Large Femoral Head Research Articles

Short-term outcomes with routine use of size ≥40 femoral heads in THA: A retrospective cohort study

BackgroundUsing larger femoral heads during total hip arthroplasty (THA) may result in a more stable hip. Greater volumetric wear and frictional torque, however, may result in increased postoperative complications. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of patients with femoral head size ≥40 mm compared to those with femoral head size <40 mm. Materials and methodsA retrospective chart review of 504 THAs performed by a single surgeon at a single institution from 2009 to 2016 was conducted. Following exclusions, 131 THAs were identified with femoral heads ≥40 mm and 348 THAs were identified with femoral heads <40 mm. In addition to demographic data, all postoperative complications were recorded. Plain radiographs were used to rule out/in periprosthetic osteolysis and/or acetabular loosening. Chi-square tests and Student's t-tests were used to compare categorical and continuous variables, respectively. ResultsMean follow-up period for the entire cohort was 5.5 years. Complications with ≥40 mm femoral heads included 1 superficial infection and 1 deep periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). There were no cases of dislocation, osteolysis, acetabular loosening, or trunnionosis. In contrast, complications with <40 mm femoral heads included 9 dislocations and 7 PJIs. ConclusionThe routine use of large femoral heads (≥40-mm) during THA appears to be a safe option for patients at short-term clinical follow-up. Notably, 0 patients had a clinical course complicated by dislocation, osteolysis, acetabular loosening, or trunnionosis. Level of evidenceLevel III Retrospective Cohort Study.

10-Year Cumulative Incidence and Indications for Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty for Patients Who Have Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome

BackgroundLong-term complications following total joint arthroplasty are not well established for patients who have Ehlers-Danlos syndrome (EDS), a group of connective tissue disorders. This study compared 10-year incidence of revision surgery after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients who have and do not have EDS. MethodsA retrospective cohort analysis was conducted using a national all-payer claims database from 2010 to 2021 to identify patients who underwent primary TKA or THA. Patients who had and did not have EDS were propensity score–matched by age, sex, and a comorbidity index. Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional hazard models were used to determine the cumulative incidence and risks of revision experienced by patients who have and do not have EDS. ResultsThe EDS patients who underwent TKA had a higher risk of all-cause revision (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.50, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.09 to 2.07, P < .014) and risk of revision due to instability (HR = 2.49, 95% CI: 1.37 to 4.52, P < .003). The EDS patients who underwent THA had a higher risk of all-cause revision (HR = 2.32, 95% CI: 1.47 to 3.65, P < .001), revision due to instability (HR = 4.26, 95% CI: 2.17 to 8.36, P < .001), and mechanical loosening (HR = 3.63, 95% CI: 2.05 to 6.44, P < .001). ConclusionsPatients who had EDS were found to have a higher incidence of revision within 10 years of undergoing TKA and THA compared to matched controls, especially for instability. Patients who have EDS should be counseled accordingly. Surgical technique and implant selection should include consideration for increased constraint in TKA and larger femoral heads or dual mobility articulations for THA.

Decreased Instability in High-Risk (Hip–Spine 2B) Patients After Modifications of Surgical Planning and Technique

BackgroundPatients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) who have spinal deformity and a stiff spine are the highest-risk group for instability. Despite the increasing use of dual-mobility cups and large femoral heads, dislocation remains a major complication after THA. Preoperative planning becomes a critical aspect of ensuring precise component positioning within a safe zone. The purpose of this study was to investigate dislocation rates over a 9-year period. MethodsA retrospective review of 4,731 THAs performed by 3 orthopaedic surgeons between January 2014 and March 2023 was performed. Spinopelvic measurements were conducted to determine the hip–spine classification group for each patient. Only patients classified as 2B (pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis > 10° and Δsacral slope < 10°) were eligible. Both absolute and relative dislocation frequencies were then analyzed using time-series analysis techniques and Fisher’s exact tests. ResultsA total of 281 hip–spine 2B patients undergoing primary THA were eligible for analysis (57% women; mean age, range: 66 years, 23 to 87; mean body mass index, range: 28, 16 to 45). The overall dislocation rate was 4.3%. Use of femoral head sizes ≥ 40 mm increased from 4% in 2014 to 2019 to 37% in 2020 to 2023 (P < .001), while the use of dual-mobility cups decreased from 100% in 2014 to 2019 to 37% in 2020 to 2023 (P < .001). Acetabular component planning was changed from the supine plane to the standing plane in February 2020. Those changes in surgical practice were notably correlated with a significant decrease in dislocation rates from 6.8% in 2014 to 2019 to 1.5% in 2020 to 2023 (P = .03). ConclusionsOur study demonstrates that the introduction of advanced preoperative THA planning to the standing plane, coupled with precise intraoperative technology for implant placement, can significantly reduce the risk of instability in high-risk THA patients. Notably, we observed a significant decrease in dislocation rates, which aligned with the shift in surgical practice. Level of EvidenceIV.

High femoral offset as a risk factor for aseptic femoral component loosening in cementless primary total hip arthroplasty

PurposeLateralized stems in primary cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) showed to be associated with aseptic femoral loosening. However, femoral head length also affects femoral offset but was not considered so far. This study analyzed the impact of high femoral offset (hFO) combinations, formed by lateralized stems or large femoral head lengths, on aseptic femoral component loosening.MethodsRetrospective cohort study was performed including all patients that underwent primary cementless THA at our institution between July 2004 and December 2016. Patients were screened for aseptic femoral component loosening and grouped in aseptic loosening (AL) and non-aseptic loosening (nAL) group. Medical records were screened; implant details were noted and classified in hFO and standard femoral offset (sFO) combinations. Supposed risk factors for aseptic loosening were analyzed.ResultsTwo thousand four hundred fifty-nine THA could be included, containing 14 THA (0.6%) with aseptic femoral component loosening. The AL group contained 11 hFO combinations (78.6%), whereas in the nAL group, 1315 hFO combinations (53.8%) were used. Subgroup analysis showed significant difference between two groups for hFO combinations (p = 0.014), age (p = 0.002), NSAR (p = 0.001), and bilateral THA on same day (p = 0.001). The multiple logistic regression analysis showed that hFO combination was the only variable for increased probability of aseptic loosening (OR, 3.7; p = 0.04).ConclusionHigh femoral offset combinations, formed by lateralized stems or large femoral head lengths in our collective of standard straight stems implanted by an anterior approach, show a 3.7-fold increased probability for aseptic femoral component loosening. Adjustment of the postoperative protocol may be considered in these cases to ensure proper stem ingrowth.

Cage Augmentation of the Retained Acetabular Shell with a Dual Mobility Cup using the Double Socket Technique

Introduction: Prevention of dislocation after total hip arthroplasty (THA) remains a topic of debate. There are various surgical options to manage hip instability such as large femoral heads, and constrained liners, although the best option to tackle this is still controversial. In revision scenarios with previous well-fixed acetabulum shells, the cementation of polyethylene liners or the cementation of dual mobility (DM) into a well-fixed acetabulum shell (Double Socket Technique) has been documented before. Here, we report a case of re-revision THA, where we have used the Double Socket Technique of retaining the previous well-fixed acetabular shell with the cementation of the DM cup along with an anti-protrusio cage inside the socket. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first such a case to be reported worldwide. Case Report: A 54-year-old male who underwent THA in 1990 and an acetabulum cup revision in 2003 presented to us with right hip pain. Radiographs showed Paprosky Type 3A femoral bone loss and polyethylene wear. Intraoperatively after removing the polyethylene liner, the acetabulum shell was found to be well fixed and therefore retained. To increase stability, an anti-protrusio cage was inserted over it and a DM cup was cemented onto it (double socket). The femoral stem was revised using Wagner stem and encerclage wires and a hook plate was used to stabilize the osteotomy site. Conclusion: This technique is a reliable option and helps shorten the surgical time and reduce the bone loss that can occur in extracting a well-fixed acetabulum shell. The use of a DM cup decreases the chances of instability compared to the cementation of polyethylene liners and decreases the high failure rate associated with the use of cementation of constrained liners. The addition of an anti-protrusio cage in addition to the Double Socket Technique increases the stability of the construct. Keywords: Anti-protrusio cage, Dual mobility, Double socket, Revision total hip arthroplasty, Well-fixed acetabulum

Safety of using a large femoral head on thin polyethylene for total hip arthroplasty based on different types of polyethylene

The use of a large femoral head in total hip arthroplasty (THA) to stabilize and reduce the incidence of dislocation is on the increase, but concerns arise when combining them with small acetabular components due to potential mechanical failures in thin polyethylene (PE) liners. A single-institution, retrospective cohort study was conducted on 116 patients with minimum 2-year follow-up who received 36-mm femoral heads and acetabular components ≤ 52 mm, using either remelted highly cross-linked polyethylene (remelted HXLPE) or vitamin E-infused HXLPE (VEPE). Osteolysis and implant loosening were not observed in either group. Although a fracture of the PE liner was observed in each group (1.7%), the clinical outcomes were excellent, as the mean modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS) at the last follow-up was 93.5. Moreover, the mean linear wear rates measured by digital imaging software in both groups were low, with 0.035 mm/y in remelted HXLPE and 0.030 mm/y in VEPE. In conclusion, The use of a large femoral head on a thin PE liner can be a viable treatment option in patients who need to prioritize stability; however, careful attention should be paid to mechanical fractures of the PE liner.

GO BIG OR GO HOME! LOWER RISK OF REVISION WITH BIGGER FEMORAL HEADS IN PRIMARY TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: A COMPARATIVE SINGLE-CENTRE STUDY (10,104 HIPS)

AbstractObjectivesTotal hip replacement (THR) is one of the most successful and cost-effective interventions in orthopaedic surgery. Dislocation is a debilitating complication of THR and managing an unstable THR constitutes a significant clinical challenge. Stability in THR is multifactorial and is influenced by surgical, patient and implant related factors. It is established that larger diameter femoral heads have a wider impingement-free range of movement and an increase in jump distance, both of which are relevant in reducing the risk of dislocation. However, they can generate higher frictional torque which has led to concerns related to increased wear and loosening. Furthermore, the potential for taper corrosion or trunnionosis is also a potential concern with larger femoral heads, particularly those made from cobalt-chrome. These concerns have meant there is hesitancy among surgeons to use larger sized heads. This study presents the comparison of clinical outcomes for different head sizes (28mm, 32mm and 36mm) in primary THR for 10,104 hips in a single centre.MethodsA retrospective study of all consecutive patients who underwent primary THR at our institution between 1st April 2003 and 31st Dec 2019 was undertaken. Institutional approval for this study was obtained. Demographic and surgical data were collected. The primary outcome measures were all-cause revision, revision for dislocation, and all-cause revision excluding dislocation. Continuous descriptive statistics used means, median values, ranges, and 95% confidence intervals where appropriate. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to estimate time to revision. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis was used to compare revision rates between the femoral head size groups. Adjustments were made for age at surgery, gender, primary diagnosis, ASA score, articulation type, and fixation method.Results10,104 primary THRs were included; median age 68.6 years with 61.5% females. A posterior approach was performed in 71.6%. There were 3,295 hips with 28 mm heads (32.6%), 4,858 (48.1%) with 32 mm heads and 1,951 (19.3%) with 36 mm heads. Overall rate of revision was 1.7% with the lowest rate recorded for the 36mm group (2.7% vs. 1.3% vs. 1.1%). Cox regression analysis showed a decreased risk of all-cause revision for 32mm &amp; 36mm head sizes as compared to 28mm; this was statistically significant for the 32mm group (p = 0.01). Risk of revision for dislocation was significantly reduced in both 32mm (p = 0.03) and 36mm (p = 0.03) head sizes. Analysis of all cause revision excluding dislocation showed no significant differences between head sizes.ConclusionThere was a significantly reduced risk of revision for all causes, but particularly revision for dislocation with larger head sizes (36mm &amp; 32mm vs. 28mm). Concerns regarding increased risk of early revision for aseptic loosening, polyethylene wear or taper corrosion with larger heads appear to be unfounded in this cohort of 10,104 patients with a mean of 6.0-year follow-up.Declaration of Interest(b) declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported:I declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.

Limb and hip morphology of two African colobine monkeys and its relationship to the mechanics of leaping and bounding locomotion.

Although a bounding gait is practiced by a diversity of animals, the morphological characteristics, kinematics, and energetics associated with this locomotor form remain poorly understood. This study focuses on the locomotor anatomy of two species of African colobine monkeys (Piliocolobus badius, a leaper, and Colobus polykomos, a leaper-bounder) in an effort to assess if bounding should be considered a unique primate locomotor category or is better viewed as a behavior on a leaping continuum. A total of 53 femora, 28 humeri, and 45 ossa coxae from the two species provide comparative morphological data. Free-body models of bounding and leaping are presented to characterize loading conditions. Species differences in morphometric traits are evaluated via parametric and nonparametric tests (i.e., analysis of variance, resampling). C. polykomos exhibits traits that align more closely with putative leaping specializations when compared to P. badius (e.g., large femoral head, long femur, low femoral neck angle), while also possessing certain traits that are not (e.g., long femoral neck and reduced relative femoral robusticity). Consequently, C. polykomos likely experiences absolutely greater joint forces at the hip and higher bending at the femoral neck both when it leaps and bounds, given equivalent accelerations in bounding and leaping. Bounding is best described as a form of low-acceleration leaping. If bounding has lower acceleration requirements relative to leaping, C. polykomos achieves locomotor competence with less energy, relatively smaller bending moments, and reduced joint forces.

Large Femoral Heads With Small Acetabular Components: An Examination of 10-Year Polyethylene Wear.

Highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) has improved polyethylene (PE) wear rates while decreasing osteolysis and aseptic loosening. However, concerns exist regarding the risk of mechanical failure with thin HXLPE liners in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Our purpose was to evaluate long-term outcomes and PE wear rates in primary THAs pairing large femoral heads with small acetabular components and thin HXLPE liners. We retrospectively reviewed 29 patients who underwent 33 primary THAs using large femoral heads (32 or 36 mm) with small acetabular components (48 or 50 mm) and thin HXLPE liners (3.9 or 5.9 mm) at minimum 10-year follow-up. PE liner wear was measured using a validated radiographic technique. Mean age was 66 years, 97% of the patients were women, and mean body mass index was 26.3 kg/m2. Thirty hips (90.9%) had ceramic femoral heads, and 13 hips (39%) had 36-mm femoral heads with 3.9-mm HXLPE liners. All cases used a neutral PE design. Mean linear wear rate and volumetric wear rate were 0.04 mm/year and 39.6 mm3/year, respectively, at mean 10.9-year follow-up. There were no instances of liner fracture, liner dissociation, or revision. Mean Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement (HOOS, JR) was 92.1. In the largest long-term study of primary THAs using large femoral heads with small acetabular components and thin HXLPE liners, we found low linear and volumetric wear rates and no cases of liner mechanical failures. Thin HXLPE liners are a safe and viable option for THA surgeons. [Orthopedics. 2024;47(2):118-122.].

MONOBLOC DUAL MOBILITY CUP VERSUS LARGE FEMORAL HEADS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF 1,940 CONSECUTIVE PRIMARY TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTIES

The benefit of dual mobility cup (DMC) for primary total hip arthroplasties (THA) is still controversial. This study aimed to compare 1) the complications rate, 2) the revisions rate, 3) the survival rate after monobloc DMC compared to large femoral heads (LFH) in primary THA.Between 2010 and 2019, 2,075 primary THA using cementless DMC or LFH were included. Indications for DMC were patients older than 70 years old or with high risk of dislocation. Every other patient received a LFH. Exclusion criteria were cemented implants, femoral neck fracture, a follow-up of less than one year. 1,940 THA were analyzed: 1,149 DMC (59.2%), 791 LFH (40.8%). The mean age was 73 ±9.2 years old in DMC group and 57 ±12 in LFH group. The complications and the revisions have been assessed retrospectively.The mean follow-up was 41.9 months ±14 [12–134]. There were significantly fewer dislocations in DMC group (n=2; 0.17%) compared to LFH group (n=8; 1%) (p=0.019). The femoral head size had no impact on the dislocations rate in LFH group (p=0.70). The overall complication rate in DMC (n=59; 5.1%) and LFH (n=53; 6.7%) were not statistically different (p=0.21). No specific complication was attributed to the DMC. In DMC group, 18 THA (1.6%) were revised versus 15 THA in LFH group (1.9%) (p= 0.71). There was no statistical difference for any cause of revisions in both groups. The cup aseptic revision-free survival rates at 5 years were 98% in DMC group and 97.3% in LFH group (p=0.78).Monobloc DMC had a lower risk of dislocation in a high-risk population than LFH in a low-risk population at the mid-term follow-up. There was no significant risk of specific complications or revisions for DMC in a large cohort. Monobloc DMC can be safely used in a selected high-risk population.

OUTCOMES OF ISOLATED HEAD AND LINER EXCHANGE USING LARGE FEMORAL HEADS AND MODERN LINERS IN REVISION TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY

Previous reports on the outcomes of isolated head and liner exchange in revision total hip arthroplasty have found high rates of instability following these surgeries. Most reports have studied constructs using ≤28mm femoral heads. The purpose of this study was to determine if modern techniques with the use of larger head sizes can improve the rate of instability after head and liner exchange.We identified 138 hips in 132 patients who underwent isolated head and liner exchange for polyethylene wear/osteolysis (57%), acute infection (27%), metallosis (13%), or other (2%). All patients underwent revision with either 32mm (23%), 36mm (62%), or 40mm (15%) diameter heads. Crosslinked polyethylene was used in all revisions. Lipped and/or offset liners were used in 104 (75%) hips. Average follow up was 3.5 (1.0–9.1) years. Statistical analyses were performed with significance set at p&lt;0.05.Revision-free survivorship for any cause was 94.6% and for aseptic causes was 98.2% at 5 years. 11 (8%) hips experienced a complication with 7 (5%) hips requiring additional revision surgery. Following revision, 4 (3%) hips experienced dislocation, 5 (4%) hips experienced infection, and 1 (1%) hip was revised for trunnionosis. No demographic or surgical factors significantly affected outcomes.Our study shows that isolated head and liner exchange using large femoral heads and modern liners provides for better stability than previous reports. The most common complication was infection. We did not identify specific patient, surgical or implant factors that reduced the risk of instability or other complication.

FEWER SUBSEQUENT REVISIONS WITH MODULAR DUAL-MOBILITY CONSTRUCTS THAN LARGE FEMORAL HEADS IN REVISION TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTIES AT TEN YEARS

There is a paucity of mid-term data on modular dual-mobility (MDM) constructs versus large (≥40 mm) femoral heads (LFH) in revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs). The purpose of this study was to update our prior series at 10 years, with specific emphasis on survivorships free of re-revision for dislocation, any re-revision, and dislocation.We identified 300 revision THAs performed at a single tertiary care academic institution from 2011 to 2014. Aseptic loosening of the acetabular component (n=65), dislocation (n=59), and reimplantation as part of a two-stage exchange protocol (n=57) were the most common reasons for index revision. Dual-mobility constructs were used in 124 cases, and LFH were used in 176 cases. Mean age was 66 years, mean BMI was 31 kg/m2, and 45% were female. Mean follow-up was 7 years.The 10-year survivorship free of re-revision for dislocation was 97% in the MDM cohort and 91% in the LFH cohort with a significantly increased risk of re-revision for dislocation in the LFH cohort (HR 5.2; p=0.03). The 10-year survivorship free of any re-revision was 90% in the MDM cohort and 84% in the LFH cohort with a significantly increased risk of any re-revision in the LFH cohort (HR 2.5; p=0.04). The 10-year survivorship free of any dislocation was 92% in the MDM cohort and 87% in the LFH cohort. There was a trend towards an increased risk of any dislocation in the LFH cohort (HR 2.3; p=0.06).In this head-to-head comparison, revision THAs using MDM constructs had a significantly lower risk of re-revision for dislocation compared to LFH at 10 years. In addition, there was a trend towards lower risk of any dislocation.Level of Evidence: IV

FEMORAL HEAD SIZE DOES NOT INFLUENCE METAL ION LEVELS AFTER METAL-ON-POLYETHYLENE TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY: A FIVE-YEAR REPORT FROM A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

In metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) THA large femoral metal heads are designed to increase stability and to reduce dislocation risk. The increased head size could lead to increased taper corrosion with the release of metal ions and adverse reactions. Using blood ion measurements, we aimed to investigate the association between femoral head size and metal-ion release after MoP THA.96 patients were enrolled at two centers and randomized to receive either a 32-mm metal head or a 36–44 mm metal head (the largest possible fitting the thinnest available polyethylene insert). Blood metal ions and PROMs (OHS, UCLA) were measured at two- and five-year follow-ups.Both 2- and 5-year median chrome, cobalt, and titanium levels were below taper corrosion indicative ion levels. At 5 years, median chrome, cobalt, and titanium levels were 0.5 μg/L (0.50–0.62), 0.24 μg/L (0.18–0.30), and 1.16 μg/L (1.0–1.68) for the 32-mm group, and 0.5 μg/L (0.5–0.54), 0.23 μg/L (0.17–0.39), and 1.30 μg/L (1–2.05) for the 36–44 mm group, with no difference between groups (p=0.825, p=1.000, p=0.558). At 2 years, 7 (32-mm) versus 4 (36–44-mm) patients had elevated ions. At 5 years, 6 (32-mm) versus 7 (36–44-mm) patients had elevated ions. There was no difference in either OHS (p=0.665) or UCLA (p=0.831) between patients with or without elevated blood metal ions.5 years after the insertion of MoP THAs, we found no differences in the blood metal ion levels between 32 mm heads and 36–44 mm heads and no corrosion-related revisions. As taper corrosion can debut after 5 years, there is still a need for long-term follow-up studies on the association between head size and corrosion in MoP THA.

DUAL MOBILITY CUP CEMENTED INTO POROUS TRABECULAR METAL SHELL DURING REVISION TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY

Revision total hip arthroplasty (RTHA) is a challenging procedure when we speak about acetabular defects and recurrent instability. There are multiple reasons like the number of previous revisions, implant position, bone quality, patient characteristics and etc. Managing acetabular defects with porous trabecular metal augments has excellent survivorship, but when addressing instability, there are some unsolved issues. Management options include the use of large femoral heads, constrained acetabular liners, and dual mobility cups (DMC). These cups have increased jump distance and reduced likelihood of dislocation while not relying on locking mechanisms, therefore are the preferred option in RTHA. We present single-center series of 13 patients undergoing revision THA with a specific DMC cemented into a newly implanted or well-fixed trabecular metal (TM) revision shell. All patients underwent cementation of a single specific cemented DMC design (Novae Stick, SERF, Decines, France) in a Trabecular Metal Revision Shell (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN, US). The mean follow-up is 15,2 months, and there were no dislocations of the implanted DM cups. The mean HHS improved significantly from 35.9 (range 15–80) preoperatively to 80.1 (range 64-93) postoperatively (p = 0.001). The results of this small clinical series demonstrate that cementing a DMC in a well-fixed TM revision shell leads to no dislocation or dissociation of the cement interface and acetabular construct loosening in the short term.

Dual-Mobility versus Large Femoral Heads in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Interim Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial

BackgroundThis multicenter randomized controlled trial evaluated if dual-mobility bearings (DM) lower the risk of dislocation compared to large femoral heads (≥36 mm) for patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) via a posterior approach. MethodsA total of 146 patients were randomized to a DM (n = 76; 46 mm median effective head size, range 36 to 59 mm) or a large femoral head (n = 70; twenty-five 36 mm heads [35.7%], forty-one 40 mm heads [58.6%], and four 44 mm heads [5.7%]). There were 71 single-component revisions (48.6%), 39 both-component revisions (26.7%), 24 reimplantations of THA after 2-stage revision (16.4%), seven isolated head and liner exchanges (4.8%), four conversions of hemiarthroplasty (2.7%), and 1 revision of a hip resurfacing (0.7%). Power analysis determined that 161 patients were required in each group to lower the dislocation rate from 8.4 to 2.2% (power = 0.8, alpha = 0.05). ResultsAt a mean of 18.2 months (range, 1.4 to 48.2), there were three dislocations in the large femoral head group compared to two in the DM cohort (4.3 versus 2.6%; P = .67). One patient in the large head group and none in the DM group were successfully treated with closed reduction without subsequent revision. ConclusionInterim analysis of this randomized controlled trial found no difference in the risk of dislocation between DM and large femoral heads in revision THA, although the rate of dislocation was lower than anticipated and continued follow-up is needed.

Large Femoral Heads and Select Dual-Mobility Bearings Are Associated With Reduced Instability in Contemporary Posterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundPostoperative dislocation is considered the main drawback of posterior approach total hip arthroplasty (THA). Thinner highly cross-linked polyethylene and dual-mobility bearings allow maximizing femoral head diameter per a given cup size. This study evaluated dislocation rates as large femoral head bearings were introduced into a practice over an 11-year period. MethodsA total of 1,511 consecutive primary THAs were retrospectively reviewed. Demographics, implant sizes, femoral head-acetabular cup ratio, and dislocation status were collected from the electronic medical record. Data were evaluated using time series analysis techniques as larger femoral heads, thinner polyethylene liners, and dual-mobility bearings were introduced. The cohort was 57% women with mean age and body mass index of 62 years (range, 13 to 93) and 31 kg/m2 (range, 13 to 54), respectively. ResultsThe overall dislocation rate was 0.98%. Use of femoral head sizes ≥ 40 millimeters increased from 4% in the years 2010 to 2016 to 51% in the years 2017 to 2021, correlating with a 50% reduction in dislocation rate from 1.4% to 0.7% (P = .279). Also, no dislocations occurred in patients who had dual-mobility bearings or ≥ 40-millimeter femoral heads (P = .007). Twelve of 14 dislocations occurred in cases with head-cup ratio < 0.7 (P = .013). Thirteen of 14 dislocations were in women (P = .005). ConclusionMaximizing the femoral head diameter per given cup size correlated with a decrease in dislocation rate in modern posterior approach THA. Furthermore, these results suggest that dual-mobility articulations should be reserved for high-risk patients or patients in whom a 40-millimeter femoral head is not possible. Level of EvidenceIV–consecutive case series; no control group.

Natural history and genetic spectrum of the Turkish metaphyseal dysplasia cohort, including rare types caused by biallelic COL10A1, COL2A1, and LBR variants.

Metaphyseal chondrodysplasias are a heterogeneous group of diseases characterized by short and bowed long bones and metaphyseal abnormality. The aim of this study is to investigate the genetic etiology and prognostic findings in patients with metaphyseal dysplasia. Twenty-four Turkish patients were included in this study and 13 of them were followed for 2-21years. COL10A1, RMRP sequencing and whole exome sequencing were performed. Results: Seven heterozygous pathogenic variants in COL10A1 were detected in 17 patients with Schmid type metaphyseal chondrodysplasia(MCDS). The phenotype was more severe in patients with heterozygous missense variants (one in signal peptide domain at the N-terminus of the protein, the other, class-1 group mutation at NC1 domain) compared to the patients with truncating variants. Short stature and coxa vara deformity appeared after 3 and 5years of age, respectively, while large femoral head resolved after the age of 13years in MCDS group. Interestingly, one patient with severe phenotype also had a biallelic missense variant in NC1 domain of COL10A1. Three patients with biallelic mutations in RMRP had prenatal onset short stature with short limb, and typical findings of cartilage hair hypoplasia (CHH). While immunodeficiency or recurrent infections were not observed, resistant congenital anemia was detected in one. Biallelic mutation in LBR was described in a patient with prenatal onset short stature, short and curved limb and metaphyseal abnormalities. Unlike previously reported patients, this patient had ectodermal findings, similar to CHH. A biallelic COL2A1 mutation was also found in the patient with lower limb deformities and metaphyseal involvement without vertebral and epiphyseal changes. Long-term clinical characteristics are presented in a metaphyseal dysplasia cohort, including rare types caused by biallelic COL10A1, COL2A1, and LBR variants. We also point out that the domains where mutations on COL10A1 take place are important in the genotype-phenotype relationship.

The Effect of Large Femoral Heads and Acetabular Cup Position on PROMs after Modern Posterior Approach THA

Introduction: Use of large femoral heads (≥40mm) in total hip arthroplasty (THA) decreases postoperative dislocation by increasing impingement-free range of motion, however, may leave patients more susceptible to groin pain.Also, limited data exist for the effect of large femoral heads and acetabular cup position on modern patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of large femoral heads (≥40mm) and acetabular cup position on PROMs after primary THA.&#x0D; Methods: 328 primary THAs performed by a single surgeon were retrospectively reviewed.Acetabular cup inclination and anteversion were measured using Martell Hip Analysis Suite software. Femoral head and acetabular cup sizes were recorded from the electronic medical record. Prospectively collected PROMs (and covariates) related to activity level, satisfaction, and overall hip health were evaluated.&#x0D; Results: Age, covariates related to PROMs, and acetabular cup position did not differ between ≥40mm and &lt;40mm femoral head groups (p≥0.177).The ≥40mm head group had significantly higher mean BMI and proportion of males (p≤0.022).UCLA Activity level and satisfaction scores did not differ preoperatively or postoperatively at 4-months or minimum 1-year follow-up between femoral head groups (p≥0.209 ). Preoperative HOOS JR scores did not differ by femoral head groups (p=0.538).At 4-months, mean HOOS JR score was significantly higher in the ≥40mm head group compared to the &lt;40mm head group (p=0.027); however, both groups achieved similar mean HOOS JR scores by minimum 1-year follow-up (p=0.956). HOOS JR score &gt;90 and being ‘very satisfied or satisfied’ correlated with wide ranges and several combinations of acetabular cup inclination and anteversion.&#x0D; Conclusion: Patients achieved comparable PROMs regardless of femoral head size suggesting large femoral heads may not leave patients susceptible to groin pain in addition to reducing the risk of postoperative dislocation. Excellent patient outcomes correlated with wide ranges of acetabular cup position.

Hip Abduction Can Be Considered the Sole Posterior Precaution Strategy to Lower the Rate of Impingement After Posterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty With Large Femoral Head: A Computer Simulation Study

BackgroundStudies suggest that posterior hip precautions are unnecessary after total hip arthroplasty; however, many surgeons and patients choose to follow these precautions to some extent. In this study, we hypothesized that 20° of hip abduction would be sufficient to prevent impingement and dislocation in motions requiring hip flexion when using larger prosthetic heads (≥36 mm) when the acetabular implant is placed within a reasonable orientation (anteversion:15-25° and inclination: 40-60°). MethodsUsing a robotic hip platform, we investigated the effect of hip abduction on prosthetic and bony impingement in 43 patients. For the flexed seated position, anterior pelvic tilt angles of 10 and 20° were chosen, while anterior pelvic tilt angles of 70 and 90° were chosen for the bending forward position. An additional 10° of hip external rotation and 10 or 20° of hip internal rotation were also added to the simulation. One hip received a 32-mm head; otherwise, 36-, 40-mm, or dual-mobility heads were used. The study power was 0.99, and the effect size was 0.644. ResultsIn 65% of the cases, bone-bone impingement between the calcar and anterior-inferior iliac spine was the main type of impingement. The absolute risk of impingement decreased between 0 and 16.3% in both tested positions with the addition of 20° hip abduction. ConclusionWith modern primary total hip arthroplasty stems (low neck diameter) and an overall acceptable cup anteversion angle, small degrees of hip abduction may be the only posterior hip precaution strategy required to lower the risk of dislocation among patients. Future studies can potentially investigate the concept of personalized hip precautions based on preoperative computer simulations, utilized implants, hip-spine relations, and final implant orientation.

Thin highly cross-linked polyethylene liners combined with large femoral heads in primary total hip arthroplasty show excellent survival and low wear rates at a mean follow-up of 12.8 years.

Several short- and mid-term studies have shown minimal liner wear of highly cross-linked polyethylene (HXLPE) in total hip arthroplasty (THA), but the safety of using thinner HXLPE liners to maximize femoral head size remains uncertain. The objective of this study was to analyze clinical survival and radiological wear rates of patients with HXLPE liners, a 36 mm femoral head, and a small acetabular component with a minimum of ten years' follow-up. We retrospectively identified 55 patients who underwent primary THA performed at a single centre, using HXLPE liners with 36 mm cobalt-chrome heads in acetabular components with an outer diameter of 52 mm or smaller. Patient demographic details, implant details, death, and all-cause revisions were recorded. Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival was used to determine all-cause and liner-specific revision. Of these 55 patients, 22 had a minimum radiological follow-up of seven years and were assessed radiologically for linear and volumetric wear. Overall survival rate for all-cause revision was 94.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 81.7% to 97.2%) at a mean follow-up of 12.8 years (10.9 to 18.7). Three patients were revised, none for liner wear, fracture, or dissociation. A total of 22 patients were included in the radiological analysis (mean follow-up 9.9 years (7.5 to 13.7)). Mean linear liner wear was 0.085 mm (95% CI -0.086 to 0.257) and the volumetric wear rate was 11.097 mm3/year (95% CI -6.5 to 28.7). Using HXLPE liners with 36 mm heads in 52 mm acetabular components or smaller is safe, with excellent survival and low rates of linear and volumetric wear at medium-term follow-up. Patients did not require revision surgery for liner complications such as fracture, dissociation, or wear. Our results suggest that the advantages of using larger heads outweigh the potential risks of using thin HXLPE liners.Cite this article: Bone Joint J2023;105-B(1):29-34.