Search

Background: Gluteal tendons tears are increasingly being recognised as a cause of recalcitrant trochanteric pain, but there is a paucity of robust studies analysing the type of tears, results and predictors of outcome.Methods: Patients with gluteal tendon tears resistant to conservative treatment who underwent isolated open repair (IR) or total hip arthroplasty and concomitant repair (THA+repair) with a minimum 1-year follow-up were retrospectively assessed separately. Type of tear, surgical approach, and fixation methods were registered. Complications and postoperative outcomes were analysed: visual analogue scale (VAS) of pain, VAS satisfaction, and activity level. Univariate regressions and multivariable models were developed.Results: 90 cases were included: 62 cases underwent IR and 28 cases THA+repair, with an average follow-up of 3.9 years and 2.6 years, respectively. 13 complications were found (n= 5 IR, n= 8 THA+repair), including 9 re-operations (n= 4 IR, n= 5 THA+repair). Mean VAS pain score was 3.02 (SD 2.74) for the IR and 2.32 (SD 2.43) for THA+repair group. Mean VAS satisfaction was 7.09 (SD 3.07) and 7.68 (SD 2.71) for the IR and THA+repair group, respectively. In the IR group 61.4% returned to all pre-injury activities, whereas in the THA+repair group 79% did. Full-thickness tears had higher VAS pain scores (p= 0.0175), and there was trend (p> 0.05) towards higher complications, re-tears and lower VAS satisfaction in this type of tears in both groups. No statistically significant differences were found in outcomes when comparing THA+repair through direct anterior (DAA) with lateral approach (LA).Conclusions: Isolated gluteal tendon repair or THA+repairs seem to be safe procedures with high levels of satisfaction at short- to mid-term follow-up. The presence of a full-thickness tear is a predictor of inferior outcomes.

Introduction: Breakage of the femoral stem component of a total hip replacement is now uncommon but continues to be seen with certain stem designs and in certain patient groups. Data previously published on this topic has been limited, either gathered from a single surgeon or centre, or included only a single stem design.Methods: We reviewed the data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), identified and analysed 143 stem breakages over a period of 16 years, covering 44 different stem designs.Results: Our data confirms previously published findings that risk factors for stem breakage include patient age at implantation of under 70, male gender, as well as the use of exchangeable necks. We found no association with initial diagnosis, or type of acetabular component implanted. We did however also find, excluding exchangeable neck designs, that after 4.5 years a cemented stem had a significantly higher risk of breakage then a cementless stem.Discussion: To our knowledge this is the 1st paper to suggest cemented fixation as a specific risk factor for stem breakage. The analysis of rare complications such as stem breakage is only possible through large data collection systems such as the AOANJRR. Whilst there have been recent advances in materials and manufacturing techniques, we recommend that surgeons are aware of all the specific risks when considering implant choices for individual patients.