Search

Background and purpose -- Joint stability after hip replacement (HR) in patients with metastatic bone disease (MBD) is of special importance. Dislocation is the second leading cause of implant revision in HR, while survival after MBD surgery is poor with an expected 1-year survival of around 40%. As few studies have investigated the dislocation risk across different articulation solutions in MBD, we conducted a retrospective study on primary HR for patients with MBD treated in our department. Patients and methods -- The primary outcome is the 1-year cumulative incidence of dislocation. We included patients with MBD who received HR at our department in 2003-2019. We excluded patients with partial pelvic reconstruction, total femoral replacement, and revision surgery. We assessed the incidence of dislocation with competing risk analysis with death and implant removal as competing risks. Results -- We included 471 patients. Median follow-up was 6.5 months. The patients received 248 regular total hip arthroplasties (THAs), 117 hemiarthroplasties, 70 constrained liners, and 36 dual mobility liners. Major bone resection (MBR), defined as resection below the lesser trochanter, was performed in 63%. The overall 1-year cumulative incidence of dislocation was 6.2% (95% CI 4.0-8.3). Dislocation stratified by articulating surface was 6.9% (CI 3.7-10) for regular THA, 6.8% (CI 2.3-11) for hemiarthroplasty, 2.9% (CI 0.0-6.8) for constrained liner, and 5.6% (CI 0.0-13) for dual mobility liners. There was no significant difference between patients with and without MBR (p = 0.5). Conclusion -- The 1-year cumulative incidence of dislocation is 6.2% in patients with MBD. Further studies are needed to determine any real benefits of specific articulations on the risk of postoperative dislocation in patients with MBD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A correction is presented to the article "Risk of reoperation due to surgical site infection in 74,771 hip fracture patients: a Danish nationwide cohort study" which appeared in the Acta Orthop 2022 issue.

Background and purpose -- Internal fixation (IF) has been the standard procedure for undisplaced femoral neck fractures (FNFs). However, there is a changing trend towards hip replacement (HR). Yet there is a knowledge gap regarding the benefits of this surgical method. We investigated functional outcomes in patients ≥ 70 years following HR compared to IF for undisplaced FNFs. Patients and methods -- Patients ≥ 70 years with undisplaced FNF registered in the Swedish National Hip Fracture Registry (SHR) who underwent either IF or HR (hemiarthroplasty [HA)] or total hip arthroplasty [THA]) were investigated in terms of 1-year survival and proportion of reoperation. In a subsample with 4-month follow-up data (n = 3,623), pain, changes in living status, and physical function were additionally analyzed. Results -- 7,758 patients were included with a mean age of 85 years. 93% of the patients were operated on with IF, 5% with HA, and 2% with THA. Patients with THA more often lived independently and were able to walk outdoors, both before and after the hip fracture. The IF and HA groups were similar in baseline characteristics, and in functional and survival outcomes. The THA group had a 54% lower adjusted risk of 1-year mortality. The proportion of reoperations within 1 year was 9.5% for IF, 5.3% for HA, and 7% for THA. Interpretation -- The pre-fracture difference in health and function between patients operated on with IF, HA, and THA maked it difficult to compare outcomes of the 2 methods. Decision on surgical method must be taken on an individual level, considering patients' well-being and allocation of resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose — In the Netherlands about 40% of hip fractures are treated with a hemiarthroplasty (HA) or a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although these procedures are claimed to have fewer complications than osteosynthesis (i.e., reoperation), complications still occur. Analyses of data from national registries with adequate completeness of revision surgery are important to establish guidelines to diminish the risk for revision. We identified risk factors for revision. Patients and methods — All patients older than 50 years of age with a hip fracture treated with arthroplasty by orthopedic surgeons and registered in the (national) Dutch arthroplasty register (LROI) were included in the study. In this register, patient characteristics and surgical details were prospectively collected. Revision surgery and reasons for revision were evaluated. A proportional hazard ratio model for revision was created using competing risk analysis (with death as competing risk). Results — 1-year revision rate of HA was (cumulative incidence function [CIF] 1.6% (95% CI 1.4-1.8) and THA 2.4% (CI 2.0-2.7). Dislocation was the most common reason for revision in both groups (HA 29%, THA 41%). Male sex, age under 80 years, posterolateral approach, and uncemented stem fixation were risk factors for revision in both THA and HA. THA patients with ASA classification III/IV were revised more often, whereas revision in the HA cohort was performed more often in ASA I/II patients. Interpretation — After arthroplasty of hip fractures, both a posterolateral approach and an uncemented hip stem have higher risks for revision surgery compared with an anterolateral approach and an cemented stem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose - The treatment of patients between 55 and 70 years with displaced intracapsular femoral neck fracture remains controversial. We compared internal fixation (IF), bipolar hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) in terms of mortality, reoperations and patient-reported outcome by using data from the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register. Patients and methods - We included 2,713 patients treated between 2005 and 2012. 1,111 patients were treated with IF, 1,030 with HA and 572 patients with THA. Major reoperations (defined as re-osteosynthesis, secondary arthroplasty, exchange, or removal of prosthesis components and Girdlestone procedure), patient-reported outcome measures (satisfaction, pain, and health-related quality of life (EQ5D) after 4 and 12 months), 1-year mortality, and change in treatment methods over the study period were investigated. Results - Major reoperations occurred in 27% after IF, 3.8% after HA and 2.8% after THA. 549 patients (20% of total study population) answered both questionnaires. Compared with IF, patients treated with THA were more satisfied after 4 and 12 months, reported less pain after 4 months and 12 months, had a higher EQ5D-index score after 4 months and 12 months, and EQ-VAS score after 4 months. Compared with IF, patients treated with HA were more satisfied and reported less pain after 4 months. EQ5D-index and EQ-VAS were similar. Patients treated with HA had higher 1-year mortality and had more comorbidities than both the THA and IF group. All these differences were statistically and clinically significant. Interpretation - This study showed high reoperation rate after IF and better patient-reported outcome after both THA and HA with medium follow-up. Patients selected for HA represented a frailer group than patients treated with THA or IF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and purpose — Femoral neck fractures (FNFs) are commonly treated with some kind of arthroplasty, but evidence on whether to use hemiarthroplasty (HA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) is lacking. HA reduces the risk of dislocation, but may lead to acetabular erosion. THA implies longer surgery and increased bleeding. THA may result in better function and health-related quality of life, but evidence is contradictory. We compared HA and THA and in terms of revision, reoperation and death. Patients and methods — Data were extracted from the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register for 11,253 patients with acute FNF receiving cemented HA or THA during 2008–2012. 2,902 patients with THA were matched by propensity score matching with as many patients with HA based on age, sex, BMI, and ASA classification. We used competing risks survival regression with reoperation or death and revision or death as endpoints. Results — THA patients had significantly reduced risk of revision (absolute risk reduction 0.51; 95% CI 0.39–0.67) and reoperation (0.58; 0.46–0.74). THA was associated with an almost 50% reduced mortality (risk ratio as competing risk for reoperation 0.51; 0.46–0.57). Interpretation — In our national register study of femoral neck fractures, THA had a lower risk than HA for further surgical procedures related to the hip. The reasons for lower mortality after THA are not known. Despite matching, there might be a selection of more healthy patients for this procedure, and other factors unknown to us, with or without relation to the choice of implant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]