® uncemented stem with bipolar head. Complete follow-up were retrospectively collected in all patients. RESULTS: In 188 patients (f: 64.9%; age: 83.1 ± 7.7a) included, no case of intra-operative mortality was recorded. 2 day mortality was 1.1%, 30 day mortality was 7.4% and 1 year mortality was 28.2%. 2 (1.1%) intra-operative fractures did not receive surgical revision, 3 (1.6%) post-operative periprosthetic fractures caused separate admission and revision. 2 cases (1.1%) of early infection required surgical revision. CONCLUSION: Our data provide proof of concept, that Actis® Stem allows an alternative, uncemented treatment option for displaced femoral neck fractures with HA. In case of preoperative or intraoperative medial cortical bone defects, stability of this implant is deteriorated.

Stress shielding: short-term radiological results of the reverse shoulder arthroplasty with an anatomic proximal coated stem in proximal humeral fractures.

PURPOSE: This study aims to determine the stress shielding and other radiological outcomes of patients who underwent an uncemented reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with an anatomic proximal coated stem for complex proximal humeral fractures (PHF) with 3 or 4 parts at 2 years postoperatively. METHODS: 37 shoulders underwent an uncemented RSA for PHF from November 2015 to February 2019 and were followed up for 2 years. A radiographic assessment of stress shielding, filling ratio, stem stability (radiolucent lines/subsidence/alignment), tuberosity healing and notch was performed. RESULTS: The mean age at the time of surgery was 72 years (range, 61-85). Stress shielding was appreciated in 31 shoulders (83.8%). The most important characteristic of stress shielding is cortical resorption: Grade 3 resorption occurred in 3 shoulders (8.1%) and grade 4 in 23 (62.2%) as per the grading system defined by Inoue et al. (Inoue et al. in J Shoulder Elbow Surg 26:1984-1989, 2017). A high occurrence of bone resorption was observed in Gruen zones 2 (Lateral Stress shielding) and 7 (Medial Stress shielding). The mean distal filling ratio in patients without stress shielding was 78,48(SD 14,9), whereas in patients with stress shielding, it was slightly higher with a mean of 81,68% (SD 4,89). Tuberosity healing was found in 94.6% (35/37) of the shoulders. No patient had any radiolucent line. No notch was observed. CONCLUSION: At short-term follow-up, a high rate of tuberosity healing was achieved (94.6%) even though stress shielding was found in 83.8% (31/37) of the shoulders. Bone resorption was most frequently observed externally at zone 2 (Lateral stress shielding) and internally at zone 7 (Medial stress shielding). A higher filling ratio was associated with an increased occurrence of stress shielding. The uncemented anatomic humeral component did not result in early loosening. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV; Case Series; Treatment study.

Comparative analysis of femoral bone loss: uncemented vs. cemented aseptic stem loosening in first-time revision surgery-a retrospective evaluation of 215 patients.

INTRODUCTION: The integrity of the femoral bone is crucial when considering reconstructive options for the first-time revision of a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Aseptic loosening of primary stems, whether cemented or uncemented, significantly affects the volume and quality of resultant femoral bone loss. This study evaluates the impact of the initial fixation method on femoral bone defect patterns by comparing the extent of bone loss. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort of 215 patients with either cemented or uncemented stems, indicated for aseptic stem loosening, and undergoing first-time stem revision from 2010 to 2022 at our institution was analyzed. Femoral bone loss extent at first-time revision was preoperatively gauged using radiographs and categorized by the Paprosky classification. Survival probabilities pre-first-time revision for both stem types were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Hazard ratios were applied to compare the risk of initial revision for uncemented versus cemented stems within the first and subsequent 2nd to 10th years post-primary implantation. RESULTS: Cemented stems were associated with a higher occurrence of significant bone defects of type 3a (23.53% vs. 14.02%, p = .108), 3b (39.22% vs. 1.22%, p < .001), and 4 (3.92% vs. 0.00%) compared to uncemented stems. Conversely, smaller defects of type 1 and 2 were more prevalent in uncemented stem loosening (84.76% vs. 33.33%, p < .001). Notably, cemented stems exhibited a significantly prolonged revision-free period over the complete decade following primary insertion (p < .001). The unadjusted risk of first-time revision due to stem loosening showed a tendency to an increase in uncemented stems within the initial postoperative year (HR 5.55, 95% CI 0.74; 41.67, p = .096), and an adjusted risk of 2.1 (95% CI 0.26; 16.53, p = .488). However, these differences did not reach statistical significance. In the subsequent 2nd-10th years, the risk was lower compared to cemented stems (HR 2.35, 95% CI 1.39; 3.99, p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Uncemented primary stems necessitating first-time revision due to aseptic loosening demonstrated notably smaller femoral bone defects in comparison to primary cemented stems.

Clinical outcomes and survival rates of a uncemented modular revision stem system in hip arthroplasty: a 10-year single-institution study on a frail population.

INTRODUCTION: The increasing prevalence of primary hip arthroplasty has led to a parallel rise in revision cases. Femoral revision often entails compromised bone integrity, requiring consideration of various solutions for optimal reconstructive options. Despite technological advancements, there is limited evidence on the clinical outcomes of the latest modular revision stems. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes and survival rates of next generation uncemented modular revision stem in patients undergoing hip revision surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective single-center study assessed the survival and failure causes of a specific uncemented modular stem in 48 patients undergoing hip revision surgery between 2012 and 2022. Data included preoperative parameters, surgical details, and postoperative outcomes measured through clinical and radiographic assessments. Forty-eight patients (25 males, 23 females; mean age 72 years) were included, with a mean Charlson Comorbidity Index of 5. Preoperative diagnoses varied, with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) being the most common (45.8%), followed by periprosthetic fractures (27.1%). Partial revisions occurred in 60.4%, total revisions in 39.6%. According to Paprosky classification of femoral bone loss, type II and III were the most represented, respectively 35.4% and 50%. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 4.6 years, stem survival was 92.5%. Complications (20%) included dislocation, PJI, fracture, and loosening; the overall reoperation rate was 12.5%. The SF-12 physical score was 43.6, while the mental score was 51.1. The HOOS score was 71.8, and the HHS score was 71.4. Radiographic analysis identified nonprogressive osteolysis in 15.1% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study on this uncemented modular revision stem demonstrated favorable outcomes in an elder fragile population with moderate to severe femoral bone loss. The implant's modularity provides versatility in addressing various defects, without any implant breakage observed during the study period. Literature comparison highlighted similar outcomes despite sample size differences. The promising results warrant continued investigation into the long-term survivorship of this modular stem system.

Do the humeral radiographic changes at 5-year follow-up affect the clinical outcomes of press-fit humeral stems in primary reverse shoulder arthroplasties?

INTRODUCTION: The purposes of this study were to analyze and compare the functional outcomes and radiological changes around the press-fit humeral components in two contemporary medialized reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) systems at a minimum of 5-year follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between December 2003 and December 2015, 249 consecutive RTSAs were performed at our hospital. Of these, 68 primary uncemented RTSA met our inclusion criteria. The Constant-Murley score (CMS), the modified Constant score, a visual analog scale (VAS) and active shoulder range of motion (ROM) were measured pre- and postoperatively. Radiological assessment was performed by plain radiographs at a minimum of 5 years postoperatively. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 80.2 months, there was no significant difference (p = .59) between the postoperative functional scores and range of motion of the two groups (Delta Xtend and Lima SMR). Radiological data of stress-shielding were observed in 38 patients (55.9%) being slightly more frequent in the Lima SMR group (21 patients) than in the Delta Xtend group (17 patients) (p = .62). CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that the good functional results are similar between the two uncemented RTSA systems used and that they do not depend on the presence of radiological changes (stress-shielding) in the humeral stem at a minimum 5-year follow-up.

Unexpected early loosening of rectangular straight femoral Zweymüller stems with an alumina-reduced surface after total hip arthroplasty-a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Alumina particles from the grit blasting of Ti-alloy stems are suspected to contribute to aseptic loosening. An alumina-reduced stem surface was hypothesized to improve osseointegration and show comparable short-term outcomes to those of a standard stem. METHODS: In this prospective, double-blind, randomized trial, 26 standard (STD) and 27 experimental new technology (NT) stems were implanted. The latter were additionally treated by acid etching and ice blasting to remove alumina particles from the grit-blasting process. Follow-up occurred at 12 and 24 months. Bone mineral density (BMD) around the stem was measured by a dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry device (DEXA). Radiographs were reviewed for alterations. Clinical scoring comprised the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Harris Hip Score (HHS). Survival rates were calculated up to 50 months. RESULTS: Lower mean BMD and more severe cortical hypertrophies were found in the NT group. At 12 months, radiolucent lines were observed mostly in the metaphyseal zone for both groups, with a progression tendency in the NT group at 24 months. At 12 months, pain scores and the WOMAC total and physical activity scores were significantly lower in the NT group, without any differences thereafter. The number of NT stem revisions amounted to 6 (24%) and 11 (41%) at 24 and 50 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: In the NT group, unexpected catastrophic failure rates of 41% caused by early aseptic loosening were noted within 50 months. Compared with the STD stems, NT stems lead to poor clinical and radiographic results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05053048.

The optimal strategy for 3D-printed uncemented endoprosthesis for the bone defect reconstruction of the distal radius, based on biomechanical analysis and retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Prosthetic reconstruction after resecting giant cell tumor of bone (GCTB) of the distal radius has been proposed. However, this is generally associated with various complications. To improve the functional outcomes, we designed a three-dimensional (3D)-printed uncemented endoprosthesis. Meanwhile, using finite-element analysis and clinical observation, an optimization strategy was explored. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients with Campanacci III or recurrent GCTB of the distal radius who underwent 3D-printed uncemented endoprosthesis reconstruction. Clinically, according to the different palmar tilts of the endoprosthesis, patients were divided into the biological angle (BA) group and the zero-degree (ZD) group. We recorded and evaluated the differences in functional outcomes and complications between the two groups. Biomechanically, four 3D finite-element models (normal and customized endoprostheses with three different implemented palmar tilts) were developed. RESULTS: We analyzed 22 patients (12 males and 10 females). The median follow-up period was 60 (range, 19-82) months. Of the 22 patients, 11 patients were included in the BA group and the remaining 11 patients were in the ZD group. Both groups showed no significant differences in the range of motion, Mayo score, and disabilities of the arm, shoulder, and hand scores postoperatively. The subluxation rate was significantly lower in the ZD group than in the BA group. The biomechanical results showed similar stress and displacement distribution patterns in the normal and prosthetic reconstruction models. Additionally, the endoprosthesis with 0° palmar tilt showed better biomechanical performance. CONCLUSION: 3D-printed uncemented endoprosthesis provides acceptable midterm outcomes in patients undergoing distal radius reconstruction. Optimizing the design by decreasing the palmar tilt may be beneficial for decreasing the risk of wrist joint subluxation.

Testing of Novel Total Elbow Prostheses Using Active Motion Experimental Setup.

PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to test a novel uncemented and unconstrained total elbow arthroplasty (Kaufmann total elbow) design that is stabilized through a ligament reconstruction. METHODS: We quantified the implant stability after 25,000 cycles, which represents the time between implantation and when ligament and bone healing has occurred. We used an active motion experimental setup that applies tendon loads via pneumatic cylinders and reproduces the forearm-originating dynamic stabilizers of the elbow. The novel total elbow arthroplasty was actuated for 5,000 full flexion-extension cycles at 5 different shoulder positions. Four Sawbones and 4 cadaver elbows were employed. Angular laxity and implant stability were recorded prior to testing and after each 5,000-loading cycle. RESULTS: Four Sawbones and 4 cadaver elbows were implanted with the uncemented total elbow arthroplasty and did not demonstrate fixation failure or substantial laxity after 25,000 cycles of loading imparted at different shoulder positions. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that the Kaufmann total elbow replacement implanted into cadaver and Sawbones specimens did not exhibit fixation failure or excessive laxity after 25,000 cycles. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: An uncemented, nonmechanically linked total elbow arthroplasty that gains component fixation using intramedullary screws and employs a ligament reconstruction to stabilize the elbow has the potential to be a valuable management option, particularly in younger patients.

Two-year clinical and radiographic outcomes following uncemented reverse shoulder replacements for proximal humerus fractures.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainty remains regarding the role and long-term outcomes following uncemented reverse shoulder replacements (RSRs) in managing displaced proximal humeral fractures (PHFs). Although RSRs for trauma have traditionally undergone cemented fixation of the humeral component, there is increasing interest in uncemented RSRs. Our primary aim was to evaluate 2-year outcomes following uncemented RSR fixation for 3- and 4-part PHFs in the elderly. A secondary aim was to evaluate if timing of surgery affected outcomes. METHODS: This cohort series evaluated 2-year outcomes for 42 patients with Neer 3- and 4-part PHFs treated with uncemented RSRs between October 2016 and December 2019. Thirty-eight patients (90%) had clinical and radiologic follow-up at a minimum of 2 years. The primary outcomes compared postoperative range of movement, radiographic outcomes, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The PROMs collected included Oxford Shoulder Scores (OSSs), satisfaction scores, and the Friends and Family Test. The secondary outcome involved a subanalysis to see if outcomes were affected by treatment timing-within 2 weeks, 2-12 weeks, and >12 weeks. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 74.1 years (range 58-89). There were 11 males and 31 females. No intraoperative fractures were sustained. There was 1 transient axillary neurapraxia, which fully resolved by 4 months. Three patients required postoperative transfusions. During the study follow-up period, no patients developed either deep infections requiring a washout or dislocation, and none underwent further surgery. At 2-year follow-up, radiologic follow-up demonstrated tuberosity union in 29 of 38 cases (76%). Eight of 38 patients (21%) demonstrated some glenoid notching (Sirveaux 1 or 2 only) on radiographic follow-up. There was no evidence of loosening. The mean OSS was 38 (range 15-48). Mean range of movement achieved at 2 years was as follows: forward flexion 122° (50°-180°), abduction 116° (46°-180°), and external rotation 25° (range 5°-60°). Eighteen patients (47%) described their result as excellent, 17 (45%) as good, and 3 (8%) as poor. When comparing the time from injury to treatment, there was no statistically significant difference in complications or radiographic outcomes between the groups. Patients had a reduced forward flexion when treated between 2 and 12 weeks compared with the other groups (P = .019). CONCLUSION: Uncemented RSR is a safe treatment option for the management of complex PHFs in the elderly. We report low complication rates, high patient satisfaction, and good outcomes at 2-year follow-up.

Is Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty Safe in Women Over 75 Y of Age?

BACKGROUND: Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the subject of renewed interest. Previous concerns about survivorship have been addressed and there is an appeal in terms of biological fixation and surgical efficiency. However, even surgeon advocates have concerns about the risk of marked subsidence when using this technology in older patients at risk for osteoporosis. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of 1,000 consecutive fully cementless mobile bearing TKAs performed at a single institution on women over 75 years of age who had postoperative and 1-year x-rays. The primary outcome was the incidence of subsidence. RESULTS: There were three asymptomatic cases with definite subsidence and change in alignment. In a fourth symptomatic case, the femoral component subsided into varus and the tibia into valgus, thus maintaining alignment which facilitated nonoperative treatment in a 92-year-old. Overall, at 1 year, there were two- liner revisions for infection without recurrence. Five patients had further surgery, of which three were washouts and two were for periprosthetic fractures sustained postoperatively within 1 year. Seven patients had further anesthesia, of which five were manipulations and two were nonrecurrent closed reductions for spinouts. CONCLUSION: Cementless TKA did not have a high risk of subsidence in this at-risk population. In the hands of experienced surgeons, these procedures can be used safely irrespective of bone quality.

Cemented Femoral Stem Fixation: Back to the Future.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures following elective and nonelective hip arthroplasty remain one of the most common modes of early failure. METHODS: This symposium will explore the current role of cemented fixation and periprosthetic fracture, focusing on history and rationale for cemented stem fixation, registry data, and other potential advantages of cemented stem fixation. A meticulous and methodical surgical technique of cemented stem fixation is paramount to the success and will be thoroughly discussed. RESULTS: The role of stem fixation, and its effect on periprosthetic fracture is well-documented in the literature. Yet despite this, the utilization of cemented stem fixation remains low in the United States. This paradox is multifactorial. CONCLUSION: In addition to a notable reduction in the risk of periprosthetic femur fractures, cemented stem fixation has numerous other advantages and is reproducible with a methodical surgical technique.

Early Survivorship of Uncemented Total Knee Arthroplasty Varies by Age and Sex Based on Data From the Michigan Arthroplasty Registry Collaborative Quality Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Outcome data for newer uncemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs has been mixed. Registry studies showed worse survivorship, but clinical trials have not demonstrated differences compared to cemented designs. There has been renewed interest in uncemented TKA with modern designs and improved technology. The utilizations of uncemented knees in Michigan, 2-year outcomes, and the effects of age and sex were evaluated. METHODS: A statewide database from 2017 through 2019 was analyzed for incidence, distribution, and early survivorship of cemented versus uncemented TKAs. There was 2-year minimum follow-up. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to generate time to first revision cumulative percent revision curves. The impacts of age and sex were examined. RESULTS: Use of uncemented TKAs increased from 7.0 to 11.3%. Uncemented TKAs were more commonly men, younger, heavier, American Society of Anesthesiologists score > 2, and opioid users (P < .05). At 2 years, overall cumulative percent revision was higher in uncemented (2.44% [2.00, 2.99]) versus cemented (1.76% [1.64, 1.89]), particularly in women uncemented (2.41 [1.87, 3.12]) versus cemented (1.64 [1.50, 1.80]). Revision rates were greater with uncemented women >70 years (1.2% 1 year, 1.02% 2 years) versus < 70 years (0.56%, 0.53%), notably uncemented were inferior in both groups (P < .05). Men, regardless of age, had similar survivorships with both cemented and uncemented designs. CONCLUSION: The use of an uncemented TKA had an increased risk of early revision compared to cemented. This finding, however, was only apparent in women, especially those >70 years old. Surgeons should consider cement fixation in women >70 years.

Can Selected Use of Cemented and Uncemented Femoral Components in a Broad Population Produce Comparable Results Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty for Osteoarthritis?

BACKGROUND: Registry data have demonstrated lower rates of revision and periprosthetic fracture in select cohorts with cemented femoral fixation at primary total hip arthroplasty. Whether this is true of all component designs is not known. We hypothesized that selected use of ream-and-broach triple-tapered uncemented stem designs may provide comparable results to cemented stems. METHODS: From 2000 to 2018, 5,809 primary total hip arthroplasties were performed with either a cemented (1,304) or ream-and-broach triple-tapered uncemented stem (4,505). Implant choice was at surgeon discretion. The cemented group was older, more often women, and had slightly lower body mass index. A subgroup analysis was performed on patients ≥75 years of age. Statistical weighting accounted for baseline cohort differences. RESULTS: At 10 years, there was a trend toward higher all-cause revision (hazards ratio (HR) 1.6, P = .053) and higher all-cause reoperation (HR 1.6, P = .02) in the cemented fixation cohort. The cemented fixation group had fewer intraoperative periprosthetic fractures (HR 0.21, P < .001) but no difference in postoperative fractures (HR 0.99, P = .96). The same was true in patients ≥75 years. In the ≥75-years subgroup, there was no difference in revision or reoperation at 10 years. CONCLUSION: Compared to cemented stems, the use of ream-and-broach triple-tapered uncemented stems in select patients, including those ≥75 years, was associated with more intraoperative fractures but no difference in 10-year implant survivorship. These findings are different than some registry data and suggest that specific uncemented components, implanted in selected patients by experienced surgeons, can perform as well as cemented implants in a broad patient population.

Association Between Surface Modifications for Biologic Fixation and Aseptic Loosening of Uncemented Total Knee Arthroplasties.

BACKGROUND: Various surface modifications are used in uncemented total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) to enhance bony ingrowth and longevity of implants. This study aimed to identify which surface modifications are used, whether they are associated with different revision rates for aseptic loosening, and which are underperforming compared to cemented implants. METHODS: Data on all cemented and uncemented TKAs used between 2007 and 2021 were obtained from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. Uncemented TKAs were divided into groups based on their surface modifications. Revision rates for aseptic loosening and major revisions were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier, Competing-Risk, Log-rank tests, and Cox regression analyses were used. In total, 235,500 cemented and 10,749 uncemented primary TKAs were included. The different uncemented TKA groups included the following: 1,140 porous-hydroxyapatite (HA); 8,450 Porous-uncoated; 702 Grit-blasted-uncoated; and 172 Grit-blasted-Titanium-nitride (TiN) implants. RESULTS: The 10-year revision rates for aseptic loosening and major revision of the cemented TKAs were 1.3 and 3.1%, and for uncemented TKAs 0.2 and 2.3% (porous-HA), 1.3 and 2.9% (porous-uncoated), 2.8 and 4.0% (grit-blasted-uncoated), and 7.9% and 17.4% (grit-blasted-TiN), respectively. Both type of revision rates varied significantly between the uncemented groups (log-rank tests, P < .001, P < .001). All grit-blasted implants had a significantly higher risk of aseptic loosening (P < .01), and porous-uncoated implants had a significantly lower risk of aseptic loosening than cemented implants (P = .03) after 10 years. CONCLUSION: There were 4 main uncemented surface modifications identified, with different revision rates for aseptic loosening. Implants with porous-HA and porous-uncoated had the best revision rates, at least equal to cemented TKAs. Grit-blasted implants with and without TiN underperformed, possibly due to the interaction of other factors.