Search

AimsUp to one in five patients undergoing primary total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA) require contralateral surgery. This is frequently performed as a staged procedure. This study aimed to determine if outcomes, as determined by the Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Knee Score (OKS) differed following second-side surgery.MethodsOver a five-year period all patients who underwent staged bilateral primary THA or TKA utilizing the same type of implants were studied. Eligible patients had both preoperative and one year Oxford scores and had their second procedure completed within a mean (2 SDs) of the primary surgery. Patient demographics, radiographs, and OHS and OKS were analyzed.ResultsA total of 236 patients met the inclusion criteria, of which 122 were THAs and 114 TKAs. The mean age was 66.5 years (SD 9.4), with a 2:1 female:male ratio. THAs showed similar significant improvements in outcomes following first- and second-side surgery, regardless of sex. In contrast for TKAs, although male patients demonstrated the same pattern as the THAs, female TKAs displayed significantly less improvement in both OKS and its pain component following second-side surgery.ConclusionFemale patients undergoing second-side TKA showed less improvement in Oxford and pain scores compared to the first-side. This difference in outcome following second-side surgery did not apply to male patients undergoing TKA, or to either sex undergoing THA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(4):243–254.

Background There are morphologic differences between males and females, which are currently underappreciated during total hip arthroplasty. We sought to assess whether these differences affected surgical process and subsequent outcome. Methods A total of 123 patients (75 females, 48 males) had preoperative and 1-year Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and pain scores recorded. Acetabular height and offset, femoral height and offset, and acetabular floor depth were measured on preoperative and postoperative X-rays and then compared to their normal opposite hip. Discrepancies between the replaced and normal hip X-ray measurements were then correlated with changes (the delta gain) in preoperative and 1-year postoperative OHS and pain scores. Results Postoperatively, females had significantly greater femoral height discrepancy (P = .023) which meant they were lengthened. This led to a reduced delta gain in OHS and pain score at 1 year. Males lost more acetabular offset than females (P = .002), leading to a medialized acetabular center and subsequently reduced delta gain in pain score at 1 year (P = .017). Conclusion Females have a smaller femur leading to a bias toward a conservative (higher) neck cut compared with males and potential for femoral lengthening. Males have a greater acetabular floor depth compared with females and thus reaming to the true floor results in greater loss of acetabular offset. In this series, both scenarios led to reduced improvement in OHS and/or pain scores at 1 year.

Background Restoration of native hip biomechanics is viewed as a key intra-operative goal in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The transverse acetabular ligament (TAL) can aid in the restoration of acetabular height and offset, and a calliper can be utilised to restore femoral height and offset. This study aimed to determine how these techniques affected the incidence of patient perception of limb length discrepancy (LLD), and if restoration of native biomechanics correlated with improved patient outcomes. Methods 123 patients were questioned regarding perception of LLD at 6 weeks and 1 year following THA. Oxford hip score (OHS) and pain scores were recorded. Radiographs were analysed by a blinded clinician who measured three variables; Global hip height (surrogate for limb length), global offset and the combination of both. These measurements were then compared to the unaffected contralateral hip. Data were analysed based on hips that were restored to within ≤±10 mm of native values, and those >±10 mm. Spearman's rank test was used to assess correlation with outcome. Results 8 (6.5%) patients perceived a LLD at 6 weeks, reducing to 3 (2.4%) at 1 year-lower than generally reported. Those patients not restored within ±10 mm of native global height had increased pain at 1 year (r = 0.558, p = 0.047). Those not restored within ±10 mm native global offset had a poorer OHS at 1 year (r = −0.586, p = 0.035) and those patients with combined height and offset discrepancy >±10 mm had both a worse OHS (r = −0.581, p = 0.037) and increased pain (r = 0.783, p = 0.002). Conclusion Patient perception of LLD is complex and relates poorly to radiographic measurement, however, patients not restored to within 10 mm of native hip height and offset have demonstrated poorer outcomes.

The introduction of a stand-alone Bone Bank in our Regional Orthopaedic Hospital has improved the availability of femoral head allograft. Benninger et al. (Bone Joint J 96-B:1307-1311, 2014), demonstrated their institutions bank to be cost effective despite a 30 % discard rate for harvested allograft. We sought to audit our own discard rates and subsequent cost-effectiveness of our bone bank. Donor recruitment. Before approaching a potential donor, our establishment's nurse specialists review their clinical notes and biochemical laboratory results, available on a regional Electronic Care Records. They view femoral head architecture on radiographs against set criteria, Patient Archive and Communication system (SECTRA, Sweden). In total 1383 femoral heads were harvested, 247 were discarded giving an overall rate of 17.9 %. The most common reasons for discard of harvested graft was a positive microbiology/bacteriology result, n = 96 (38.9 %). After a rise in discard rates in 2007, we have steadily reduced our discard rates since 2006/2007 (28.2 %), 2008/2009 (17 %), 2010/2011 (14.8 %), and finally to 10.3 % in 2012/2013. In the current financial year, our cost to harvest, test, store and release a femoral head is £ 610. With a structured donor recruitment process and unique pre-operative radiographic analysis we have successfully reduced our discard rates bi-annually making our bone bank increasingly cost-effective.