A study comparing the primary stability of two uncemented, modular titanium femoral stems

As the annual incidence of revision total hip replacement (THR) rises so too do the technical, biomechanical and socioeconomic challenges it presents. This thesis investigated many of the key clinical and pre-clinical aspects of this surgery. Improving implant stability was addressed through biomechanical analyses and the cost and complications of revision THR were explored. The biomechanical investigation compared two designs of tapered, fluted, modular, titanium-alloy stems. The Redapt® stem featured a novel flute configuration and chamfered tip. It was hypothesised that this would improve axial and rotational stability compared to the Modular Restoration® control stem. Each stem was implanted into one of 7 matched pairs of human cadaveric femora with simulated proximal bony defects. A photoelastic coating compared surface strains in the medial femoral cortex for the intact and operated femora. Under incremental static loads each operated bone showed marked stress-shielding with a statistically significant reduction in strain. This effect was diminished with the Redapt® stem because of reduced distal endosteal contact (‘fill’) as confirmed by radiographic analysis. Primary stability was measured using micromotion transducers and radiostereometric analysis. Under cyclical loading both stems were stable by agreed standards at x1 body weight. As load increased 85% of the Redapt stems remained stable compared to 100% of the Restoration (p=0.055). Overall transducer recorded axial subsidence was 0.1 mm for the Redapt and 0.17 mm for the Restoration. Both stems achieved results commensurate with their expected successful application in revision cases with extensive bony defects. Clinical and financial data was collected from 305 consecutive revision THRs between 1999-2008 performed at our institution. Analysis revealed a large variation in costs by indication from £10893 (SD £5476) for dislocation to £21937 (SD £10965) for septic revisions. A large shortfall in reimbursement was found questioning the ability of smaller units to continue providing this service

A systematic review of the evidence for single stage and two stage revision of infected knee replacement

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic infection about the knee is a devastating complication that may affect between 1% and 5% of knee replacement. With over 79 000 knee replacements being implanted each year in the UK, periprosthetic infection (PJI) is set to become an important burden of disease and cost to the healthcare economy. One of the important controversies in treatment of PJI is whether a single stage revision operation is superior to a two-stage procedure. This study sought to systematically evaluate the published evidence to determine which technique had lowest reinfection rates. METHODS: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases with the aim to identify existing studies that present the outcomes of each surgical technique. Reinfection rate was the primary outcome measure. Studies of specific subsets of patients such as resistant organisms were excluded. RESULTS: 63 studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria. The majority of which (58) were reports of two-stage revision. Reinfection rated varied between 0% and 41% in two-stage studies, and 0% and 11% in single stage studies. No clinical trials were identified and the majority of studies were observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence for both one-stage and two-stage revision is largely of low quality. The evidence basis for two-stage revision is significantly larger, and further work into direct comparison between the two techniques should be undertaken as a priority

Re-Infection Outcomes following One- and Two-Stage Surgical Revision of Infected Hip Prosthesis:A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The two-stage revision strategy has been claimed as being the "gold standard" for treating prosthetic joint infection. The one-stage revision strategy remains an attractive alternative option; however, its effectiveness in comparison to the two-stage strategy remains uncertain.To compare the effectiveness of one- and two-stage revision strategies in treating prosthetic hip infection, using re-infection as an outcome.Systematic review and meta-analysis.MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, manual search of bibliographies to March 2015, and email contact with investigators.Cohort studies (prospective or retrospective) conducted in generally unselected patients with prosthetic hip infection treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision and with re-infection outcomes reported within two years of revision. No clinical trials were identified.Data were extracted by two independent investigators and a consensus was reached with involvement of a third. Rates of re-infection from 38 one-stage studies (2,536 participants) and 60 two-stage studies (3,288 participants) were aggregated using random-effect models after arcsine transformation, and were grouped by study and population level characteristics.In one-stage studies, the rate (95% confidence intervals) of re-infection was 8.2% (6.0-10.8). The corresponding re-infection rate after two-stage revision was 7.9% (6.2-9.7). Re-infection rates remained generally similar when grouped by several study and population level characteristics. There was no strong evidence of publication bias among contributing studies.Evidence from aggregate published data suggest similar re-infection rates after one- or two-stage revision among unselected patients. More detailed analyses under a broader range of circumstances and exploration of other sources of heterogeneity will require collaborative pooling of individual participant data.PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015016559

A systematic review of Vancouver B2 and B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures

Aims The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of Vancouver type B2 and B3 fractures by performing a systematic review of the methods of surgical treatment which have been reported. Materials and Methods A systematic search was performed in Ovid MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. For inclusion, studies required a minimum of ten patients with a Vancouver type B2 and/or ten patients with a Vancouver type B3 fracture, a minimum mean follow-up of two years and outcomes which were matched to the type of fracture. Studies were also required to report the rate of re-operation as an outcome measure. The protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database. Results A total of 22 studies were included based on the eligibility criteria, including 343 B2 fractures and 167 B3 fractures. The mean follow-up ranged from 32 months to 74 months. Of 343 Vancouver B2 fractures, the treatment in 298 (86.8%) involved revision arthroplasty and 45 (12.6%) were treated with internal fixation alone. A total of 37 patients (12.4%) treated with revision arthroplasty and six (13.3%) treated by internal fixation only underwent further re-operation. Of 167 Vancouver B3 fractures, the treatment in 160 (95.8%) involved revision arthroplasty and eight (4.8%) were treated with internal fixation without revision. A total of 23 patients (14.4%) treated with revision arthroplasty and two (28.6%) treated only with internal fixation required re-operation. Conclusion A significant proportion, particularly of B2 fractures, were treated without revision of the stem. These were associated with a higher rate of re-operation. The treatment of B3 fractures without revision of the stem resulted in a high rate of re-operation. This demonstrates the importance of careful evaluation and accurate characterisation of the fracture at the time of presentation to ensure the correct management. There is a need for improvement in the reporting of data in case series recording the outcome of the surgical treatment of periprosthetic fractures. We have suggested a minimum dataset to improve the quality of data in studies dealing with these fractures