header advert
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 10 | Pages 1060 - 1069
1 Oct 2023
Holleyman RJ Jameson SS Reed M Meek RMD Khanduja V Hamer A Judge A Board T

Aims

This study describes the variation in the annual volumes of revision hip arthroplasty (RHA) undertaken by consultant surgeons nationally, and the rate of accrual of RHA and corresponding primary hip arthroplasty (PHA) volume for new consultants entering practice.

Methods

National Joint Registry (NJR) data for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man were received for 84,816 RHAs and 818,979 PHAs recorded between April 2011 and December 2019. RHA data comprised all revision procedures, including first-time revisions of PHA and any subsequent re-revisions recorded in public and private healthcare organizations. Annual procedure volumes undertaken by the responsible consultant surgeon in the 12 months prior to every index procedure were determined. We identified a cohort of β€˜new’ HA consultants who commenced practice from 2012 and describe their rate of accrual of PHA and RHA experience.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 12, Issue 5 | Pages 309 - 310
5 May 2023
Sharrock M Board T

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(5):309–310.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 12, Issue 5 | Pages 306 - 308
1 May 2023
Sharrock M Board T

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(5):306–308.


Bone & Joint Research
Vol. 11, Issue 3 | Pages 180 - 188
1 Mar 2022
Rajpura A Asle SG Ait Si Selmi T Board T

Aims

Hip arthroplasty aims to accurately recreate joint biomechanics. Considerable attention has been paid to vertical and horizontal offset, but femoral head centre in the anteroposterior (AP) plane has received little attention. This study investigates the accuracy of restoration of joint centre of rotation in the AP plane.

Methods

Postoperative CT scans of 40 patients who underwent unilateral uncemented total hip arthroplasty were analyzed. Anteroposterior offset (APO) and femoral anteversion were measured on both the operated and non-operated sides. Sagittal tilt of the femoral stem was also measured. APO measured on axial slices was defined as the perpendicular distance between a line drawn from the anterior most point of the proximal femur (anterior reference line) to the centre of the femoral head. The anterior reference line was made parallel to the posterior condylar axis of the knee to correct for rotation.


Bone & Joint Open
Vol. 2, Issue 7 | Pages 466 - 475
8 Jul 2021
Jain S Lamb J Townsend O Scott CEH Kendrick B Middleton R Jones SA Board T West R Pandit H

Aims

This study evaluates risk factors influencing fracture characteristics for postoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) around cemented stems in total hip arthroplasty.

Methods

Data were collected for PFF patients admitted to eight UK centres between 25 May 2006 and 1 March 2020. Radiographs were assessed for Unified Classification System (UCS) grade and AO/OTA type. Statistical comparisons investigated relationships by age, gender, and stem fixation philosophy (polished taper-slip (PTS) vs composite beam (CB)). The effect of multiple variables was estimated using multinomial logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Surgical treatment (revision vs fixation) was compared by UCS grade and AO/OTA type.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 98-B, Issue 2 | Pages 179 - 186
1 Feb 2016
Berber R Skinner J Board T Kendoff D Eskelinen A Kwon Y Padgett DE Hart A

Aims

There are many guidelines that help direct the management of patients with metal-on-metal (MOM) hip arthroplasties. We have undertaken a study to compare the management of patients with MOM hip arthroplasties in different countries.

Methods

Six international tertiary referral orthopaedic centres were invited to participate by organising a multi-disciplinary team (MDT) meeting, consisting of two or more revision hip arthroplasty surgeons and a musculoskeletal radiologist. A full clinical dataset including history, blood tests and imaging for ten patients was sent to each unit, for discussion and treatment planning. Differences in the interpretation of findings, management decisions and rationale for decisions were compared using quantitative and qualitative methods.