Mind the gap! The Lucent Line Sign: A Pathognomonic Radiographic Finding in Periprosthetic Hip Fractures Around Cemented Polished Tapered Femoral Stems.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosing minimally displaced femoral PPFs using plain-film radiographs can be challenging. As a result, fractures can be missed. CASE REPORT: We present four cases of minimally displaced PPFs around cemented polished tapered stems. In each case, radiographs demonstrate no clear cortical breach, but the presence of a fracture is highlighted by a pathognomic lucent line between the cement mantle and the prosthesis: The Lucent Line Sign. CONCLUSION: Paying attention to the Lucent Line Sign can be pivotal in the diagnosis of minimally displaced PPFs around cemented polished tapered stems.

B2 or not B2? That is the question: a review of periprosthetic fractures around cemented taper-slip femoral components.

AIMS: Periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) around cemented taper-slip femoral prostheses often result in a femoral component that is loose at the prosthesis-cement interface, but where the cement-bone interface remains well-fixed and bone stock is good. We aim to understand how best to classify and manage these fractures by using a modification of the Vancouver classification. METHODS: We reviewed 87 PPFs. Each was a first episode of fracture around a cemented femoral component, where surgical management consisted of revision surgery. Data regarding initial injury, intraoperative findings, and management were prospectively collected. Patient records and serial radiographs were reviewed to determine fracture classification, whether the bone cement was well fixed (B2W) or loose (B2L), and time to fracture union following treatment. RESULTS: In total, 47 B2W fractures (54.0%) and one B3 fracture (1.1%) had cement that remained well-fixed at the cement-bone interface. These cases were treated with cement-in-cement (CinC) revision arthroplasty. Overall, 43 fractures with follow-up united, and two patients sustained further fractures secondary to nonunion and required further revision surgery. A total of 19 B2L fractures (21.8%) and 19 B3 fractures (21.8%) had cement that was loose at the cement-bone interface. These cases were managed by revision arthroplasty with either cemented or uncemented femoral components, or proximal femoral arthroplasty. One case could not be classified. CONCLUSION: We endorse a modification of the original Vancouver system to include a subclassification of B2 fractures around cemented femoral prostheses to include B2W (where cement is well-fixed to bone) and B2L (where the cement is loose). Fractures around taper-slip design stems are more likely to fracture in a B2W pattern compared to fractures around composite beam design stems which are more likely to fracture in a B2L pattern. B2W fractures can reliably be managed with CinC revision. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):71-78.

The Relative Merits of Cemented and Uncemented Prostheses in Total Hip Arthroplasty.

The results of modern cemented and uncemented total hip arthroplasties are outstanding and both systems have their advantages and disadvantages. This paper aims to examine the designs of different types of prostheses, some history behind their development and the reported results. Particular emphasis is placed on cemented stem design and the details of cementing technique.

Surgical anatomy of the proximal release of the gastrocnemius: a cadaveric study.

BACKGROUND: The importance of isolated gastrocnemius contracture in disorders of the foot and ankle has been established in recent years. The aim of this study was to describe the proximal anatomical approach to the medial and lateral heads of gastrocnemius and to compare the sizes of the medial and lateral heads of the gastrocnemius. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 15 cadaveric extremities were dissected using a posterior approach 1 cm below the level of the skin crease. Proximity of cutaneous nerves and major vessels was noted. The heads of the gastrocnemius were dissected from their origin and the cross sectional anatomy was assessed. RESULTS: Approach to the medial head of gastrocnemius was safe. Conversely the variable anatomy of the nerves in the approach to the lateral head meant that extreme care must be taken if complications are to be avoided. The aponeurosis of the medial head of gastrocnemius was 2.4 times the cross-sectional area compared to the lateral head. CONCLUSION: In this study we describe a safe posterior approach to the medial aponeurosis of the gastrocnemius and also describe the different sizes of the medial and lateral gastrocnemius heads. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We conclude that the approach to the medial head of gastrocnemius is free from neurovascular structures and that release of the medial head alone may be efficacious in the operative treatment of isolated gastrocnemius tightness that has failed non-operative treatment.