The journey to preventing dislocation after total hip arthroplasty : how did we get here?

Incidence, treatment, and outcomes of modern dual-mobility intraprosthetic dissociations

Aims

Dual-mobility (DM) components are increasingly used to prevent and treat dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Intraprosthetic dissociation (IPD) is a rare complication of DM that is believed to have decreased with contemporary implants. This study aimed to report incidence, treatment, and outcomes of contemporary DM IPD.

Methods

A total of 1,453 DM components were implanted at a single academic institution between January 2010 and December 2021: 695 in primary and 758 in revision THA. Of these, 49 presented with a dislocation of the large DM head and five presented with an IPD. At the time of closed reduction of the large DM dislocation, six additional IPDs occurred. The mean age was 64 years (SD 9.6), 54.5% were female (n = 6), and mean follow-up was 4.2 years (SD 1.8). Of the 11 IPDs, seven had a history of instability, five had abductor insufficiency, four had prior lumbar fusion, and two were conversions for failed fracture management.

Results

The incidence of IPD was 0.76%. Of the 11 IPDs, ten were missed either at presentation or after attempted reduction. All ten patients with a missed IPD were discharged with a presumed reduction. The mean time from IPD to surgical treatment was three weeks (0 to 23). One patient died after IPD prior to revision. Of the ten remaining hips with IPD, the DM head was exchanged in two, four underwent acetabular revision with DM exchange, and four were revised to a constrained liner. Of these, five (50%) underwent reoperation at a mean 1.8 years (SD 0.73), including one additional acetabular revision. No patients who underwent initial acetabular revision for IPD treatment required subsequent reoperation.

Conclusion

The overall rate of IPD was low at 0.76%. It is essential to identify an IPD on radiographs as the majority were missed at presentation or after iatrogenic dissociation. Surgeons should consider acetabular revision for IPD to allow conversion to a larger DM head, and take care to remove impinging structures that may increase the risk of subsequent failure.

Does Surgical Approach Affect Dislocation Rate After Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients Who Have Prior Lumbar Spinal Fusion? A Retrospective Analysis of 16,223 Cases

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal fusion (LSF) is a risk factor for dislocation following total hip arthroplasty (THA). The effect of the surgical approach on this association has not been investigated. This study examined the association between the surgical approach and dislocation following THA in patients who had prior LSF.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 16,223 primary elective THAs at our institution from June 2011 to September 2022. Patients who had LSF prior to THA were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes. Patients were stratified by LSF history, surgical approach, and intraoperative robot or navigation use to compare dislocation rates. There were 8,962 (55.2%) posterior, 5,971 (36.8%) anterior, and 1,290 (8.0%) laterally based THAs. Prior LSF was identified in 323 patients (2.0%). Binary logistic regressions were used to assess the association of patient factors with dislocation risk.

RESULTS

There were 177 dislocations identified in total (1.1%). In nonadjusted analyses, the dislocation rate was significantly higher following the posterior approach among all patients (P = .003). Prior LSF was associated with a significantly higher dislocation rate in all patients (P < .001) and within the posterior (P < .001), but not the anterior approach (P = .514) subgroups. Multivariate regressions demonstrated anterior (OR [odds ratio] = 0.64, 95% CI [confidence interval] 0.45 to 0.91, P = .013), and laterally based (OR = 0.42, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.96, P = .039) approaches were associated with decreased dislocation risk, whereas prior LSF (OR = 4.28, 95% CI 2.38 to 7.69, P < .001) was associated with increased dislocation risk. Intraoperative technology utilization was not significantly associated with dislocation in the multivariate regressions (OR = 0.72, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.06, P = .095).

CONCLUSIONS

The current study confirmed that LSF is a significant risk factor for dislocation following THA; however, anterior and laterally based approaches may mitigate dislocation risk in this population. In multivariate analyses, including surgical approach, LSF, and several perioperative variables, intraoperative technology utilization was not found to be significantly associated with dislocation risk.

The effect of intraoperative fluoroscopy on acetabular component positioning and patient anatomy restoration during posterior or posterolateral approach total hip arthroplasty: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Positioning implant components and restoring patient anatomy during total hip arthroplasty (THA) are essential for joint stability, polyethylene liner wear, and range of motion. Previous studies comparing intraoperative fluoroscopy with no fluoroscopy during the posterior or posterolateral approach have reported conflicting results. This meta-analysis evaluated if intraoperative fluoroscopy improves component positioning and femoral component position compared to no fluoroscopy during posterior or posterolateral approach total hip arthroplasty.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses standards were followed when conducting the systematic review. We searched Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, Cochrane Library, Highwire, CBM, CNKI, VIP, and Wanfang database in May 2023 to identify studies involving Intraoperative fluoroscopy versus no fluoroscopy during posterior or posterolateral approach total hip arthroplasty. Finally, we identified 1133 patients (1145 hips) assessed in seven studies.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in terms of acetabular cup inclination angle (ACIA, P = 0.43), ACIA within safe zone rate (P = 0.58), acetabular cup anteversion angle (ACAA, P = 0.46); ACAA within safe zone rate (P = 0.72), Combined safe zone rate (P = 0.28), dislocation rate (P = 0.64) and infection rate (P = 0.94) between two groups. Compared with the no fluoroscopy group, the intraoperative fluoroscopy group had more operation time (P < 0.00001), less femoral component offset difference (FCOD, P = 0.03), and less LLD (P < 0.00001).

CONCLUSION

Even though intraoperative fluoroscopy was not related to an improvement in cup location or dislocation incidence. Our findings demonstrate that the restoration of leg lengths and femoral offset can be significantly improved by using intraoperative fluoroscopy to supplement good surgical skills in THA. The advantages of intraoperative fluoroscopy might become more apparent for surgeons with less experience. To ascertain whether intraoperative fluoroscopy for posterior or posterolateral approach total hip arthroplasty will have clinical benefits and improve the survival of prostheses, more well-powered and well-designed long-term follow-up studies were necessary.

Dual-Mobility Acetabular Components in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty Do Not Increase the Risk of Complication Compared to Conventional Articulations: A Matched Cohort Comparative Analysis

Background

A recent National Joint Registry report suggests a higher local complication risk for dual-mobility (DM) total hip arthroplasty (THA) compared to conventional articulation THA. This report may be subject to data heterogeneity with multiple confounders. Controlling for these factors by matching demographic characteristics may give different results. We aim to compare 2-year local complication rates between matched DM and conventional THAs in primary hip osteoarthritis.

Methods

Data were collected for consecutive primary THAs undertaken via a posterior approach. The conventional articulation and DM cohorts were matched 3:1 for age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiology grade, body mass index, and operative time using a propensity score and nearest neighbor matching method. Outcome measures were 2-year local complication rates, reoperation rates, systemic complication rates, and mortality rates. Demographic and outcome data were compared, and cumulative survival rates (%) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier methodology with a 2-year local complication as the endpoint. Statistical significance was set at P < .05.

Results

Four hundred twelve THAs were included: 309 conventional and 103 DM articulations. There were no statistically significant differences between DM and conventional articulation THAs for local complications (7 [6.8%] vs 23 [7.4%], P = .820), reoperations (3 [2.9%] vs 4 [1.3%], P = .374), systemic complications (3 [2.9%] vs 4 [1.3%], P = .374), or 90-day mortality (1 [1%] vs 2 [0.6%], P = 1.000). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis demonstrated similar 2-year survival rates for conventional THAs compared to DM THAs (93.3% [standard error, 0.014] vs 91.9% [standard error, 0.031], P = .906).

Conclusions

This matched study shows that there is no difference in local complication rates between DM and conventional THA articulations.

Unrepaired Trochanteric Bursae as a Risk Factor for Deep Gluteal Syndrome After Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The trochanteric bursae are often left unrepaired after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and they retract posteriorly over the muscle belly of the piriformis. Deep gluteal syndrome (DGS) is a multifactorial condition presenting as buttock pain and is attributed to nondiscogenic sciatic nerve irritation or impingement causes. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between bursal repair and incidence of DGS in patients undergoing THA.

METHODS

This prospective randomized trial included patients treated with a THA between January and December 2022 for a diagnosis of primary osteoarthritis. Patients were randomized into 2 groups: group 1 underwent a routine bursal repair, while group 2 did not, leaving the bursae unrepaired. Follow-up was performed on the 15th, 30th, and 90th day postoperatively with clinical scores, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. In this cohort of 104 patients, mean age was 55 years (range, 26 to 88). Demographic variables as well as range of motion and overall clinical results showed no significant difference between the groups.

RESULTS

DGS rates were significantly more common in the patients who had an unrepaired bursa (group 2) both on the 30th and 90th postoperative days, while comparison of lateral trochanteric pain on palpation showed similar results between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

DGS is common in individuals who have unrepaired trochanteric bursal tissue following a THA. Despite its higher frequency, these symptoms did not have a substantial impact on the overall clinical scores, which remained consistent across the study groups.

The Frank Stinchfield Award: Assembly and Dissociation Forces Differ Between Commonly Used Dual Mobility Implants: A Biomechanical Study

BACKGROUND

Intraprosthetic dissociation (IPD) is a complication unique to dual mobility (DM) implants where the outer polyethylene head dissociates from the inner femoral head. Increasing reports of IPD at the time of closed reduction of large head DM dislocations prompted this biomechanical study evaluating the assembly and dissociation forces of DM heads.

METHODS

We tested 17 polyethylene DM heads from 5 vendors. Of the heads, 12 were highly cross-linked polyethylene (4 vendors) and 5 were infused with vitamin E (2 vendors). Heads were between 46 and 47 mm in diameter, accepting a 28 mm-inner ceramic head. Implants were assembled and disassembled using a servohydraulic machine that recorded the forces and torques applied during testing. Dissociation was tested via both axial pull-out and lever-out techniques, where lever-out simulated stem-on-acetabular component impingement.

RESULTS

The initial maximum assembly force was significantly different between all vendors (P < .01) and decreased for all implants with subsequent assembly. Vendor 4-E (Link with vitamin E) heads required the highest assembly force (1,831.9 ± 81.95 N), followed by Vendor 3 (Smith & Nephew), Vendor 5 (DePuy Synthes), Vendor 1-E (Zimmer Biomet with vitamin E), Vendor 2 (Stryker), and Vendor 1 (Zimmer Biomet Arcom). Vendor 4-E implants showed the greatest dissociation resistance in both pull-out (2,059.89 N, n = 1) and lever-out (38.95 ± 2.79 Nm) tests. Vendor 1-E implants with vitamin E required higher assembly force, dissociation force, and energy than Vendor 1 heads without vitamin E.

CONCLUSIONS

There were notable differences in DM assembly and dissociation forces between implants. Diminishing force was required for assembly with each additional trial across vendors. Vendor 4-E DM heads required the highest assembly and dissociation forces. Vitamin E appeared to increase the assembly and dissociation forces. Based on these results, DM polyethylene heads should not be reimplanted after dissociation, and there may be a role for establishing a minimum dissociation energy standard to minimize IPD risk.

The True Dislocation Incidence following Elective Total Hip Replacement in Sweden: How Does It Relate to the Revision Rate?

(1) Background: The true dislocation incidence following THA is difficult to ascertain in population-based cohorts. In this study, we explored the cumulative dislocation incidence (CDI), the relationship between the incidence of dislocation and revision surgery, patient- and surgery-related factors in patients dislocating once or multiple times, and differences between patients being revised for dislocation or not. (2) Methods: We designed an observational longitudinal cohort study linking registers. All patients with a full dataset who underwent an elective unilateral THA between 1999 and 2014 were included. The CDI and the time from the index THA to the first dislocation or to revision were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier (KM) method, giving cumulative dislocation and revision incidences at different time points. (3) Results: 136,810 patients undergoing elective unilateral THA were available for the analysis. The 30-day CDI was estimated at 0.9% (0.9-1.0). The revision rate for dislocation throughout the study period remained much lower. A total of 51.2% (CI 49.6-52.8) suffered a further dislocation within 1 year. Only 10.9% of the patients with a dislocation within the first year postoperatively underwent a revision for dislocation. (4) Discussion: The CDI after elective THA was expectedly considerably higher than the revision incidence. Further studies investigating differences between single and multiple dislocators and the criteria by which patients are offered revision surgery following dislocation are urgently needed.

Perioperative safety and efficacy of robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty in ERAS-managed patients: a pilot study

AIMS

Robot-assisted total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) boasts superior accuracy in implant placement, but there is a lack of effective assessment in perioperative management in the context of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). This study aimed to compare the effectiveness and safety of rTHA versus conventional total hip arthroplasty (cTHA) in ERAS-managed patients.

METHODS

In this prospective trial, a total of 60 eligible patients aged between 18 and 80 years were randomly divided into two groups to undergo either rTHA or cTHA. The primary outcomes included blood loss parameters. Secondary outcomes were the duration of the operation, surgical time, WOMAC pain score, WOMAC stiffness score, WOMAC physical function score, Harris score, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The study cohort analyzed 59 eligible participants, 30 of whom underwent rTHA and 29 of whom underwent cTHA. Analysis could not be conducted for one patient due to severe anemia. Notably, the cTHA group had a significantly shorter surgical time than the rTHA group (69.49 ± 18.97 vs. 104.20 ± 19.63 min, P < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between the rTHA and cTHA groups for blood loss parameters, including total blood loss (1280.30 ± 404.01 vs. 1094.86 ± 494.39 ml, P = 0.137) and drainage volume (154.35 ± 121.50 vs. 159.13 ± 135.04 ml, P = 0.900), as well as intraoperative blood loss (126.67 ± 38.80 vs. 118.52 ± 60.68 ml, P = 0.544) and hidden blood loss (982.43 ± 438.83 vs. 784.00 ± 580.96 ml, P = 0.206). Only one patient in the cTHA group required allogeneic blood transfusion. At 3 months postoperatively, both groups showed improvements in WOMAC pain score, WOMAC stiffness score, WOMAC physical function score, and Harris score, with no significant differences found between the two groups. Few complications were reported in both groups without significant differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the longer surgical time, rTHA did not negatively affect blood loss, pain, or functional recovery or lead to an increased risk of complications in ERAS-managed patients, suggesting that rTHA can be safely and effectively incorporated into an ERAS program for primary THA.