No improvement in long-term wear and revision rates with the second-generation Biomet cup (RingLoc) in young patients: 141 hips followed for median 12 years

Optimising joint reconstruction management in arthritis and bone tumour patient

Uncemented and cemented primary total hip arthroplasty in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register: Evaluation of 170,413 operations

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Since the introduction of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in Sweden, both components have most commonly been cemented. A decade ago the frequency of uncemented fixation started to increase, and this change in practice has continued. We therefore analyzed implant survival of cemented and uncemented THA, and whether the modes of failure differ between the two methods of fixation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All patients registered in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register between 1992 and 2007 who received either totally cemented or totally uncemented THA were identified (n = 170,413). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis with revision of any component, and for any reason, as the endpoints was performed. Cox regression models were used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for revision for various reasons, adjusted for sex, age, and primary diagnosis. RESULTS: Revision-free 10-year survival of uncemented THA was lower than that of cemented THA (85% vs. 94%, p < 0.001). No age or diagnosis groups benefited from the use of uncemented fixation. Cox regression analysis confirmed that uncemented THA had a higher risk of revision for any reason (RR = 1.5, 95% CI: 1.4-1.6) and for aseptic loosening (RR = 1.5, CI: 1.3-1.6). Uncemented cup components had a higher risk of cup revision due to aseptic loosening (RR = 1.8, CI: 1.6-2.0), whereas uncemented stem components had a lower risk of stem revision due to aseptic loosening (RR = 0.4, CI: 0.3-0.5) when compared to cemented components. Uncemented stems were more frequently revised due to periprosthetic fracture during the first 2 postoperative years than cemented stems (RR = 8, CI: 5-14). The 5 most common uncemented cups had no increased risk of revision for any reason when compared with the 5 most commonly used cemented cups (RR = 0.9, CI: 0.6-1.1). There was no significant difference in the risk of revision due to infection between cemented and uncemented THA. INTERPRETATION: Survival of uncemented THA is inferior to that of cemented THA, and this appears to be mainly related to poorer performance of uncemented cups. Uncemented stems perform better than cemented stems; however, unrecognized intraoperative femoral fractures may be an important reason for early failure of uncemented stems. The risk of revision of the most common uncemented cup designs is similar to that of cemented cups, indicating that some of the problems with uncemented cup fixation may have been solved.Open Access - This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the source is credited

Epidemiology of Knee and Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review§

We present a systematic review of epidemiologic studies of Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) and Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA). The studies summarized in this systematic review provide us with estimates of arthroplasty utilization rates, underlying disease frequency and its trends and differences in utilization rates by age, gender and ethnicity among other factors. Among these, many studies are registry-based that assessed utilization rates using data from major orthopedic centers that may provide some understanding of underlying diagnosis and possibly time-trends. Several studies are population-based cross-sectional, which provide estimates of prevalence of TKA and THA. Population-based cohort studies included in this review provide the best estimates of incidence and utilization rates, time-trends and differences in these rates by important patient characteristics (age, gender, ethnicity and others). This article reviews the current published literature in the area and highlights the main findings

The Bimetric cementless total hip replacement: 7–18 year follow-up assessing the influence of acetabular design on survivorship

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mid- to long-term survivorship of Bimetric cementless total hip replacement and assess how it is affected by the acetabular design. This was a retrospective analysis of 127 Bimetric cementless total hip replacements in 110 patients with a follow-up of 7–18 years. A single design stem and three different cementless metal-backed acetabular designs were used. Patients were assessed clinically using the Harris hip score and radiologically by independent review of current hip radiographs. There was only one case of aseptic loosening of the femoral stem. The earliest acetabular design showed a high failure rate whilst the latter two designs showed a 96% survivorship at a mean of 9.5 years. We conclude that a combination of the bimetric stem with either of the latter acetabular cup designs has a good mid- to long-term performance