The classification and management of aseptic loosening of total hip arthroplasty remains a distinct challenge to the modern orthopaedic surgeon. The aim of this study was to assess the inter-observer and intra-observer reliability of commonly used classification systems for the assessment of bone stock loss in revision hip surgery. Radiographs of 23 femoral and 32 acetabular components in 30 patients were assessed using the Paprosky, AAOS and Endo-Klinik classification systems. A novel classification system was introduced and also used to assess the radiographs. Assessment was undertaken by 3 surgeons on 2 separate occasions and the inter- and intra- observer reliability calculated. The novel classification system showed a good to very good intra-observer reliability for both femoral and acetabular components (0.77-1.0; p<0.001), performing better than the other systems assessed. The novel femoral system demonstrated moderate to good inter-observer agreement (0.46-0.73), performing as well as the Paprosky (0.63-0.80) and AAOS (0.63-0.68) femoral systems. The novel acetabular system demonstrated fair to moderate inter-observer reliability (0.35-0.51) performing better than the AAOS acetabular classification (0.07-0.10) and as well as the Paprosky acetabular classification system (0.59-0.60). We propose this novel system as an alternative method for assessing bone stock loss in revision hip surgery.

One-stage and two-stage revision strategies are the two main options for treating established chronic peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the hip; however, there is uncertainty regarding which is the best treatment option. We aimed to compare the risk of re-infection between the two revision strategies using pooled individual participant data (IPD). Observational cohort studies with PJI of the hip treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision and reporting re-infection outcomes were retrieved by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform; as well as email contact with investigators. We analysed IPD of 1856 participants with PJI of the hip from 44 cohorts across four continents. The primary outcome was re-infection (recurrence of infection by the same organism(s) and/or re-infection with a new organism(s)). Hazard ratios (HRs) for re-infection were calculated using Cox proportional frailty hazards models. After a median follow-up of 3.7 years, 222 re-infections were recorded. Re-infection rates per 1000 person-years of follow-up were 16.8 (95% CI 13.6–20.7) and 32.3 (95% CI 27.3–38.3) for one-stage and two-stage strategies respectively. The age- and sex-adjusted HR of re-infection for two-stage revision was 1.70 (0.58–5.00) when compared with one-stage revision. The association remained consistently absent after further adjustment for potential confounders. The HRs did not vary importantly in clinically relevant subgroups. Analysis of pooled individual patient data suggest that a one-stage revision strategy may be as effective as a two-stage revision strategy in treating PJI of the hip.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s10654-018-0377-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.