Cemented vs cementless stems for revision arthroplasties due to Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fracture.

PURPOSE: According to Vancouver classification, B2 type fractures are most often treated with removal of the loose stem and implantation of a long stem that bypasses the fracture site. However, there is a controversy about the stem fixation that should be used: cemented or cementless. Hence, this study aims to compare cemented and cementless stems in prosthetic revision due to Vancouver B2 (VB2) periprosthetic hip fracture. METHODS: A retrospective study was done including all the patients treated with stem exchange due to VB2 periprosthetic hip fracture in a tertiary hospital between 2015 and 2022. Patients were divided into two groups according to the stem fixation used: cemented or cementless. Functional outcomes, hospital stay, surgical time, complication rate, and mortality were compared between the two groups of patients. RESULTS: Of the 30 included patients, 13 (43.4%) were treated with cementless stems and 17 (56.7%) with cemented stems. There were no statistically significant differences in age, gender, anesthesia risk scale (ASA) or functional capacity prior to the intervention. Patients treated with cementless stems had a higher complication and reintervention rate than those treated with cemented stems: 62 and 45% versus 34 and 6% (p = 0.035; p = 0.010), respectively. Furthermore, in the group of cementless stems a higher proportion of non-union was found (53.8% vs. 17.6%; p = 0.037). Also, the hospital stay (33 vs. 24 days; p = 0.037) and the time to full weight-bearing (21 days vs. 9 days; p < 0.001) were longer in the cementless stem group. CONCLUSION: Cemented fixation in stem revision due to Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fracture could be an optimal option with faster recovery which could decrease the rate of complications and reintervention, without compromising the fracture healing and patient mortality. Thus, this option can be considered when an anatomical reduction can be obtained, especially in elderly patients with multiple comorbidities in which a less aggressive surgical option should be considered.

Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fractures treatment: fix or replace? A retrospective study comparing both techniques.

INTRODUCTION: Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fractures involve stem stability and they have been classically treated with revision surgery. Crucial factors such as age, clinical comorbidities and functional status are often neglected. The current study aims to compare clinical outcomes between patients treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) or femoral stem exchange. METHODS: This is a retrospective study that includes all Vancouver B2 periprosthetic hip fractures in a tertiary referral hospital from 2016 to 2020. Patients were divided into two groups: Group 1. Patients treated with an ORIF and Group 2. Patients treated with stem replacement. The outcomes that were compared between groups included demographic data, functional capacity, complications and mortality. RESULTS: 29 periprosthetic Vancouver B2 fractures were finally analyzed. 11 (37.9%) were treated with ORIF (Group 1) and 18 (62.1%) by stem replacement (Group 2). Surgery time (143 vs. 160 min), hemoglobin drop (1.8 vs. 2.5 g/dL) and hospital stance (25.5 vs. 29.6 days) were shorter in Group 1. According to complications, 18.2% of patients in the ORIF group had orthopedic complications compared with 44.4% in the revision group. In the revision group, 3 cases needed a two-stage revision and one of these revisions ended up with a resection arthroplasty (Girdlestone). The first-year mortality rate was 27% in Group 1 and 11% in Group 2. DISCUSSION: ORIF treatment seems to be a less aggressive and complex procedure which can lead to a faster general recovery. Revision surgery can imply a higher risk of orthopedic complications which can be severe and may require further aggressive solutions. The ORIF group mortality was similar to the proximal femur fracture rate (20-30%). In conclusion, ORIF treatment seems to be a good option especially in fragile patients with low functional demand when anatomical reduction is possible.

Fused hip conversion to total hip arthroplasty with the direct anterior approach: surgical technique on a regular surgical table under fluoroscopic guidance.

PURPOSE: Conversion of a fused hip to a total hip arthroplasty (THA) is technically challenging due to the loss of anatomical references. Here, a reproducible technique using the direct anterior approach (DAA) with a regular surgical table under fluoroscopic guidance is described, which has several advantages over traditional such as lateral or posterior approaches. METHODS: There were reported 11 cases of ankylosis hip that were converted to THA using the same surgical technique protocol. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were recorded at 3.2 years of follow-up. A detailed preoperative evaluation was performed, including a pelvis radiological evaluation and magnetic resonance image (MRI) to assess the integrity of the periarticular soft tissue and flexor muscles. RESULTS: The DAA has considerable advantages, such as allowing more precise targeting during surgery, avoiding the risk of pseudoarthrosis due to the absence of a trochanteric osteotomy, preserving the abductors, and allowing an easier-to-use of intraoperative fluoroscopy due to the supine position. Besides, the use of a standard table reduces surgical time and allows assessment of limb length, hip stability, and impingement in all planes in an intraoperative dynamic range, which decreases postoperative complications. CONCLUSION: Conversion from hip fusion to THA is a rare and complex procedure. The use of DAA with a standard table and fluoroscopy helps to avoid high complications since it allows a dynamic intra-operative examination of the range of motion to rule out impingements, reduces the risk of dislocation, and allows leg lengthening verification.

Should we employ preoperative templating in hip hemiarthroplasty after femoral neck fracture? A nested case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Dislocation following hip hemiarthroplasty is a serious complication. It remains unclear if acetabular morphology is associated with a higher risk of dislocation. The aim of our study was to investigate whether there are differences in hip morphology radiological parameters between patients who have suffered a dislocation episode, and those who have not suffered a dislocation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between January 2015 and December 2018, a nested case-control study was performed. From 707 patients who underwent hip hemiarthroplasty because of femoral neck fracture, 50 patients (50 hips) suffered an episode of dislocation. They were randomly matched with 94 patients (100 hips) without dislocation (ratio 1:2). Clinical data regarding demographics, medical comorbidities and surgical and radiological parameters were studied. RESULTS: Statistically significantly smaller lateral centre-edge angle (LCEA) and femoral offset (FO) and greater Tönnis angle were found in the dislocation group. No differences in acetabular angle were seen. Neurological impairment prevalence was statistically significantly higher in patients who suffered a dislocation (60% vs. 44%, p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: The current study suggests that a smaller LCEA and FO, a greater TA, and neurological impairment could be related to a higher risk of hip hemiarthroplasty dislocation after femoral neck fracture in the elderly. We consider that preoperative templating could be helpful in identifying abnormal parameters and carefully planning surgery could lead to changes in treatment strategy, such as choosing a dual-mobility total hip arthroplasty.

Direct anterior approach provides better functional outcomes when compared to direct lateral approach in hip hemiarthroplasty following femoral neck fracture.

PURPOSE: This study aims to compare the differences between direct anterior approach (DAA) and direct lateral approach (DLA) in hip hemiarthroplasty (HHA) after displaced femoral neck fracture (FNF) in early functional outcome, hospital length of stay, morbidity and mortality rates. METHODS: This non-interventional retrospective study, carried out at a tertiary trauma centre within the Spanish National Health System, included all patients who underwent a bipolar HHA between 1st January 2018 and 31st December 2019 performed by 2 of our hip unit surgeons. RESULTS: A total of 94 patients were included (40 in DAA group and 54 in DLA group). Median follow-up was 19.2 months (range 8-30.8 months). Postoperative degree of mobilisation showed statistically significant differences in favour of DAA group, where 35% of patients were able to walk with no assistance after surgery. DAA group had 1 day less of hospitalisation in contrast with DLA group overall (8 days vs 9 days, respectively, p < 0.05). Statistically significant differences were not detected in comparing postoperative complications, re-operations rates or 6-months mortality rate. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights the benefits of DAA for HHA after displaced FNF in terms of postoperative mobilisation degree and hospitalisation length of stay when compared to DLA.

Can we trust combined anteversion and Lewinnek safe zone to avoid hip prosthesis dislocation?

INTRODUCTION: Dislocation is one of the most common complications after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Combined anteversion (CA) is currently considered one of the most important measures of stability for THA. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the association between a correct CA after THA and hip prosthesis dislocation, and to analyze the reliability of the Lewinnek safe zone parameters. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a non-interventional retrospective study, carried out at a tertiary hospital in Spain. 2489 primary THA in 2147 patients between January 2008 and December 2014 were identified. Clinical, biological and radiographic data, including cup inclination and cup and femoral anteversion, were analyzed of all patients who developed a hip prosthesis dislocation. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients met the eligibility criteria to be analyzed. In 73.5% (25/34) of cases, acetabular anteversion (AV) was correct, with a mean AV of 15.1° ± 9.4°. Femoral anteversion (FA) was considered correct only in 38.2% (13/34) of the dislocated THA, with a mean FA of 8.4° ± 17.2°. Sixteen of these 34 patients (47.0%) presented a correct CA, with a mean CA of 24.2° ± 21.0°. Nineteen hips (55.8%) were within the Lewinnek safe zone. Moreover, eleven patients (32.3%) developed a dislocation even though components were within the Lewinnek safe zone and presented a correct CA. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that even when the THA components are positioned within a correct CA and in the Lewinnek safe zone, hip prosthesis dislocations can occur in a not inconsiderable percentage of the cases. Thus, further radiological and clinical analysis should be done to identify potential reasons for hip prosthesis dislocation.

Simultaneous bilateral dual mobility total hip arthroplasty dislocation in a patient with hepatic encephalopathy: A case report.

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE: Dislocation is a severe complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA). It is one of the most common reasons for failure and revision surgery. This is the first case of a documented simultaneous bilateral dual mobility (DM) THA dislocation. CASE PRESENTATION: A forty-nine-year-old man presented with bilateral hip pain, immobility and deformity. X-ray images demonstrated simultaneous bilateral posterior THA dislocation. Previously, the patient had presented atraumatic dislocations recurrently. When he was thoroughly re-interrogated, he complained of uncontrolled and generalized muscle contractions, which were compatible with myoclonus due to hepatic encephalopathy (HE). Multidisciplinary treatment was performed satisfactorily to control myoclonus symptomatology and to prevent dislocation. CLINICAL DISCUSSION: Patient's most important risk factor was a neuromuscular disorder, which we initially gave little notice and undervalued. HE is a serious but reversible syndrome, observed in patients with liver dysfunction. It leads to a wide spectrum of neuropsychiatric abnormalities. Management is based on prevention of episodes, avoiding the underlying triggers. Due to the high risk for dislocation of our patient, we decided to use DM cups bilaterally. This system has demonstrated lower rates of dislocation. CONCLUSION: This case report reminds us that a careful evaluation through meticulous history and physical examination are mandatory when faced with recurrent instability. Furthermore, prevention of dislocation is vastly preferable to treating this challenging complication. High-risk patients should be identified, and appropriate surgical approach, technique and implants have to be collectively used to reach a strategy that mitigates and ideally prevents dislocation.