Dislocation after revision total hip is a common complication. The purpose of this study was to assess whether a large femoral head (36/40mm) would result in a decreased dislocation rate compared to a standard head (32mm). A randomized clinical trial was undertaken to assess the effect of large femoral heads on dislocation after revision total hip. Patients undergoing revision hip arthroplasty at seven centers were randomized to 32mm head or 36/40mm head. Patients were stratified according to surgeon. Primary endpoint was dislocation. Rates were compared with Fishers exact test. Secondary outcome measures were quality of life: WOMAC, SF-36 and satisfaction. One hundred eighty four patients were randomized: 92 in the 32mm head group and 92 in the large head group. Baseline demographics were similar in the two groups. Patients were followed from two to five years postoperativelyPurpose
Method
There is a postulated association between increased serum metal ions and pseudotumour formation in patients with metal-on-metal hip replacements. The primary aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of pseudotumour in 31 asymptomatic patients with a large femoral head (LFH) metal-on-metal hip implant. This was compared to the prevalence of pseudotumour in 20 matched asymptomatic patients with a hip resurfacing (HRA) and 24 matched asymptomatic patients with a standard metal-on-polyethylene (MOP) total hip. A secondary objective was to assess possible correlation between increased serum metal ions and pseudotumour formation Ultrasound examination of the three groups was performed at a minimum follow up of two years. Serum metal ions were measured in the metal-on-metal LFH and HRA groups at a minimum of two years.Purpose
Method
The outcome following isolated liner exchange for revision knee arthroplasty, while an attractive option for its simplicity, has a mixed outcome reported in the literature. We report our experience in patients who had a minimum of two years follow-up. From our database we identified 44 cases in 41 patients who had an isolated liner exchange for a failed primary knee replacement. Twenty were female and the mean body mass index was 33 (range 20 to 49). The mean time to revision from their index procedure was 76 months (range 8 to 152). The mean age at revision was 69 years (range 45 to 90). Patients were assessed by use of validated quality of life questionnaires: Oxford-12, UCLA Activity Level, WOMAC and SF-12. Patients current scores were compared to pre-operative scores in 19 cases. Radiographs were assessed for polyethylene wear, osteolysis and alignment with respect to the mechanical axis. Intra-operative findings were compared to radiographic findings.Purpose
Method
The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the MIS Anterolateral Approach to that of the MIS Posterolateral and MIS Direct Lateral Approach. A prospective randomized control trial was designed and conducted to compare the MIS Anterolateral Approach to that of the MIS Posterolateral and MIS Direct Lateral Approach. Contemporary methods for economic evaluation were used to ascertain direct and indirect costs (in Canadian dollars) along with clinical effectiveness outcomes (SF6D and Pat5D utility measures). University and hospital ethics was obtained and patients were recruited and consented to participate in the RCT resulting in the assignment of 130 patients MIS hip arthroplasty procedures. Baseline patient demographics, comorbidity, quality of life, and utility were obtained for all patients. In-hospital costing data was obtained including operating room and patient room costs as well as medication, rehab and complications. Post-discharge costs were calculated from direct and indirect costs of medication, rehab, medical costs and complications until one year post-operatively. Clinical effectiveness measures were administered at intervals until one year post-operatively.Purpose
Method
