Biplane double-supported screw fixation (F-technique): a method of screw fixation at osteoporotic fractures of the femoral neck

The present work introduces a method of screw fixation of femoral neck fractures in the presence of osteoporosis, according to an original concept of the establishment of two supporting points for the implants and their biplane positioning in the femoral neck and head. The provision of two steady supporting points for the implants and the highly increased (obtuse) angle at which they are positioned allow the body weight to be transferred successfully from the head fragment onto the diaphysis, thanks to the strength of the screws, with the patient’s bone quality being of least importance. The position of the screws allows them to slide under stress with a minimal risk of displacement. The method was developed in search of a solution for those patients for whom primary arthroplasty is contraindicated. The method has been analysed in relation to biomechanics and statics. For the first time, a new function is applied to a screw fixation—the implant is presented as a simple beam with an overhanging end

Infection after primary hip arthroplasty: A comparison of 3 Norwegian health registers

Background and purpose: The aim of the present study was to assess incidence of and risk factors for infection after hip arthroplasty in data from 3 national health registries. We investigated differences in risk patterns between surgical site infection (SSI) and revision due to infection after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) and hemiarthroplasty (HA). Materials and methods: This observational study was based on prospective data from 2005–2009 on primary THAs and HAs from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR), the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register (NHFR), and the Norwegian Surveillance System for Healthcare–Associated Infections (NOIS). The Norwegian Patient Register (NPR) was used for evaluation of case reporting. Cox regression analyses were performed with revision due to infection as endpoint for data from the NAR and the NHFR, and with SSI as the endpoint for data from the NOIS. Results: The 1–year incidence of SSI in the NOIS was 3.0% after THA (167/5,540) and 7.3% after HA (103/1,416). The 1–year incidence of revision due to infection was 0.7% for THAs in the NAR (182/24,512) and 1.5% for HAs in the NHFR (128/8,262). Risk factors for SSI after THA were advanced age, ASA class higher than 2, and short duration of surgery. For THA, the risk factors for revision due to infection were male sex, advanced age, ASA class higher than 1, emergency surgery, uncemented fixation, and a National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance (NNIS) risk index of 2 or more. For HAs inserted after fracture, age less than 60 and short duration of surgery were risk factors of revision due to infection. Interpretation: The incidences of SSI and revision due to infection after primary hip replacements in Norway are similar to those in other countries. There may be differences in risk pattern between SSI and revision due to infection after arthroplasty. The risk patterns for revision due to infection appear to be different for HA and THA

Fixation of the fully hydroxyapatite-coated Corail stem implanted due to femoral neck fracture: 38 patients followed for 2 years with RSA and DEXA

Background Today, dislocated femoral neck fractures are commonly treated with a cemented hip arthroplasty. However, cementing of the femoral component may lead to adverse effects and even death. Uncemented stems may lower these risks and hydroxyapatite (HA) coating may enhance integration, but prosthetic stability and clinical outcome in patients with osteoporotic bone have not been fully explored. We therefore studied fixation and clinical outcome in patients who had had a femoral neck fracture and who had received a fully HA-coated stem prosthesis. Patients and methods 50 patients with a dislocated femoral neck fracture were operated with the fully HA-coated Corail total or hemiarthroplasty. 38 patients, mean age 81 (70-96) years, were followed for 24 months with conventional radiographs, RSA, DEXA, and for clinical outcome. Results 31 of the 38 implants moved statistically significantly up to 3 months, mainly distally, mean 2.7 mm (max. 20 mm (SD 4.3)), and rotated into retroversion mean 3.3 (-1.8 to 17) (SD 4.3) and then appeared to stabilize. Distal stem migration was more pronounced if the stem was deemed to be too small. There was no correlation between BMD and stem migration. The migration did not result in any clinically adverse effects. Interpretation The fully hydroxyapatite-coated Corail stem migrates during the first 3 months, but clinical outcome appears to be good, without any adverse events

Statistical analysis of arthroplasty data: II. Guidelines

It is envisaged that guidelines for statistical analysis and presentation of results will improve the quality and value of research. The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) has therefore developed guidelines for the statistical analysis of arthroplasty register data. The guidelines are divided into two parts, one with an introduction and a discussion of the background to the guidelines (Ranstam et al. 2011a, see pages x-y in this issue), and this one with a more technical statistical discussion on how specific problems can be handled. This second part contains (1) recommendations for the interpretation of methods used to calculate survival, (2) recommendations on howto deal with bilateral observations, and (3) a discussion of problems and pitfalls associated with analysis of factors that influence survival or comparisons between outcomes extracted from different hospitals

Inadequate timing of prophylactic antibiotics in orthopedic surgery. We can do better

Background and purpose There are rising concerns about the frequency of infection after arthroplasty surgery. Prophylactic antibiotics are an important part of the preventive measures. As their effect is related to the timing of administration, it is important to follow how the routines with preoperative prophylactic antibiotics are working

The effect of type of femoral component fixation on mortality and morbidity after hip hemiarthroplasty:A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background: Hip hemiarthroplasty is a well-established treatment of displaced femoral neck fracture, although debate exists over whether cemented or uncemented fixation is superior. Uncemented prostheses have typically been used in younger, healthier patients and cemented prostheses in older patients with less-stable bone. Also, earlier research has suggested that bone cement has cytotoxic effects and may trigger cardiovascular and respiratory adverse events. Questions/Purposes: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare morbidity and mortality rates after cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly patients. Methods: Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched seven medical databases for randomized clinical trials and observational studies. We compared cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty using the Harris Hip Score (HHS), as well as measures of postoperative pain, mortality, and complications. Data were extracted and pooled as risk ratios or standardized mean difference with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals in a meta-analysis model. Results: The meta-analysis included 34 studies (12 randomized trials and 22 observational studies), with a total of 42,411 patients. In the pooled estimate, cemented hemiarthroplasty was associated with less risk of postoperative pain than uncemented hemiarthroplasty. There were no significant differences between groups regarding HHS or rates of postoperative mortality, pulmonary embolism, cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, acute cardiac arrhythmia, or deep venous thrombosis. Conclusions: While we found that cemented hemiarthroplasty results in less postoperative pain than uncemented hemiarthroplasty in older patients with femoral neck fracture, the lack of significant differences in functional hip scores, mortality, and complications was surprising. Further high-level research is needed