Intra-Articular Hyaluronic Acid Injections Less Than 6 Months Before Total Hip Arthroplasty: Is It Safe? A Retrospective Cohort Study in 565 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Intra-articular hyaluronic acid (IAHA) can be injected into an osteoarthritic hip joint to reduce pain and to improve functionality. Several studies report IAHA to be safe, with minor adverse effects that normally disappear spontaneously within a week. However, intra-articular corticosteroids prior to total hip arthroplasty (THA) have been associated with increased infection rates. This association has never been investigated for IAHA and THA. We aimed to assess the influence of IAHA on the outcome of THA, with an emphasis on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). METHODS: At a mean follow-up of 52 months (±18), we compared complication rates, including superficial and deep PJIs, of THA in patients who received an IAHA injection ≤6 months prior to surgery (injection group) with that of patients undergoing THA without any previous injection in the ipsilateral hip (control group). One hundred thirteen patients (118 hips) could be retrospectively included in the injection group, and 452 patients (495 hips) in the control group. RESULTS: No differences in baseline characteristics nor risk factors for PJI between the 2 groups were found. The clinical outcomes in terms of VAS pain scores (1.4 vs 1.7 points, P = .11), modified Harris Hip Scores (77 vs 75 points, P = .09), and Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (79 vs 76 points, P = .24) did not differ between the injection group and the control group. Also, complications in terms of persistent wound leakage (0% vs 1.2%, P = .60), thromboembolic events (0% vs 0.6%, P = 1.00), periprosthetic fractures (1.7% vs 1.2%, P = .65), and dislocations (0% vs 0.4%, P = 1.00) did not differ. However, in the injection group there was a higher rate of PJIs (4% vs 0%, P < .001) and postoperative wound infections (9% vs 3%, P = .01), compared to the control group. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that IAHA performed 6 months or less prior to THA may pose a risk for increased rates of PJI. We recommend refraining from performing THA within 6 months after IAHA administration.

Pinnacle® modular metal-on-metal articulation in primary total hip arthroplasty: mid-term results of 195 cases.

Studies concerning Pinnacle® modular metal-on- metal (MoM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) show better results than for most other MoM THAs. The goal of this study was to report on the revision rate, clinical outcome and metal ion levels regarding this specific prosthesis. Retrospectively selected patients were evaluated clinically, and Visual Analogue Score for pain (VAS), Harris Hip Score (HHS) and Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS) were determined. Blood metal ion levels were measured. 195 patients were included (mean follow-up 6.4 years). MoM related revision was performed in 5.1%. Clinical outcome was good, with a mean VAS of 6.7 out of 100, HHS of 88.9 and HOOS of 80.7. Five year survival was 96.6%, eight year survival decreased to 90.0%. No correlation could be found between metal ion levels and outcome. Although clinical outcome was good, overall survival of the Pinnacle® MoM is unacceptably low compared to MoP survival.

Outcome of custom-made IMP femoral components of total hip arthroplasty: a follow-up of 15 to 22 years.

A total of 1659 primary THAs using a cemented custom-made intra-operative manufactured prosthesis (IMP)-stem were studied. The end point for survival was defined as revision of the stem for any reason. Revision arthroplasty was performed in 49 cases. The IMP-stems had a revision free 20-year survival rate of 95.5%. Revisions were performed mainly because of aseptic loosening. There were no drawbacks like increased infection risk due to the prolonged surgical time needed for the intra-operative production of the stem. These data provide evidence that the cemented IMP-stem is able to provide good long-term results.

2-stage revision recommended for treatment of fungal hip and knee prosthetic joint infections.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fungal prosthetic joint infections are rare and difficult to treat. This systematic review was conducted to determine outcome and to give treatment recommendations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After an extensive search of the literature, 164 patients treated for fungal hip or knee prosthetic joint infection (PJI) were reviewed. This included 8 patients from our own institutions. RESULTS: Most patients presented with pain (78%) and swelling (65%). In 68% of the patients, 1 or more risk factors for fungal PJI were found. In 51% of the patients, radiographs showed signs of loosening of the arthroplasty. Candida species were cultured from most patients (88%). In 21% of all patients, fungal culture results were first considered to be contamination. There was co-infection with bacteria in 33% of the patients. For outcome analysis, 119 patients had an adequate follow-up of at least 2 years. Staged revision was the treatment performed most often, with the highest success rate (85%). INTERPRETATION: Fungal PJI resembles chronic bacterial PJI. For diagnosis, multiple samples and prolonged culturing are essential. Fungal species should be considered to be pathogens. Co-infection with bacteria should be treated with additional antibacterial agents. We found no evidence that 1-stage revision, debridement, antibiotics, irrigation, and retention (DAIR) or antifungal therapy without surgical treatment adequately controls fungal PJI. Thus, staged revision should be the standard treatment for fungal PJI. After resection of the prosthesis, we recommend systemic antifungal treatment for at least 6 weeks-and until there are no clinical signs of infection and blood infection markers have normalized. Then reimplantation can be performed.

A modified custom-made triflanged acetabular reconstruction ring (MCTARR) for revision hip arthroplasty with severe acetabular defects.

The treatment of extensive acetabular bone loss and pelvic discontinuity in revision total hip arthroplasty remains challenging. We report our preliminary experience with the modified custom-made triflanged acetabular reconstruction ring (MCTARR) in the management of such situations. The MCTARR is a custom-made metal reinforcement ring with a trabecular surface to encourage bone ingrowth and a bulky trabecular metal augmentation to fill the acetabular defects, designed to achieve initial and long-term stability. A custom-made drilling jig is used to achieve optimal screw positioning. The clinical and radiological short-term follow-up (10-58 months) of our first six cases treated with this new technique show acceptable to good results. None of the reconstructions failed or had to be revised. Clinical results were satisfactory. Radiographs showed good screw positioning. The custom-made acetabular drilling jig and the reconstruction of the acetabulum with a titanium porous structure are of added value in the treatment of severe acetabular bone loss and pelvic discontinuity with custom-made triflanged components.

Pinnacle revision cup in acetabular surgery results at 2 to 5 years.

Uncemented revision cups are widely used in revision hip arthroplasty; they have shown good results. We report the the short term outcome with the cementless Pinnacle revision cup. All acetabular revisions using a Pinnacle revision cup between January 2007 and March 2010 were included. In March 2012, clinical scores were determined and the latest radiographs were assessed. Revision and radiographic signs of loosening were reported as failure of the cup. Ths study included 117 patients (118 revision cups) with a follow-up between two and five years. Five cups failed (4%). The median modified Harris Hip Score was 64 (range : 18-91). Survival rates of the Pinnacle revision cup are good in the short term follow-up. This implant appears as a safe and reliable solution for small to moderate acetabular defects.

Comparison of intra-articular injections of hyaluronic acid and corticosteroid in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the hip in comparison with intra-articular injections of bupivacaine. Design of a prospective, randomized, controlled study with blinding of the patients and outcome assessors.

BACKGROUND: Although intra-articular hyaluronic acid is well established as a treatment for osteoarthritis of the knee, its use in hip osteoarthritis is not based on large randomized controlled trials. There is a need for more rigorously designed studies on hip osteoarthritis treatment as this subject is still very much under debate. METHODS/DESIGN: Randomized, controlled trial with a three-armed, parallel-group design. Approximately 315 patients complying with the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be randomized into one of the following treatment groups: infiltration of the hip joint with hyaluronic acid, with a corticosteroid or with 0.125% bupivacaine.The following outcome measure instruments will be assessed at baseline, i.e. before the intra-articular injection of one of the study products, and then again at six weeks, 3 and 6 months after the initial injection: Pain (100 mm VAS), Harris Hip Score and HOOS, patient assessment of their clinical status (worse, stable or better then at the time of enrollment) and intake of pain rescue medication (number per week). In addition patients will be asked if they have complications/adverse events. The six-month follow-up period for all patients will begin on the date the first injection is administered. DISCUSSION: This randomized, controlled, three-arm study will hopefully provide robust information on two of the intra-articular treatments used in hip osteoarthritis, in comparison to bupivacaine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01079455.

Prolonged inhibition of inflammation in osteoarthritis by triamcinolone acetonide released from a polyester amide microsphere platform.

Controlled biomaterial-based corticosteroid release might circumvent multiple injections and the accompanying risks, such as hormone imbalance and muscle weakness, in osteoarthritic (OA) patients. For this purpose, microspheres were prepared from an amino acid-based polyester amide (PEA) platform and loaded with triamcinolone acetonide (TAA). TAA loaded microspheres were shown to release TAA for over 60days in PBS. Furthermore, the bioactivity lasted at least 28days, demonstrated by a 80-95% inhibition of PGE2 production using TNFα-stimulated chondrocyte culture, indicating inhibition of inflammation. Microspheres loaded with the near infrared marker NIR780-iodide injected in healthy rat joints or joints with mild collagenase-induced OA showed retention of the microspheres up till 70days after injection. After intra-articular injection of TAA-loaded microspheres, TAA was detectable in the serum until day seven. Synovial inflammation was significantly lower in OA joints injected with TAA-loaded microspheres based on histological Krenn scores. Injection of TAA-loaded nor empty microspheres had no effect on cartilage integrity as determined by Mankin scoring. In conclusion, the PEA platform shows safety and efficacy upon intra-articular injection, and its extended degradation and release profiles compared to the currently used PLGA platforms may render it a good alternative. Even though further in vivo studies may need to address dosing and readout parameters such as pain, no effect on cartilage pathology was found and inflammation was effectively lowered in OA joints.

Quality of life after staged revision for infected total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this review was to assess (health-related) quality of life ([HR]Qol) after 1-stage or 2-stage revision for prosthetic joint infection of the hip (PJI). Additionally, we compared (HR)QoL scores with normative population scores to assess whether QoL is reduced after revision for PJI. METHODS: A systematic search was performed in Embase, Cochrane and Pubmed. We included articles that reported (HR)QoL questionnaires after staged revision for hip PJI with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Methodological quality was assessed using the MINORS score. RESULTS: The search produced 11,195 results. We selected 12 papers describing 2-stage revisions. The mean MINORS score was 9.8. Average WOMAC scores of 185 patients with a mean follow-up of 69.8 months were 73.Average Short Form 36 (SF-36) scores of 159 patients with a mean follow-up of 40.7 months were 40.4 for the physical component score (PCS) and 51.6 for the mental component score (MCS). Average Short Form 12 (SF-12) scores of 154 patients with a mean follow-up of 73.4 months were: a PCS of 35.4 and a MCS of 49.1. The WOMAC, SF-12 (PCS) and SF-36 (PCS) were respectively 12%, 26.7% and 14.8% lower, compared to normative values. DISCUSSIONS: Patients who underwent 2-stage revision for hip PJI had substantially lower (physical component) (HR)QoL scores, but mental scores were comparable to the general population.

One-stage revision in two cases of Salmonella prosthetic hip infection.

We describe two cases of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip due to Salmonella. The first patient presented with an early infection 5 d after being discharged following a total hip replacement and the second patient presented at the emergency ward with a late infection, thirteen years following a total hip replacement. Both cases occurred within one month of each other at our institution and both were successfully treated with a one-stage revision. PJI caused by Salmonella species is very rare: so far only 20 Salmonella PJIs of the hip have been described. Therefore, full consensus on the best treatment approach has not yet been reached. An aggressive two-stage approach is advised because of the virulence of Salmonella, although a limited number of successful one-stage approaches have been described as well. According to the latest guidelines, one-stage revision has comparable success rates and less morbidity compared to two-stage treatment, when selecting the right patients. In our opinion, PJI caused by Salmonella should be treated just as PJI caused by other bacteria, with consideration of the selection criteria as mentioned in several treatment guidelines. As illustrated by these two cases, one-stage revision can be successful in both early and late Salmonella PJI of the hip.

Intra-articular infiltration therapy for patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis: A systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: Conservative treatments are especially in patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GH-OA) important, since shoulder arthroplasty has its limitations. In this systematic review, we will evaluate the current evidence regarding the efficacy of intra-articular (IA) infiltration treatment options in patients with GH-OA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The following databases are searched: Pubmed/Medline, Cochrane Clinical Trial Register, Embase and the WHO clinical trial register. All IA injection products used for the treatment of shoulder OA in humans are included. RESULTS: A total of 8 studies could be included in this review. Hyaluronic acid (HA) showed effect sizes of 2.07, 2.02 and 2.11 at 6, 12 and 26 weeks follow-up, respectively. Placebo (1.60, 1.82 and 1.68) also showed stable effect sizes at the same time points. The efficacy of corticosteroids (CS) decreased rapidly at follow-up (1.08, 0.43 and 0.19). Although statistical significant, the maximum difference in effect sizes between HA and placebo was only 0.43 with absolute values between 2.0 and 6.4 on a 100-point visual analogue score for pain. CONCLUSION: IA treatment with HA has a good efficacy at follow-up compared to baseline. However, the difference in efficacy between HA and placebo never reaches the minimal clinically important difference at any of the follow-up points. We are not able to give clear recommendations for the use of IA CS injections in patients with GH-OA. In future research, we recommend focusing on sufficiently powered randomized trials to compare the efficacies of HA, CS, placebo and other IA treatment options in patients with GH-OA.

Treatment of acute periprosthetic infections with prosthesis retention: Review of current concepts.

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after total joint arthroplasty, occurring in approximately 1%-2% of all cases. With growing populations and increasing age, PJI will have a growing effect on health care costs. Many risk factors have been identified that increase the risk of developing PJI, including obesity, immune system deficiencies, malignancy, previous surgery of the same joint and longer operating time. Acute PJI occurs either postoperatively (4 wk to 3 mo after initial arthroplasty, depending on the classification system), or via hematogenous spreading after a period in which the prosthesis had functioned properly. Diagnosis and the choice of treatment are the cornerstones to success. Although different definitions for PJI have been used in the past, most are more or less similar and include the presence of a sinus tract, blood infection values, synovial white blood cell count, signs of infection on histopathological analysis and one or more positive culture results. Debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR) is the primary treatment for acute PJI, and should be performed as soon as possible after the development of symptoms. Success rates differ, but most studies report success rates of around 60%-80%. Whether single or multiple debridement procedures are more successful remains unclear. The use of local antibiotics in addition to the administration of systemic antibiotic agents is also subject to debate, and its pro's and con's should be carefully considered. Systemic treatment, based on culture results, is of importance for all PJI treatments. Additionally, rifampin should be given in Staphylococcal PJIs, unless all foreign material is removed. The most important factors contributing to treatment failure are longer duration of symptoms, a longer time after initial arthroplasty, the need for more debridement procedures, the retention of exchangeable components, and PJI caused by Staphylococcus (aureus or coagulase negative). If DAIR treatment is unsuccessful, the following treatment option should be based on the patient health status and his or her expectations. For the best functional outcome, one- or two-stage revision should be performed after DAIR failure. In conclusion, DAIR is the obvious choice for treatment of acute PJI, with good success rates in selected patients.

High-energy bilateral knee dislocations in a young man: a case report.

Bilateral knee dislocations are rare. We report one such case in a 22-year-old man. His clinical presentation, radiographical findings, and the operative and non-operative treatments are discussed, with emphasis on the timing of treatment and rehabilitation.

Two-stage revision of an infected total hip arthroplasty: a follow-up of 136 patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Periprosthetic infection of a total hip arthroplasty (THA) is commonly treated with a two-stage revision procedure. After resection of the infected THA and placement of a cement spacer loaded with antibiotics, a THA is inserted at a second procedure to restore hip function and mobility. Revision surgery carries a significant risk of complications. This study focuses on hip function, rate of complications and reinfection after two-stage revision surgery for an infected THA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 1996 to April 2010, 136 patients underwent revision surgery after removal of an infected THA. Follow-up ranged from 2 years to more than 15 years. Hip function was evaluated using the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) and the Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS). Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) measured pain. Annual follow-up included radiographs of the affected hip and blood sampling for inflammatory parameters. RESULTS: After revision surgery, average mHHS was 63% and average HOOS was 54%. VAS pain averaged 26.8 on a 100-point scale and 40% of patients had no pain. Prosthesis-related complications unrelated to sepsis occurred in 32%. Most common were periprosthetic fractures, leg length discrepancy and dislocation. Reinfection occurred in 13% of these patients and Coagulase Negative Staphylococcus (CNS) was isolated in 67%. CONCLUSION: Two-stage evision surgery is an accepted treatment for infected THAs. However, complications are common and hip function afterwards is modest. As previous studies have shown, CNS is an important microorganism in reinfection.

Inverted cup prosthesis to treat recurrent hip dislocation in frail elderly patients.

Recurrent hip dislocation has become an increasing problem in patients who had multiple component revision in total hip arthroplasty. These are often frail elderly patients with loss of constraining soft tissue envelope around the hip and an excessive weakness of the abductor mechanism. We present a simple technique for open reduction of a dislocated hip using a custom-made fully constrained construct with potential for preserving the well fixed femoral implant and parts of the acetabular component. The custom-made constrained construct consists of the application of an inverted cup over the femoral neck or head, the cup being fixed to the acetabular insert with screws. Three frail elderly patients have been successfully treated. One specific case is described in detail. In frail elderly patients who may have undergone several revision surgeries, it is important to preserve components of the total hip replacement when possible. The proposed technique may be an alternative solution for these patients.

Hyaluronic acid for the treatment of osteoarthritis in all joints except the knee: what is the current evidence?

BACKGROUND: The use of intra-articular hyaluronic acid (HA) is a well known treatment in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). In other joints, less evidence is available about the efficacy of treatment with intra-articular HA. HA is also used intra-articularly in the metatarsophalangeal-1 joint, the ankle, the hip, the sacroiliac joint, the facet joints, the carpometacarpal-1 joint, the shoulder and the temporo-mandibular joint. In this systematic review we include all prospective studies about the effects of intra-articular HA in the above-mentioned joints. Its use in the knee joint, however, will be discussed in a separate article in this journal. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using databases including MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Clinical Trial Register, and EMBASE. RESULTS: After performing a solid systematic review using a rigid methodology and trying to pool the outcomes of different studies, we noticed that, compared with baseline, there is statistical evidence for a positive effect of intra-articular HA. However, there is limited evidence HA is superior to placebo and no evidence that intra-articular HA is better than corticosteroids or other conservative therapies. CONCLUSION: Our recommendation for future research is that one should focus on adequately powered randomized trials comparing HA treatment with other types of intra-articular or conservative treatment. We think it is useless to further perform and publish (large) non-comparative prospective studies about the use of HA in the treatment of problems caused by OA. It is well perceived that HA exerts positive effects in the treatment of OA, but up to now there is no (strong) evidence available that HA is superior to other treatments of OA such as corticosteroids, physiotherapy or other conservative measures.

Hyaluronic acid in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis with emphasis on the efficacy of different products.

BACKGROUND: Although accepted as a conservative treatment option for knee osteoarthritis, the debate about the effectiveness of intra-articular treatment with hyaluronic acid (HA) is still ongoing because of contrasting outcomes in different clinical studies. Several well designed clinical studies showed a significant improvement in pain at follow-up compared with baseline but no significant improvement comparing the efficacy of HA with placebo (saline) or with other conservative treatment options. Notwithstanding the effectiveness of different types of intra-articular HA products, the question of whether one HA product is better than another is still unanswered. In this systematic review we compare the effects of intra-articularly administered HA with intra-articularly administered placebo in general and, more specifically, the effects of individual HA products with placebo. We also compare the efficacy of different HA products. METHODS: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted using databases including MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Clinical Trial Register and EMBASE. RESULTS: Seventy-four RCTs were included in this systematic review. HA improves pain by approximately 40-50% compared with baseline levels. However, when compared with saline the difference in efficacy is not that large. Due to a large 'placebo effect' of saline (approximately 30% pain reduction, persisting for at least 3 months) we determined a weighted mean difference between the efficacy of HA and saline of just 10.20 using the visual analog scale for pain. It is debatable whether this difference reaches the minimum clinically important difference. Comparing the different HA products, which vary in the molecular weight, concentration, and volume of HA, we were not able to conclude that one brand has a better efficacy than another due to the heterogeneity of the studies and outcomes. DISCUSSION: In the future it will be important to determine the exact mechanism of action of placebo as this may give us an idea of how to treat osteoarthritis more efficiently. Due to the limitations of this review (follow-up of just 3 months and large heterogeneity of the included studies), it is also important to compare the different HA products to determine which product(s), or which molecular weight range, concentration, or volume of HA is the best option to treat osteoarthritis. Our recommendation is to start large (multicenter) RCTs to give us more evidence about the efficacy of the different HA products.