Total Hip Replacement with a Fully Hydroxyapatite-Coated Shortened Stem: Five- to Thirteen-Year Follow-Up Results.

Background: Shortened femoral stems aim to mimic the biomechanical performance of traditional stems while preserving more bone and minimizing soft tissue damage. Our objective is to assess the outcomes of patients treated with a shortened stem (Furlong Evolution, JRI Orthopaedics, Sheffield, UK) to analyze the implant's efficacy and survivorship. Methods: This retrospective observational study included all patients aged 18 to 70 undergoing uncemented shortened stem total hip replacement at Hospital del Mar between 2010 and 2018. Hip function and pain were assessed with the Merle d'Aubigné-Postel scale and visual analog scale, respectively. A radiographic analysis measured stem and cup orientation, leg length discrepancy, stem subsidence, and radiolucencies around the cup. Perioperative complications, prosthetic failures, and reoperations were documented. Results: A total of 109 patients (74 male, 35 female) of a mean age of 51.8 ± 8.8 years were included. The average follow-up was 91 ± 17.4 months. Radiographically, 71 (65.1%) of the stems had been inserted at the appropriate angulation (±3°), and 102 (93.6%) of the cups had been placed in the Lewinnek safety zone. Leg length discrepancy was observed in 19 (17.4%) cases. The mean Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score improved from 13.1 ± 1.39 preoperatively to 17.8 ± 0.49 at 6 months postoperatively (p < 0.001). Merle d'Aubigné-Postel subscales also reflected a statistically significant improvement (p < 0.001). The mean pain score 12 months postoperatively was 0.52 ± 1.22, with 95.4% of patients declaring themselves satisfied or highly satisfied. The expected 13-year survival according to a Kaplan-Meier analysis was 100% in the absence of infection and 91.3% if revision for any cause is taken as a survival endpoint. Conclusions: The shortened stem under analysis provides excellent functional results and long-term survival rates.

Polyurethane Scaffold vs Fascia Lata Autograft for Hip Labral Reconstruction: Comparison of Femoroacetabular Biomechanics.

Background: The integrity of the acetabular labrum is critical in providing normal function and minimizing hip degeneration and is considered key for success in today's hip preservation algorithm. Many advances have been made in labral repair and reconstruction to restore the suction seal. Purpose/Hypothesis: To compare the biomechanical effects of segmental labral reconstruction between the synthetic polyurethane scaffold (PS) and fascia lata autograft (FLA). Our hypothesis was that reconstruction with a macroporous polyurethane implant and autograft reconstruction of fascia lata would normalize hip joint kinetics and restore the suction seal. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Ten cadaveric hips from 5 fresh-frozen pelvises underwent biomechanical testing with a dynamic intra-articular pressure measurement system under 3 conditions: (1) intact labrum, (2) reconstruction with PS after a 3-cm segmental labrectomy, then (3) reconstruction with FLA. Contact area, contact pressure, and peak force were evaluated in 4 positions: 90º of flexion in neutral, 90º of flexion plus internal rotation, 90º of flexion plus external rotation, and 20º of extension. A labral seal test was performed for both reconstruction techniques. The relative change from the intact condition (value = 1) was determined for all conditions and positions. Results: PS restored contact area to at least 96% of intact (≥0.96; range, 0.96-0.98) in all 4 positions, and FLA restored contact area to at least 97% (≥0.97; range, 0.97-1.19). Contact pressure was restored to ≥1.08 (range, 1.08-1.11) with the PS and ≥1.08 (range, 1.08-1.10) with the FLA technique. Peak force returned to ≥1.02 (range, 1.02-1.05) with PS and ≥1.02 (range, 1.02-1.07) with FLA. No significant differences were found between the reconstruction techniques in contact area in any position (P > .06), with the exception that FLA presented greater contact area in flexion plus internal rotation as compared with PS (P = .003). Suction seal was confirmed in 80% of PSs and 70% of FLAs (P = .62). Conclusion: Segmental hip labral reconstruction using PS and FLA reapproximated femoroacetabular contact biomechanics close to the intact state. Clinical Relevance: These findings provide preclinical evidence supporting the use of a synthetic scaffold as an alternative to FLA and therefore avoiding donor site morbidity.

Hip Labral Reconstruction With a Polyurethane Scaffold: Restoration of Femoroacetabular Contact Biomechanics.

Background: Many advances have been made in hip labral repair and reconstruction and in the restoration of the suction seal. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical effects of segmental labral reconstruction with a synthetic polyurethane scaffold (PS) in comparison with segmental labrectomy. Our hypothesis was that reconstruction with a icroporous polyurethane implant would normalize joint kinetics of the hip and restore the suction seal. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: We used 10 hips from 5 fresh-frozen pelvises with an intact acetabular labrum without osteoarthritis. Using an intra-articular pressure measurement system, the contact area, contact pressure, and peak force were assessed for the following conditions: intact labrum, partial anterosuperior labrectomy, and PS reconstruction. For each condition, all specimens were analyzed in 4 positions (90° of flexion, 90° of flexion and internal rotation, 90° of flexion and external rotation, and 20° of extension) and underwent a labral seal test. The relative change from the intact condition was determined for all conditions and positions. Results: Compared with the intact labrum, labrectomy resulted in a significant decrease in the contact area (P < .001) and a significant increase in the peak force (P < .001) and contact pressure (P < .001) across all positions. Compared with labrectomy, PS reconstruction resulted in a significant increase in the contact area (P < .001) and a significant decrease in the contact pressure (P ≤ .02) and peak force (P < .001) across all positions. Compared with the intact labrum, PS reconstruction restored the contact area and peak force to normal values in all positions (P > .05), whereas the contact pressure was significantly decreased compared with labrectomy (P < .05) but did not return to normal values. The labral seal was lost in all specimens after labrectomy but was restored in 80% of the specimens after PS reconstruction. Conclusion: Femoroacetabular contact biomechanics significantly worsened after partial labrectomy; reconstruction using a PS restored the contact area and peak force to the intact state and improved the contact pressure increases seen after partial labrectomy. The contact area and peak force were normalized, and the labral seal was re-established in most cases. Clinical Relevance: This study provides biomechanical evidence for the use of a scaffold for labral reconstruction.

Orthopedic Surgeons' Accuracy When Orienting an Acetabular Cup. A Comparison with Untrained Individuals.

Background and Objectives: Previous studies demonstrated a huge variability among surgeons when it comes to reproducing the position of an acetabular cup in total hip arthroplasty. Our main objective is to determine if orthopedic surgeons can replicate a given orientation on a pelvic model better than untrained individuals. Our secondary objective is to determine if experience has any influence on their ability for this task. Materials and Methods: A group of specialist orthopedic hip surgeons and a group of volunteers with no medical training were asked to reproduce three given (randomly generated) acetabular cup orientations (inclination and anteversion) on a pelvic model. Error was measured by means of a hip navigation system and comparisons between groups were made using the appropriate statistical methods. Results: The study included 107 individuals, 36 orthopedic surgeons and 71 untrained volunteers. The mean error among surgeons was slightly greater as regards both inclination (7.84 ± 5.53 vs. 6.70 ± 4.03) and anteversion (5.85 ± 4.52 vs. 5.48 ± 3.44), although statistical significance was not reached (p = 0.226 and p = 0.639, respectively). Similarly, although surgeons with more than 100 procedures a year obtained better results than those with less surgical experience (8.01 vs. 7.67 degrees of error in inclination and 5.83 vs. 5.87 in anteversion), this difference was not statistically significant, either (p = 0.852 and p = 0.981). Conclusions: No differences were found in the average error made by orthopedic surgeons and untrained individuals. Furthermore, the surgeons' cup orientation accuracy was not seen to improve significantly with experience.

Labral reconstruction with polyurethane implant.

Surgical treatment of labral injuries has shifted from debridement to preservation over the past decades. Primary repair and secondary augmentation or reconstruction techniques are aimed at restoring the labral seal and preserving or improving contact mechanics. Currently, the standard of care for non-repairable tears favours the use of auto- or allografts. As an alternative, we present our initial experience using a synthetic, off-the-shelf polyurethane scaffold for augmentation and reconstruction of segmental labral tissue loss or irreparable labral damage. Three patients aged 37-44 (two male, one female) with femoroacetabular impingement without associated dysplasia (Wiberg > 25°) or osteoarthritis (Tönnis <2) were included in this series. Labral reconstruction (one case) and augmentation (two cases) were performed using a synthetic polyurethane scaffold developed for meniscal substitution (Actifit®, Orteq Ltd, London, UK) and adapted to the hip. Clinical results were analysed with patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) using non-arthritic hip score (NAHS) and daily live activities hip outcome score (DLA HOS) and magnetic resonance images (MRI) at 2- and 4-year follow-up. Clinically improvement was seen in all PROMs at 4 years. The NAHS scores improved from 57.7 to 82.3 (50.9% improvement) and HOS from 59 to 79.3 (35.3% improvement). Last follow-up MRIs confirmed the presence of the scaffold; however, the scaffold signal was still hyperintense compared to native labrum. There was no shrinkage in any scaffold and no progression to hip osteoarthritis seen. Reconstruction or augmentation of segmental labral defects with a polyurethane scaffold may be an effective procedure. At 4 years after implantation, our small cases series resulted in improved hip joint function, reduced pain and scaffold preservation on follow-up imaging.

Biomechanical Behavior of an Hydroxyapatite-Coated Traditional Hip Stem and a Short One of Similar Design: Comparative Study Using Finite Element Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The objective is to compare, by the means of finite elements analysis, the biomechanical behavior of a conventional stem of proven performance with a short stem based on the same fixation principles. METHODS: A 3D femur was modeled from CT scan data, and real bone density measures were incorporated into it. Load stresses were applied to that bone in 3 different scenarios: without prosthesis, with the conventional stem, and with the short stem. Different bone loading patterns were compared by Gruen's zones both visually and statistically using Welch's test. RESULTS: The implantation of a stem generates a certain degree of stress shielding in the surrounding bone, but the pattern of the change is very similar in the compared stem models. Although there is statistical significance (P < 0.01) in the mean stress variation in most of the Gruen's zones, the magnitude of the difference is always under 2 MPa (range: 0.01 - 1.74 MPa). CONCLUSIONS: The bone loading patterns of the traditional stem and the short stem are very similar. Although there is no evidence of a link between biomechanics and clinical outcomes, our results may suggest that theoretical advantages of short stems can be exploited without the fear of altering bone loading patterns.

Reconstrucción acetabular con el sistema Cup-Cage para discontinuidades pélvicas y defectos acetabulares masivos / Reconstruction for pelvic discontinuity and massive acetabular defects

INTRODUCCIÓN: La reconstrucción acetabular con defectos óseos masivos y discontinuidades pélvicas es un procedimiento quirúrgico complejo que presenta importantes dificultades para el cirujano ortopédico. El objetivo de este estudio es presentar los resultados a corto y medio plazo de la revisión acetabular con el sistema de reconstrucción Cup-Cage en una serie consecutiva de casos. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Retrospectivamente revisamos 22 casos consecutivos de defectos acetabulares masivos (8 Paprosky IIIA y 9 IIIB); 5 discontinuidades pélvicas; 2 fracturas pélvicas durante la implantación de la prótesis primaria, y una seudoartrosis pélvica. Todos fueron revisados con un cotilo de metal trabecular y una caja de reconstrucción tipo Cup-Cage. Se realizó seguimiento clínico y radiográfico de los pacientes para detectar fallos mecánicos o aflojamientos del implante. RESULTADOS: En un tiempo de seguimiento medio de 45,06 meses (12-73 meses) no se objetivó ningún fracaso radiográfico del implante (migración del componente, osteólisis ni rotura de tornillos). Las complicaciones (13,63%) incluyeron una luxación recidivante, una infección y una subluxación recidivante; todos precisaron reintervención quirúrgica. El Merle d'Aubigné-Postel mejoró de 6,91 a 14,36 y la puntuación del rango de movilidad, de 2,91 a 4,36 en promedio de los valores preoperatorios y postoperatorios, respectivamente, así como una mejoría del Harris Hip Score de 30 (16-55) a 72 (40-90) en el último control. CONCLUSIÓN: La reconstrucción acetabular con el sistema Cup-Cage es una alternativa válida para la reconstrucción de pérdidas óseas acetabulares masivas (Paprosky tipo IIIA y IIIB) y discontinuidades pélvicas que ofrece buenos resultados a corto y medio plazo

OBJECTIVE: The acetabular reconstruction with massive acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity is a complex surgery with important difficulties for the orthopaedic surgeon. The objective of this study is to show the short and midterm results of the acetabular revision with the Cup-Cage construct in a consecutive serie of cases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospectively we reviewed 22 consecutive patients with massive acetabular defects (8 Paprosky IIIa and 9 IIIB); 5 pelvic discontinuities; 2 pelvic fractures during the implantation of primary artroplasty, and one pelvic pseudoarthrosis. All were reoperated with a trabecular metal acetabular component and a Cup-Cage. We did clinical and radiological follow-up to detect machanical failures and loosening of the implant. RESULTS: With a middle follow-up of 45.06 months (12-73 months) we did not see any radiographic failure of the implant (component migration, osteolysis neither rupture of the implant or screws). The complications (13,63%) included one recurrent luxation, one infection and one recurrent subluxation. The Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score improved from 6.91 to 14.36 and the punctuation in the range of motion from 2.91 to 4.36 on average of the values preoperatively and postoperatively respectively and improvement in Harris Hip Score 30 (16-55) to 72 (40-90) in the latest follow up. CONCLUSION: The acetabular reconstruction with the Cup-Cage system is a valid alternative for the reconstruction of massive acetabular defects (Paprosky type IIIA and IIIB) and pelvic discontinuities offering good results at short and midterm follow-up

Reconstruction for pelvic discontinuity and massive acetabular defects. / Reconstrucción acetabular con el sistema Cup-Cage para discontinuidades pélvicas y defectos acetabulares masivos.

OBJECTIVE: The acetabular reconstruction with massive acetabular defects and pelvic discontinuity is a complex surgery with important difficulties for the orthopaedic surgeon. The objective of this study is to show the short and midterm results of the acetabular revision with the Cup-Cage construct in a consecutive serie of cases. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Retrospectively we reviewed 22 consecutive patients with massive acetabular defects (8 Paprosky IIIa and 9 IIIB); 5 pelvic discontinuities; 2 pelvic fractures during the implantation of primary artroplasty, and one pelvic pseudoarthrosis. All were reoperated with a trabecular metal acetabular component and a Cup-Cage. We did clinical and radiological follow-up to detect machanical failures and loosening of the implant. RESULTS: With a middle follow-up of 45.06 months (12-73 months) we did not see any radiographic failure of the implant (component migration, osteolysis neither rupture of the implant or screws). The complications (13,63%) included one recurrent luxation, one infection and one recurrent subluxation. The Merle d'Aubigné-Postel score improved from 6.91 to 14.36 and the punctuation in the range of motion from 2.91 to 4.36 on average of the values preoperatively and postoperatively respectively and improvement in Harris Hip Score 30 (16-55) to 72 (40-90) in the latest follow up. CONCLUSION: The acetabular reconstruction with the Cup-Cage system is a valid alternative for the reconstruction of massive acetabular defects (Paprosky type IIIA and IIIB) and pelvic discontinuities offering good results at short and midterm follow-up.

Fracture of the femoral component after a lightning strike injury: A case report.

A fracture of the stem in a total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an uncommon complication. We report a case of femoral stem fracture in a 55-year-old male patient after a lightning strike. A revision was conducted using a Wagner osteotomy and a revision prosthesis. Dall-Milles cerclages were used to close the osteotomy. The postoperative evolution was satisfactory, with an immediate partial weight bearing, consolidation of the osteotomy after three months and return to daily activity without pain.

Two-stage revision of hip prosthesis infection using a hip spacer with stabilising proximal cementation.

Two-stage revision hip arthroplasty for infection using an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer has been used frequently with good results. However, spacer instability is also frequent. Proximal cementation of the spacer could avoid spacer dislocation. We retrospectively assessed 35 patients in whom a 2-stage revision hip arthroplasty for infection was carried out using an antibiotic-loaded cement spacer with gentamicin (Spacer-G) in which the spacer was proximally cemented in 16 patients. The mean follow-up was 32 months. We assessed spacer stability and infection elimination. There were 8 spacer dislocations (22.9%), 5 in hips without proximal cementation and 2 in hips with proximal cementation (p>0.05). There was no fracture in any hip. Reinfection occurred in 5 hips (14.3%), in 3 with the same microorganism, while 2 had a different microorganism. Our results indicate that the proximal cementation of the spacer prevents its dislocation. Infection was eliminated in 86% of the hips.