In patients with primary hip replacement for previous infective arthritis the risk of recurrence of infection is of major concern. In addition, the safe time interval post infective arthritis for p...
Introduction Osteosynthesis to conserve femoral head following neck of femur (NOF) fractures has reported failure rates of 36 to 47% at 2 years. However, the long-term outcomes of THAs performed fo...
Background One of the major concerns of hinge knees have been reported in literature is mechanical failure. Failure in the form of component fracture (2–10%) and hinge dislocation/ failure are worr...
Optimal management of acute patellar dislocation is still a topic of debate. Although, conventionally it has been managed by non-operative measures, recent literature recommends operative treatment to prevent re-dislocations. Our study recommends that results of non-operative measures comparable to that of operative management. Our study is the retrospective with 46 consecutive patients (47 knees) of first time patellar dislocation managed between 2012 and 2014. The study methodology highlighted upon the etiology, mechanism of injury and other characteristics of first time dislocations and also analysed outcomes of conservative management including re-dislocation rates. The duration of follow up ranged from 1 to 4 years. Average age at first-time dislocation was 23 years (Range 10–62 years). Male:Female ratio was 30:17. Twisting injury was the commonest cause. 1 patient required open reduction but all others relocated spontaneously or had successful closed reduction. Medial Patello-Femoral Ligament injury was frequent associated feature. 11 knees (24%) re-dislocated during follow up. Age was the significant risk factor for re-dislocations. All patients with re-dislocation were less than 30 years old. Maximum redislocations happened between 6 months to 1 year after index dislocation. Skeletal abnormality was the commonest pathology in re-dislocators. Only 4 patients (8.6%) finally required surgical intervention. One patient had persistent knee pain as a complication. Conservative management of primary patellar dislocation is successful in majority of patients. Surgery should be reserved for the carefully selected patients with specific indications.
With increasing burden of revision hip arthroplasty, one of the major challenge is the management of bone loss associated with previous multiple surgeries. Proximal femoral replacement (PFR) has already been popularised for tumour surgeries. The inherent advantages of PFR over allograft –prosthesis system, which is the other option for addressing severe bone loss include, early weight bearing and avoidance of non-union and disease transmission. Our study explores PFR as a possible solution for the management of complex hip revisions. Thirty consecutive hips (29 patients) that underwent PFR between January 2009 and December 2015 were reviewed retrospectively for their clinical and radiological outcomes. The Stanmore METS system was used in all these patients. Mean age at the index surgery (PFR) was 72.69 years (range 50–89) with number of previous hip arthroplasties ranging from 1–5. At mean follow up of 32.27 months, there were no peri-prosthetic fractures and no mechanical failure of the implants. Clearance of infection was achieved in 80% of cases. There was 1 early failure due to intra-operative perforation of femoral canal needing further revision and two were revised for deep infection. Instability was noted in 26.7% (8) of the hips, of which, 87.5% (7) needed further revision with constrained sockets. Out of these 8 hips with instability, 5 had pre-operative infection. Deep infection was noted in 20% (6) of the hips, of which, 5 were primarily revised with PFR for septic loosening. However, further surgeries were essential for only 3 patients. One patient has symptomatic aseptic acetabular loosening and 1 had asymptomatic progressive femoral side loosening (lost to follow up). Severe proximal femoral bone loss in complex revision arthroplasties has necessitated the use of PFR prosthesis. Our study supports the fact that PFR is probably a mechanically viable option for complex revisions. Significant numbers of dislocations and infections could be attributed to the poor soft tissue envelope around the hip. Further surgical techniques in the form use of dual mobility cups and silver coated PFR implants need to be explored.
Background One of the major concerns of hinge knees have been reported in literature is mechanical failure. Failure in the form of component fracture (2–10%) and hinge dislocation/ failure are worrisome. In addition, higher risk of aseptic loosening with hinge knee prosthesis has been attributed to stress transfer at bone cement interface. Methods Retrospective review of clinical and radiological results of 71 consecutive patients operated at single centre using Smiles hinge knee (Stanmore implants) between 2010 and 2014. Data was collected till the latest follow up. Mechanical failure due to any reason was considered as primary end point. Radiological evidence of aseptic loosening was considered to be one of the surrogate end points. Results Mean age at revision knee was 65.4 years (range 42 – 84). The number of previous revisions ranged from 1 – 4. Most common indications for revision were infection (n=26) and instability (n=26). Majority of patients had rotating hinge knee (n=66). Average follow-up was 31 months (range 3 – 72). Four patients died during follow-up due to medical reasons. There were no mechanical failures of implants apart from backing out of axle due to failure of circlip in 1 patient. Asymptomatic aseptic loosening of implant on femoral side was noted in 1 patient; however, there were no peri-prosthetic fractures in this series. Three patients had re-revision for infection and one for extensor mechanism subluxation. Conclusion To our knowledge, this is the largest series till date reporting on mechanical outcomes of hinged knee implants for complex revisions. Clip failure is of concern; however there have been no other mechanical failures. Early results are encouraging, with no symptomatic aseptic loosening of implants to report.
Distal femoral replacement is an operation long considered as salvage operation for neoplastic conditions. Outcomes of this procedure for difficult knee revisions with bone loss of distal femur have been sparsely reported.We present the early results of complex revision knee arthroplasty using distal femoral replacement implant, performed for severe osteolysis and bone loss.Retrospective review of clinic and radiological results of 25 consecutive patients operated at single centre between January 2010 and December 2014. All patients had single type of implant. All data was collected till the latest follow up. Re-revision for any reason was considered as primary end point.Mean age at surgery was 72.2 years (range 51 – 85 years). Average number of previous knee replacements was 2.28 (range 1 to 6). Most common indications were infection, aseptic loosening and peri-prosthetic fracture. Average follow up was 24.5 months (range: 3–63 months). 1 patient died 8 months post-op due to unrelated reasons. Re-revisio...
Abstract Introduction Lisfranc injuries form a distinct group of rare but severe injury. Literature suggests a low incidence, but failure to diagnose these injuries early and its subsequent delay in management will affect the patient’s mobility and quality of life significantly. The preferred mode of management is said to be surgical. Conversely, the method of intervention for patients not suitable for surgery is less clear. Aim This study aims to evaluate the effect of delayed diagnosis and the treatment provided on the overall functional outcome for the patients with missed Lisfranc injury. Methodology The study was conducted at a specialist centre in the North-West of UK between January 2011 and November 2016. All patients with acute Lisfranc injuries were included in this study. Patient data was collected through electronic notes and analysed to ascertain missed diagnosis. It was also used to evaluate functional and radiological outcome. Results In our series, 58.8% of Lisfranc injuries were missed on their initial presentation. We report better results for the surgical group when compared with the non-operated group, in spite of the delay in diagnosis. Conclusion We believe that definitive treatment in the form of surgical fixation and anatomical reduction has more influence on the functional outcome than the timing of the surgical fixation in case of subtle Lisfranc injuries.
Optimal management of acute patellar dislocation is still a topic of debate. Although, conventionally it has been managed by non-operative measures, recent literature recommends operative treatment to prevent re-dislocations. Our study recommends that results of non-operative measures comparable to that of operative management.Our study is the retrospective with 46 consecutive patients (47 knees) of first time patellar dislocation managed between 2012 and 2014. The study methodology highlighted upon the etiology, mechanism of injury and other characteristics of first time dislocations and also analysed outcomes of conservative management including re-dislocation rates. The duration of follow up ranged from 1 to 4 years.Average age at first-time dislocation was 23 years (Range 10–62 years). Male:Female ratio was 30:17. Twisting injury was the commonest cause. 1 patient required open reduction but all others relocated spontaneously or had successful closed reduction. Medial Patello-Femoral Ligament injury w...
With increasing burden of revision hip arthroplasty (THA), one of the major challenges is the management of proximal femoral bone loss associated with previous multiple surgeries. Proximal femoral arthroplasty (PFA) has already been popularized for tumour surgeries. Our aim was to describe the outcome of using PFA in these demanding non-neoplastic cases.A retrospective review of 25 patients who underwent PFA for non-neoplastic indications between January 2009 and December 2015 was undertaken. Their clinical and radiological outcome, complication rates, and survival were recorded. All patients had the Stanmore Implant - Modular Endo-prosthetic Tumour System (METS).At mean follow-up of 5.9 years, there were no periprosthetic fractures. Clearance of infection was achieved in 63.6% of cases. One hip was re-revised to pseudo arthroplasty for deep infection. Instability was noted in eight of the hips (32%), of which seven needed further surgery. Out of these eight hips with instability, five had preoperative infection. Deep infection was noted in five of the hips (20%), of which four were primarily revised for infection. One patient had aseptic loosening of the femoral component and awaits revision surgery. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship free of revision of any component for any reason was 72% (95% confidence interval (CI) 51.3% to 92.7%), and for revisions of only femoral component for any reason was 96% (95% CI 86.3% to 105.7%) at five years.Dislocation and infection remain the major cause for failure, particularly in patients with pre-existing infection. The use of dual mobility cups, silver-coated implants, and less aggressive postoperative rehabilitation regimens would possibly aid in the reduction of complications. PFA performed in patients with periprosthetic fracture seem to fair better. This study supports the judicious use of PFA in non-oncological revision hip arthroplasties, and that they be performed by experienced revision arthroplasty surgeons. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(3):229-235.