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.

Knee replacement is an effective treatment for pain and functional impairment secondary to degenerative joint conditions. The number of knee replacements performed continues to rise. Periprosthetic fractures around total knee arthroplasties are a relatively rare complication but are complex injuries that require the treating surgeon to be familiar with and proficient at arthroplasty and trauma reconstructive techniques. An increase in life expectancy and in the functional demands of elderly patients may lead to an increased incidence of periprosthetic fractures. Supracondylar fractures of the femur are the most common type and this review will focus on the incidence, risk factors, classification, investigation, and treatment options for periprosthetic fractures around total knee arthroplasties.

Loss of bone stock is a major problem in revision surgery of the hip. Impaction bone grafting of the femur is frequently used when dealing with deficient bone stock. In this retrospective study a consecutive series of 68 patients (69 hips) who had revision of a hip replacement with femoral impaction grafting were reviewed. Irradiated bone allograft was used in all hips. Radiological measurement of subsidence of the stem, incorporation of the graft and remodelling was carried out and showed incorporation of the graft in 26 of 69 hips (38%). However, there was no evidence of trabecular remodelling. Moderate subsidence of 5 mm to 10 mm occurred in ten hips (14.5%), and massive subsidence of > 10 mm in five (7.2%). The results of this study are less favourable than those of others describing studies of revision of the femoral stem using impaction bone grafting. The absence of the characteristic changes of graft remodelling noted in other series raises the question as to whether irradiated bone graft may be a significant factor influencing the post-operative outcome.

The authors of this study noticed that the elastic garters of below knee anti-embolism stockings (AES) were indenting the proximal calves of patients after application and feared this might be interrupting venous return. This was lower on one ward which had a rigorous standardized protocol for sizing and checking stockings. Hypotheses were that proximal indentation caused higher proximal than distal pressures (reverse gradients) and that by adopting the standardized protocol throughout the unit, proximal indentation could be reduced. Fifty-seven patients were recruited after total hip replacement (THR) or total knee replacement (TKR) in a regional orthopaedic centre. The authors implemented the standardized protocol for sizing stockings and measured the pressures under them. After implementation of the standardized protocol, proximal indentation fell from 53% to 19% (p<0.05), incorrectly sized stockings from 74% to 34% (p<0.05) and removal of stockings by patients from 32% to 0% (p<0.05). In total, 21% of patients had reverse gradients which occurred in 41% of legs with proximal indentation and 8% without. When reverse gradients or proximal indentation exist, AES may not be as effective and may be counterproductive. A standardized protocol of nursing practice is critical to optimizing AES after THR and TKR. More in-vivo research is needed on AES after hip and knee replacement.

No abstract