Skip to main content

Open Procedures

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
Osteoarthritis
Heberden-Arthrose.JPG
The formation of hard nobs at the middle finger joints (known as Bouchard's nodes) and at the farther away finger joint (known as Heberden's node) are a common feature of OA in the hands.
Classification and external resources
Specialty Rheumatology, orthopedics
ICD-10 M15-M19, M47
ICD-9-CM 715
OMIM 165720
DiseasesDB 9313
MedlinePlus 000423
eMedicine med/1682 orthoped/427pmr/93 radio/492
Patient UK Osteoarthritis
MeSH D010003

Osteoarthritis (OA) also known as degenerative arthritisdegenerative joint disease, or osteoarthrosis, is a type of joint disease that results from breakdown of joint cartilage and underlying bone. The most common symptoms are joint pain and stiffness. Initially, symptoms may occur only following exercise, but over time may become constant. Other symptoms may include joint swelling, decreased range of motion, and when the back is affected weakness or numbness of the arms and legs. The most commonly involved joints are those near the ends of the fingers, at the base of the thumb, neck, lower back, knees, and hips. Joints on one side of the body are often more affected than those on the other. Usually the problems come on over years. It can affect work and normal daily activities. Unlike other types of arthritis, only the joints are typically affected.

Causes include previous joint injury, abnormal joint or limb development, and inherited factors. Risk is greater in those who are overweight, have one leg of a different length, and have jobs that result in high levels of joint stress. Osteoarthritis is believed to be caused by mechanical stress on the joint and low grade inflammatory processes. It develops as cartilage is lost with eventually the underlying bone becoming affected. As pain may make it difficult to exercise, muscle loss may occur. Diagnosis is typically based on signs and symptom with medical imaging and other tests occasionally used to either support or rule out other problems. Unlike inrheumatoid arthritis, which is primarily an inflammatory condition, the joints do not typically become hot or red.

Treatment includes exercise, efforts to decrease joint stress, support groups, and pain medications. Efforts to decrease joint stress include resting, the use of a cane, and braces. Weight loss may help in those who are overweight. Pain medications may include paracetamol (acetaminophen). If this does not work NSAIDs such as naproxen may be used but these medications are associated with greater side affects. Opioids if used are generally only recommended short term due to the risk of addiction. If pain interferes with normal life despite other treatments, joint replacement surgery may help. An artificial joint, however, only lasts a limited amount of time. Outcomes for most people with osteoarthritis are good.

OA is the most common form of arthritis with disease of the knee and hip affecting about 3.8% of people as of 2010. Among those over 60 years old about 10% of males and 18% of females are affected. It is the cause of about 2% of years lived with disability. In Australia about 1.9 million people are affected, and in the United States about 27 million people are affected. Before 45 years of age it is more common in men, while after 45 years of age it is more common in women. It becomes more common in both sexes as people become older.

 

Signs and symptoms

 
Osteoarthritis most often occurs in the hands (at the ends of the fingers and thumbs), neck, lower back, knees, and hips

The main symptom is pain, causing loss of ability and often stiffness. "Pain" is generally described as a sharp ache or a burning sensation in the associated muscles and tendons. OA can cause a crackling noise (called "crepitus") when the affected joint is moved or touched and people may experience muscle spasms and contractions in the tendons. Occasionally, the joints may also be filled with fluid. Some people report increased pain associated with cold temperature, high humidity, and/or a drop in barometric pressure, but studies have had mixed results.

OA commonly affects the hands, feet, spine, and the large weight bearing joints, such as the hips and knees, although in theory, any joint in the body can be affected. As OA progresses, the affected joints appear larger, are stiff and painful, and usually feel better with gentle use but worse with excessive or prolonged use, thus distinguishing it from rheumatoid arthritis.

In smaller joints, such as at the fingers, hard bony enlargements, called Heberden's nodes (on the distal interphalangeal joints) and/or Bouchard's nodes (on the proximal interphalangeal joints), may form, and though they are not necessarily painful, they do limit the movement of the fingers significantly. OA at the toes leads to the formation of bunions, rendering them red or swollen. Some people notice these physical changes before they experience any pain.

OA is the most common cause of a joint effusion of the knee.

Risk factors

Damage from mechanical stress with insufficient self repair by joints is believed to be the primary cause of osteoarthritis. Sources of this stress may include misalignments of bones caused by congenital or pathogenic causes; mechanical injury; excess body weight; loss of strength in the muscles supporting a joint; and impairment of peripheral nerves, leading to sudden or uncoordinated movements. However exercise, including running in the absence of injury, has not been found to increase the risk. Nor has cracking one's knuckles been found to play a role.

Primary

A number of studies have shown that there is a greater prevalence of the disease among siblings and especially identical twins, indicating a hereditary basis. Although a single factor is not generally sufficient to cause the disease, about half of the variation in susceptibility has been assigned to genetic factors.

As early human ancestors evolved into bipeds, changes occurred in the pelvis, hip joint and spine which increased the risk of osteoarthritis. Additionally genetic variations that increase the risk were likely not selected against because usually problems only occur after reproductive success.

The development of OA is correlated with a history of previous joint injury and with obesity, especially with respect to knees. Since the correlation with obesity has been observed not only for knees but also for non-weight bearing joints and the loss of body fat is more closely related to symptom relief than the loss of body weight, it has been suggested that there may be a metabolic link to body fat as opposed to just mechanical loading.

Changes in sex hormone levels may play a role in the development of OA as it is more prevalent among post-menopausal women than among men of the same age. A study of mice found natural female hormones to be protective while injections of the male hormone dihydrotestosterone reduced protection.

Secondary

This type of OA is caused by other factors but the resulting pathology is the same as for primary OA:

  • Alkaptonuria
  • Congenital disorders of joints
  • Diabetes doubles the risk of having a joint replacement due to OA and people with diabetes have joint replacements at a younger age than those without diabetes.
  • Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome
  • Hemochromatosis and Wilson's disease
  • Inflammatory diseases (such as Perthes' disease), (Lyme disease), and all chronic forms of arthritis (e.g., costochondritis, gout, and rheumatoid arthritis). In gout, uric acid crystals cause the cartilage to degenerate at a faster pace.
  • Injury to joints or ligaments (such as the ACL), as a result of an accident or orthopedic operations.
  • Ligamentous deterioration or instability may be a factor.
  • Marfan syndrome
  • Obesity
  • Joint infection

Pathophysiology

 
In a healthy joint, the ends of bones are encased in smooth cartilage. Together, they are protected by a joint capsule lined with a synovial membrane that produces synovial fluid. The capsule and fluid protect the cartilage, muscles, and connective tissues.
 
With osteoarthritis, the cartilage becomes worn away. Spurs grow out from the edge of the bone, and synovial fluid increases. Altogether, the joint feels stiff and sore.

While OA is a degenerative joint disease that may cause gross cartilage loss and morphological damage to other joint tissues, more subtle biochemical changes occur in the earliest stages of OA progression. The water content of healthy cartilage is finely balanced by compressive force driving water out & swelling pressure drawing water in. Collagen fibres exert the compressive force, whereas the Gibbs–Donnan effect & cartilage proteoglycans create osmotic pressure which tends to draw water in.

However, during onset of OA, the collagen matrix becomes more disorganized and there is a decrease in proteoglycan content within cartilage. The breakdown of collagen fibers results in a net increase in water content. This increase occurs because whilst there is an overall loss of proteoglycans (and thus a decreased osmotic pull), it is outweighed by a loss of collagen. Without the protective effects of the proteoglycans, the collagen fibers of the cartilage can become susceptible to degradation and thus exacerbate the degeneration. Inflammation of the synovium (joint cavity lining) and the surrounding joint capsule can also occur, though often mild (compared to what occurs in rheumatoid arthritis). This can happen as breakdown products from the cartilage are released into the synovial space, and the cells lining the joint attempt to remove them.

Other structures within the joint can also be affected. The ligaments within the joint become thickened and fibrotic and the menisci can become damaged and wear away. Menisci can be completely absent by the time a person undergoes a joint replacement. New bone outgrowths, called "spurs" or osteophytes, can form on the margins of the joints, possibly in an attempt to improve the congruence of the articular cartilage surfaces in the absence of the menisci. The subchondral bone volume increases and becomes less mineralized (hypomineralization). All these changes can cause problems functioning. The pain in an osteoarthritic joint has been related to thickened synovium and subchondral bone lesions.

Diagnosis

Diagnosis is made with reasonable certainty based on history and clinical examination. X-rays may confirm the diagnosis. The typical changes seen on X-ray include: joint space narrowing, subchondral sclerosis(increased bone formation around the joint), subchondral cyst formation, and osteophytes. Plain films may not correlate with the findings on physical examination or with the degree of pain. Usually other imaging techniques are not necessary to clinically diagnose OA.

In 1990, the American College of Rheumatology, using data from a multi-center study, developed a set of criteria for the diagnosis of hand OA based on hard tissue enlargement and swelling of certain joints. These criteria were found to be 92% sensitive and 98% specific for hand OA versus other entities such as rheumatoid arthritis and spondyloarthropathies.

Related pathologies whose names may be confused with OA include pseudo-arthrosis. This is derived from the Greek words pseudo, meaning "false", and arthrosis, meaning "joint." Radiographic diagnosis results in diagnosis of a fracture within a joint, which is not to be confused with OA which is a degenerative pathology affecting a high incidence of distal phalangeal joints of female patients. A polished ivory-like appearance may also develop on the bones of the affected joints, reflecting a change called eburnation.

Classification[

A number of classification systems are used for gradation of osteoarthritis:

  • WOMAC scale
  • Kellgren-Lawrence grading scale

OA can be classified into either primary or secondary depending on whether or not there is an identifiable underlying cause.

Both primary generalized nodal OA and erosive OA (EOA, also called inflammatory OA) are sub-sets of primary OA. EOA is a much less common, and more aggressive inflammatory form of OA which often affects the distal interphalangeal joints of the hand and has characteristic articular erosive changes on x-ray.

Management

 
People with osteoarthritis should do different kinds of exercise for different benefits to the body.

Lifestyle modification (such as weight loss and exercise) and analgesics are the mainstay of treatment. Acetaminophen (also known as paracetamol) is recommended first line with NSAIDs being used as add on therapy only if pain relief is not sufficient. This is due to the relative greater safety of acetaminophen.

Lifestyle modification

For overweight people, weight loss may be an important factor. Patient education has been shown to be helpful in the self-management of arthritis. It decreases pain, improves function, reduces stiffness and fatigue, and reduces medical usage. Patient education can provide on average 20% more pain relief when compared to NSAIDs alone in patients with hip OA.

Physical measures

Moderate exercise is beneficial with respect to pain and function in those with osteoarthritis of the knee and hip. These exercises should occur at least three times per week. While some evidence supports certainphysical therapies, evidence for a combined program is limited. There is not enough evidence to determine the effectiveness of massage therapy. The evidence for manual therapy is inconclusive. Functional, gait, and balance training has been recommended to address impairments of position sense, balance, and strength in individuals with lower extremity arthritis as these can contribute to higher falls in older individuals.

Lateral wedge insoles do not appear to be useful in osteoarthritis of the knee. Knee braces may be useful. For pain management heat can be used to relieve stiffness, and cold can relieve muscle spasms and pain.

Medication

Treatment recommendations by risk factors
GI riskStroke and heart riskOption
Low Low NSAID, or paracetamol
Moderate Low Paracetamol, or low dose NSAID withantacid
Low Moderate Paracetamol, or low dose aspirin with an antacid
Moderate Moderate Low dose paracetamol, aspirin, and antacid. Monitoring for abdominal pain or black stool.

The analgesic acetaminophen is the first line treatment for OA. However, a 2015 review found acetaminophen to only have a small short term benefit. For mild to moderate symptoms effectiveness is similar to non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), though for more severe symptoms NSAIDs may be more effective. NSAIDs such as naproxen while more effective in severe cases are associated with greater side effects such asgastrointestinal bleeding. Another class of NSAIDs, COX-2 selective inhibitors (such as celecoxib) are equally effective to NSAIDs with lower rates of adverse gastrointestinal effects but higher rates of cardiovascular disease such as myocardial infarction. They are also more expensive than non-specific NSAIDs. Oral opioids, including both weak opioids such as tramadol and stronger opioids, are also often prescribed. Their appropriateness is uncertain and opioids are often recommended only when first line therapies have failed or are contraindicated. This is due to a small benefit and relatively large risk of side effects. Oral steroids are not recommended in the treatment of OA.

There are several NSAIDs available for topical use including diclofenac. Topical and oral diclofenac work equally well with topical having a greater risk of mild skin reactions but no greater risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects. Transdermal opioid pain medications are not typically recommended in the treatment of osteoarthritis. Topical capsaicin is controversial with some reviews finding benefit and others not.

Joint injections of glucocorticoids (such as hydrocortisone) leads to short term pain relief that may last between a few weeks and a few months. Injections of hyaluronic acid have not been found to lead to much improvement compared to placebo but have been associated with harm. The effectiveness of injections of platelet-rich plasma is unclear; there are suggestions that such injections improve function but not pain and are associated with increased risk.

Surgery

If problems are significant and more conservative management is ineffective, joint replacement surgery or resurfacing may be recommended. Evidence supports joint replacement for both knees and hips as it is both clinically effective, and cost-effective. Surgery to transfer articular cartilage from a non-weight-bearing area to the damaged area is one possible procedure that has some success but there are problems getting the transferred cartilage to integrate well with the existing cartilage at the transfer site.

Osteotomy may be useful in people with knee osteoarthritis but has not been well studied. Arthroscopic surgery is largely not recommended as it does not improve outcomes in knee osteoarthritis. Additionally arthroscopy may result in harm.

Alternative medicine

Many dietary supplements are sold as treatments for OA. Since glucosamine is a precursor for a component of cartilage, it has been studied for prevention and treatment. The effectiveness of glucosamine is controversial. Most recent reviews found it to be equal to or only slight better than placebo. A difference may exist between glucosamine sulfate and glucosamine hydrochloride, with glucosamine sulfate showing a benefit and glucosamine hydrochloride not. The evidence for glucosamine sulfate having an effect on OA progression is somewhat unclear and if present likely modest. The Osteoarthritis Research Society International recommends that glucosamine be discontinued if no effect is observed after six months and the National Institute of Clinical Excellence no longer recommends its use. Despite the difficulty in determining the efficacy of glucosamine, it remains a viable treatment option. Its use as a therapy for osteoarthritis is usually safe.

Phytodolor, SAMe, and SKI306X (a Chinese herbal mixture) may be effective in improving pain, and there is some evidence to support the use of cat's claw as an anti-inflammatory. There is tentative evidence to support avocado/soybean unsaponifiables(ASU), methylsulfonylmethane, and rose hip. A few high-quality studies of Boswellia serrata show consistent, but small, improvements in pain and function among people with osteoarthritis.

There is little evidence supporting benefits for some supplements, including: the Ayurvedic herbal preparations with brand names Articulin F and Eazmov, collagen, devil's claw, Duhuo Jisheng Wan (a Chinese herbal preparation), fish liver oil, ginger, the herbal preparation gitadyl, glucosamine, hyaluronic acid, omega-3 fatty acids, the brand-name product Reumalax, stinging nettle, turmeric, vitamins A, C, and E in combination, vitamin E alone, vitamin K and willow bark. There is insufficient evidence to make a recommendation about the safety and efficacy of these treatments.

While acupuncture leads to improvements in pain relief, this improvement is small and may be of questionable importance. Waiting list-controlled trials for peripheral joint osteoarthritis do show clinically relevant benefits, but these may be due to placebo effects. Acupuncture does not seem to produce long-term benefits. While electrostimulation techniques such as TENS have been used for twenty years to treat osteoarthritis in the knee, there is no conclusive evidence to show that it reduces pain or disability.

Epidemiology

 
Disability-adjusted life year for OA per 100,000 inhabitants in 2004.
 no data
 ≤ 200
 200–220
 220–240
 240–260
 260–280
 280–300
 300–320
 320–340
 340–360
 360–380
 380–400
 ≥ 400

Globally approximately 250 million people have osteoarthritis of the knee (3.6% of the population). OA affects nearly 27 million people in the United States, accounting for 25% of visits to primary care physicians, and half of all NSAID prescriptions. It is estimated that 80% of the population have radiographic evidence of OA by age 65, although only 60% of those will have symptoms.

As of 2004, OA globally causes moderate to severe disability in 43.4 million people.

In the United States, there were approximately 964,000 hospitalizations for osteoarthritis in 2011, a rate of 31 stays per 10,000 population. With an aggregate cost of $14.8 billion ($15,400 per stay), it was the second-most expensive condition seen in U.S. hospital stays in 2011. By payer, it was the second-most costly condition billed to Medicare and private insurance.

History

Evidence for OA found in the fossil record is studied by paleopathologists, specialists in ancient disease and injury. OA has been reported in fossils of the large carnivorous dinosaur Allosaurus fragilis.

Etymology

OA is derived from the Greek word part osteo-, meaning "of the bone", combined with arthritisarthr-, meaning "joint", and -itis, the meaning of which has come to be associated with inflammation. The -itis of OA could be considered misleading as inflammation is not a conspicuous feature. Some clinicians refer to this condition as osteoarthosis to signify the lack of inflammatory response.

Research

There are ongoing efforts to determine if there are agents that modify outcomes in OA. Sprifermin is one candidate drug. There is also tentative evidence that strontium ranelate may decrease degeneration in OA and improve outcomes.

As well as attempting to find disease-modifying agents for OA, there is emerging evidence that a system-based approach is necessary to find the causes of OA. Changes may occur before clinical disease is evident due to abnormalities in biomechanics, biologyand/or structure of joints that predispose them to develop clinical disease. Research is thus focusing on defining these early pre-OA changes using biological, mechanical, and imaging markers of OA risk, emphasising multi-disciplinary approaches, and looking into personalized interventions that can reverse OA risk in healthy joints before the disease becomes evident.

Gene transfer strategies aim to target the disease process rather than the symptoms.

Biomarkers

Guidelines outlining requirements for inclusion of soluble biomarkers in OA clinical trials were published in 2015, but as yet, there are no validated biomarkers for OA. A 2015 systematic review of biomarkers for OA looking for molecules that could be used for risk assessments found 37 different biochemical markers of bone and cartilage turnover in 25 publications. The strongest evidence was for urinary C-terminal telopeptide of collagen type II (uCTX-II) as a prognostic marker for knee OA progression and serum cartilage oligomeric protein (COMP) levels as a prognostic marker for incidence of both knee and hip OA. A review of biomarkers in hip OA also found associations with uCTXII.

One problem with using a specific collagen type II biomarker from the breakdown of articular cartilage is that the amount of cartilage is reduced (worn away) over time with progression of the disease so a patient can eventually have very advanced OA with none of this biomarker detectable in their urine. Another problem with a systemic biomarker is that a patient can have OA in multiple joints at different stages of disease at the same time, so the biomarker source cannot be determined. Some other collagen breakdown products in the synovial fluid correlated with each other after acute injuries (a known cause of secondary OA) but did not correlate with the severity of the injury.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shoulder replacement is a surgical procedure in which all or part of the glenohumeral joint is replaced by a prosthetic implant. Such joint replacement surgery generally is conducted to relieve arthritis pain or fix severe physical joint damage.

Shoulder replacement surgery is an option for treatment of severe arthritis of the shoulder joint. Arthritis is a condition that affects the cartilage of the joints. As the cartilage lining wears away, the protective lining between the bones is lost. When this happens, painful bone-on-bone arthritis develops. Severe shoulder arthritis is quite painful, and can cause restriction of motion. While this may be tolerated with some medications and lifestyle adjustments, there may come a time when surgical treatment is necessary.

Treatment

The main source of shoulder pain, shoulder arthritis, is first managed in early stages with physical therapy and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory (NSAID) drugs. Surgery is considered if pain worsens. There are two primary methods for shoulder replacement; total shoulder replacement and reverse shoulder replacement. Total shoulder replacement involves a replacement of the ball and socket joint. A metal ball is used to replace the humeral head and a plastic socket replaces the cartilage on the glenoid cavity. Once complete this method looks and functions like the original joint.

A reverse shoulder replacement is used to treat patients with severe damage or arthritis of the shoulder joint, and particularly patients with severe rotator cuff tears. It involves the insertion of a hemispherical implant in place of the glenoid instead of the humerus and the cup section being added to the humerus. This method allows the arm to be moved primarily by the deltoid instead of the rotator cuff. An important complication following reverse shoulder replacement is known as scapular notching, in which erosion of the scapular neck is caused by repetitive contact between the humeral component and the inferior scapular neck during adduction.[5]Scapular notching may be more likely in patients with shorter scapular neck lengths.

Non surgery options are preferred treatment for a variety of reasons. Besides not wanting to risk the usual risks of surgery such as infection, shoulder replacement can lead to a variety of complications including rotator cuff tear and glenohumeral instability. However despite these risks, shoulder replacement shows promise with a low rate of complication which depending on the type of surgery is close to 5%.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
Knee replacement
Intervention
ICD-10-PCS 0SRD0JZ
ICD-9-CM 81.54
MeSH D019645
MedlinePlus 002974
eMedicine 1250275
 
X-ray of total knee replacement, anterior-posterior (front to back) view.
 
X-ray of total knee replacement, lateral (side) view.
 
The incision for knee replacement surgery

Knee replacement, or knee arthroplasty, is a surgical procedure to replace the weight-bearing surfaces of the knee joint to relieve pain and disability. It is most commonly performed for osteoarthritis, and also for other knee diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis and psoriatic arthritis. In patients with severe deformity from advanced rheumatoid arthritis, trauma, or long-standing osteoarthritis, the surgery may be more complicated and carry higher risk. Osteoporosis does not typically cause knee pain, deformity, or inflammation and is not a reason to perform knee replacement.

Other major causes of debilitating pain include meniscus tears, cartilage defects, and ligament tears. Debilitating pain from osteoarthritis is much more common in the elderly.

Knee replacement surgery can be performed as a partial or a total knee replacement. In general, the surgery consists of replacing the diseased or damaged joint surfaces of the knee with metal and plastic components shaped to allow continued motion of the knee.

The operation typically involves substantial postoperative pain, and includes vigorous physical rehabilitation. The recovery period may be 6 weeks or longer and may involve the use of mobility aids (e.g. walking frames, canes, crutches) to enable the patient's return to preoperative mobility.

Medical uses

Knee replacement surgery is most commonly performed in people with advanced osteoarthritis and should be considered when conservative treatments have been exhausted. Total knee replacement is also an option to correct significant knee joint or bone trauma in young patients. Similarly, total knee replacement can be performed to correct mild valgus or varus deformity. Serious valgus or varus deformity should be corrected by osteotomy. Physical therapyhas been shown to improve function and may delay or prevent the need for knee replacement. Pain is often noted when performing physical activities requiring a wide range of motion in the knee joint.

Risks

Risks and complications in knee replacement are similar to those associated with all joint replacements. The most serious complication is infection of the joint, which occurs in <1% of patients. Deep vein thrombosis occurs in up to 15% of patients, and is symptomatic in 2–3%. Nerve injuries occur in 1–2% of patients. Persistent pain or stiffness occurs in 8–23% of patients. Prosthesis failure occurs in approximately 2% of patients at 5 years.

There is increased risk in complications for obese people going through total knee replacement. The morbidly obese should be advised to lose weight before surgery and, if medically eligible, would probably benefit from bariatric surgery.

Fracturing or chipping of the polyethylene platform inserted onto of the tibial component may be a concern.These fragments may become lodged in the knee and create pain or may move into other parts of the body. Recent advancements in production have greatly reduced these issues but over the lifespan of the knee replacement there is potential.

Deep vein thrombosis

According to the American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons (AAOS), deep vein thrombosis in the leg is "the most common complication of knee replacement surgery... prevention... may include periodic elevation of patient's legs, lower leg exercises to increase circulation, support stockings and medication to thin your blood."

Fractures

Periprosthetic fractures are becoming more frequent with the aging patient population and can occur intraoperatively or postoperatively.

Loss of Motion

The knee at times may not recover its normal range of motion (0–135 degrees usually) after total knee replacement. Much of this is dependent on pre-operative function. Most patients can achieve 0–110 degrees, but stiffness of the joint can occur. In some situations, manipulation of the knee under anesthetic is used to reduce post operative stiffness. There are also many implants from manufacturers that are designed to be "high-flex" knees, offering a greater range of motion.

Instability

In some patients, the kneecap is unrevertable post-surgery and dislocates to the outer side of the knee. This is painful and usually needs to be treated by surgery to realign the kneecap. However this is quite rare.

In the past, there was a considerable risk of the implant components loosening over time as a result of wear. As medical technology has improved however, this risk has fallen considerably. Knee replacement implants can now last up to 20 years.

Infection

The current classification of AAOS divides prosthetic infections into four types.

  • Type 1 (positive intraoperative culture): Two positive intraoperative cultures
  • Type 2 (early postoperative infection): Infection occurring within first month after surgery
  • Type 3 (acute hematogenous infection): Hematogenous seeding of site of previously well-functioning prosthesis
  • Type 4 (late chronic infection): Chronic indolent clinical course; infection present for more than a month

While it is relatively rare, periprosthetic infection remains one of the most challenging complications of joint arthroplasty. A detailed clinical history and physical remain the most reliable tool to recognize a potential periprosthetic infection. In some cases the classic signs of fever, chills, painful joint, and a draining sinus may be present, and diagnostic studies are simply done to confirm the diagnosis. In reality though, most patients do not present with those clinical signs, and in fact the clinical presentation may overlap with other complications such as aseptic loosening and pain. In those cases diagnostic tests can be useful in confirming or excluding infection.

 
FDG-PET CT showing septic loosening of knee prothesis; the FDG-enrichment shows entensive inflammatory foci: demonstrative: the PET-image ist unlike the CT reconstruction not disturbed by the high radiation attenuation of the prothesis.

According to a recent review the following tests can be used in the diagnosis of a periprosthetic infection.

  • Conventional radiograph: Rule out other conditions such as loosening and/or osteolysis.
  • Radionucleotide Imaging: Technetium-99m Sulfur imaging combined with indium-111-labeled leukocytes probably offers improved specificity than either test alone. Gallium 67 scans alone have low sensitivity for infection. FDG-PET imaging has been shown to have variable specificity and sensitivity.
  • Serology: Elevated serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) more than three months following arthroplasty are good screening tests.
  • Cultures: High sensitivity and specificity, but only if done two weeks following antibiotic discontinuation. Gram stains have low specificity and sensitivity. The predictive value of a positive culture increases if the culture is performed in patient with high clinical suspicion, rather than a screening test.
  • Joint fluid leukocyte counts: A joint fluid white blood cell count of more than 500/μl is suggestive of an infection.
  • Frozen sections of implant membranes: More than five white blood cells/High power field is indicative of infection.
  • Newer tests: Polymerase chain reactions involving the bacterial 16S rRNA have high rates of false positives because they can detect necrotic bacterial debris even in the absence of active infection.

None of the above laboratory tests has 100% sensitivity or specificity for diagnosing infection. Specificity improves when the tests are performed in patients in whom clinical suspicion exists. ESR and CRP remain good 1st line tests for screening (high sensitivity, low specificity). Aspiration of the joint remains the test with the highest specificity for confirming infection.

The choice of treatment depends on the type of prosthetic infection.

  1. Positive intraoperative cultures: Antibiotic therapy alone
  2. Early post-operative infections: debridement, antibiotics, and retention of prosthesis.
  3. Acute hematogenous infections: debridement, antibiotic therapy, retention of prosthesis.
  4. Late chronic: delayed exchange arthroplasty. Surgical débridement and parenteral antibiotics alone in this group has limited success, and standard of care involves exchange arthroplasty.

Appropriate antibiotic doses can be found at the following instructional course lecture by AAOS 

Knee replacements are now being introduced to younger people, as they are lasting a lot longer and if they wear out, the surgery to fix the replacement is a much smaller and still effective surgery.

Pre-operative preparation

Knee arthroplasty is major surgery. The xray indication for a knee replacement would be weightbearing xrays of both knees- AP, Lateral, and 30 degrees of flexion. AP and lateral views may not show joint space narrowing, but the 30 degree flexion view is most sensitive for narrowing. If this view, however, does not show narrowing of the knee, then a knee replacement is not indicated. Pre-operative preparation begins immediately following surgical consultation and lasts approximately one month. The patient is to perform range of motion exercises and hip, knee and ankle strengthening as directed daily. Before the surgery is performed, pre-operative tests are done: usually a complete blood count, electrolytes, APTT and PT to measure blood clotting, chest X-rays, ECG, and blood cross-matching for possible transfusion. About a month before the surgery, the patient may be prescribed supplemental iron to boost the hemoglobin in their blood system. Accurate X-rays of the affected knee are needed to measure the size of components which will be needed. Medications such as warfarin and aspirin will be stopped some days before surgery to reduce the amount of bleeding. Patients may be admitted on the day of surgery if the pre-op work-up is done in the pre-anesthetic clinic or may come into hospital one or more days before surgery. Some hospitals offer a pre-operative seminar for this surgery.

Technique

 
Model of total knee replacement

The surgery involves exposure of the front of the knee, with detachment of part of the quadriceps muscle (vastus medialis) from the patella. The patella is displaced to one side of the joint, allowing exposure of the distal end of the femurand the proximal end of the tibia. The ends of these bones are then accurately cut to shape using cutting guides oriented to the long axis of the bones. The cartilages and the anterior cruciate ligament are removed; the posterior cruciate ligament may also be removed but the tibial and fibular collateral ligaments are preserved. Metal components are then impacted onto the bone or fixed using polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) cement. Alternative techniques exist that affix the implant without cement. These cement-less techniques may involve osseointegration, including porous metal prostheses.

Femoral replacement

A round ended implant is used for the femur, mimicking the natural shape of the joint. On the tibia the component is flat, although it sometimes has a stem which goes down inside the bone for further stability. A flattened or slightly dished high density polyethylene surface is then inserted onto the tibial component so that the weight is transferred metal to plastic not metal to metal. During the operation any deformities must be corrected, and the ligaments balanced so that the knee has a good range of movement and is stable and aligned. In some cases the articular surface of the patella is also removed and replaced by a polyethylene button cemented to the posterior surface of the patella. In other cases, the patella is replaced unaltered.

Variations

Different implant manufacturers require slightly different instrumentation and technique. No consensus has emerged over which one is the best. Clinical studies are very difficult to perform, requiring large numbers of cases followed over many years. The most significant variations are between cemented and uncemented components and between resurfacing the patella or not. Among those who do not resurface the patella, there is also variation between denervating the patella using electrocautery or not. In theory, this technique could disrupt the superficial pain receptors near the patella in hopes of relieving anterior knee pain, a common post-operative complaint. No consensus exists, but a recent randomized controlled trial indicates that while both methods provide relief, patellar denervation results in a modest benefit compared to no denervation in the short-term. The patient satisfaction was higher with more number of patients rating the procedure as excellent in the denervation group (74.6% vs 50.8%). The benefit does not, however, persist mid- to long-term post-operatively. Anterior knee pain component within the patellar score and Visual Analogue Scale for anterior knee pain were significantly better in the denervation group at 3 months (4.5 vs 5.1) but not at 12 months (4.4 vs 4.9) and 24 months (2.1 vs. 2.2).

Some also study patient satisfaction data associated with pain. Retaining the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) has been shown to be beneficial for patients. Removal of the PCL has been shown to reduce the maximal force that the individual can place on that knee. Typically individuals who have the PCL removed will lean forward while climbing in order to maximize the force of the quadriceps.

Minimally invasive procedures have been developed in total knee replacement (TKR) that do not cut the quadriceps tendon. There are different definitions of minimally invasive knee surgery, which may include a shorter incision length, retraction of the patella (kneecap) without eversion (rotating out), and specialized instruments. There are few randomized trials, but studies have found less postoperative pain, shorter hospital stays, and shorter recovery. However, no studies have shown long-term benefits.

Partial knee replacement

Unicompartmental arthroplasty (UKA), also called partial knee replacement, is an option for some patients. The knee is generally divided into three "compartments": medial (the inside part of the knee), lateral (the outside), and patellofemoral (the joint between the kneecap and the thighbone). Most patients with arthritis severe enough to consider knee replacement have significant wear in two or more of the above compartments and are best treated with total knee replacement. A minority of patients (the exact percentage is hotly debated but is probably between 10 and 30 percent) have wear confined primarily to one compartment, usually the medial, and may be candidates for unicompartmental knee replacement. Advantages of UKA compared to TKA include smaller incision, easier post-op rehabilitation, better post-operative range of motion, shorter hospital stay, less blood loss, lower risk of infection, stiffness, and blood clots, but a harder revision if necessary. While most recent data suggests that UKA in properly selected patients has survival rates comparable to TKA, most surgeons believe that TKA is the more reliable long term procedure. Persons with infectious or inflammatory arthritis (Rheumatoid, Lupus, Psoriatic ), or marked deformity are not candidates for this procedure.

Post-operative rehabilitation

The length of post-operative hospitalization is 5 days on average depending on the health status of the patient and the amount of support available outside the hospital setting. Protected weight bearing on crutches or a walker is required, until the quadriceps muscle has healed and recovered its strength.

Patients typically undergo several weeks of physical therapy and occupational therapy to restore motion, strength, and function. Treatment includes encouraging patients to move early after the surgery.  Often range of motion (to the limits of the prosthesis) is recovered over the first two weeks (the earlier the better). At six weeks, patients have usually progressed to full weight bearing with a cane. Complete recovery from the operation involving return to full normal function may take three months, and some patients notice a gradual improvement lasting many months longer than that.

For knee replacement without complications, continuous passive motion (CPM) will can improve recovery. Additionally, CPM is inexpensive, convenient, and assists patients in therapeutic compliance. However, CPM should be used in conjunction with traditional physical therapy. In unusual cases where the person has problem which prevents standard mobilization treatment, then CPM may be useful.

Some physicians and patients may consider having lower limbs venous ultrasonography to screen for deep vein thrombosis after knee replacement. However, this kind of screening should only be done when indicated because to perform it routinely would beunnecessary health care. If a medical condition exists that could cause deep vein thrombosis, a physician can choose to treat patients with cyrotherapy and intermittent pneumatic compression as a preventive measure.

Epidemiology

With 718,000 hospitalizations, knee arthroplasty accounted for 4.6% of all United States operating room procedures in 2011—making it one of the most common procedures performed during hospital stays. The number of knee arthroplasty procedures performed in U.S. hospitals increased 93% between 2001 and 2011. A study of United States community hospitals showed that in 2012, among hospitalizations that involved an OR procedure, knee arthroplasty was the OR procedure performed most frequently during hospital stays paid by Medicare (10.8 percent of stays) and by private insurance (9.1 percent). Knee arthroplasty was not among the top five most frequently performed OR procedures for stays paid by Medicaid or for uninsured stays.

By 2030, the demand for primary total knee arthroplasty is projected to increase to 3.4 million surgeries performed annually in the U.S.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
 
Hip replacement
Intervention
Hip replacement Image 3684-PH.jpg
An X-ray showing a right hip (left of image) has been replaced, with the ball of this ball-and-socket joint replaced by a metal head that is set in the femur and the socket replaced by a white plastic cup (clear in this X-ray).
ICD-9-CM 81.51–81.53
MeSH D019644
MedlinePlus 002975

Hip replacement is a surgical procedure in which the hip joint is replaced by a prosthetic implant. Hip replacement surgery can be performed as a total replacement or a hemi (half) replacement. Such joint replacementorthopaedic surgery is generally conducted to relieve arthritis pain or in some hip fractures. A total hip replacement (total hip arthroplasty) consists of replacing both the acetabulum and the femoral head whilehemiarthroplasty generally only replaces the femoral head. Hip replacement is currently the most common orthopaedic operation, though patient satisfaction short- and long-term varies widely.

Medical uses

Total hip replacement is most commonly used to treat joint failure caused by osteoarthritis. Other indications include rheumatoid arthritis, avascular necrosis, traumatic arthritis, protrusio acetabuli, certain hip fractures, benign and malignant bone tumors, arthritis associated with Paget's disease, ankylosing spondylitis and juvenile rheumatoid arthritis. The aims of the procedure are pain relief and improvement in hip function. Hip replacement is usually considered only after other therapies, such as physical therapy and pain medications, have failed.

Risks

 
Dislocated artificial hip
 
Hip prosthesis displaying aseptic loosening (arrows)

Risks and complications in hip replacement are similar to those associated with all joint replacements. They can include dislocation, loosening, impingement, infection, osteolysis, metal sensitivity, nerve palsy, pain and death.

Vein thrombosis

Venous thrombosis such as deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism are relatively common following hip replacement surgery. Standard treatment with anticoagulants is for 7–10 days; however treatment for more than 21 days may be superior.

Some physicians and patients may consider having lower limbs venous ultrasonography to screen for deep vein thrombosis after hip replacement. However, this kind of screening should only be done when indicated because to perform it routinely would be unnecessary health care.

Dislocation

Dislocation is the most common complication of hip replacement surgery. At surgery the femoral head is taken out of the socket, hip implants are placed and the hip put back into proper position. It takes eight to twelve weeks for the soft tissues injured or cut during surgery to heal. During this period, the hip ball can come out of the socket. The chance of this is diminished if less tissue is cut, if the tissue cut is repaired and if large diameter head balls are used. Surgeons who perform more of the operations each year tend to have fewer patients dislocate. Doing the surgery from an anterior approach seems to lower dislocation rates when small diameter heads are used, but the benefit has not been shown when compared to modern posterior incisions with the use of larger diameter heads. Patients can decrease the risk further by keeping the leg out of certain positions during the first few months after surgery. Use of alcohol by patients during this early period is also associated with an increased rate of dislocation.

Fracture

Bones with internal fixation devices in situ are at risk of periprosthetic fractures at the end of the implant, an area of relative mechanical stress. Post-operative femoral fractures are graded by the Vancouver classification.

Osteolysis

Many long-term problems with hip replacements are the result of osteolysis. This is the loss of bone caused by the body's reaction to polyethylene wear debris, fine bits of plastic that come off the cup liner over time. An inflammatoryprocess causes bone resorption that may lead to subsequent loosening of the hip implants and even fractures in the bone around the implants. In an attempt to eliminate the generation of wear particles, ceramic bearing surfaces are being used in the hope that they will have less wear and less osteolysis with better long-term results. Metal cup liners joined with metal heads (metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty) were also developed for similar reasons. In the lab these show excellent wear characteristics and benefit from a different mode of lubrication. At the same time that these two bearing surfaces were being developed, highly cross linked polyethylene plastic liners were also developed. The greater cross linking significantly reduces the amount of plastic wear debris given off over time. The newer ceramic and metal prostheses do not always have the long-term track record of established metal on poly bearings. Ceramic pieces can break leading to catastrophic failure. This occurs in about 2% of the implants placed. They may also cause an audible, high pitched squeaking noise with activity. Metal-on-metal arthroplasty releases metal debris into the body raising concerns about the potential dangers of these accumulating over time. Highly cross linked polyethylene is not as strong as regular polyethylene. These plastic liners can crack or break free of the metal shell that holds them.

Metal sensitivity

Concerns are being raised about the metal sensitivity and potential dangers of metal particulate debris. New publications have demonstrated development of pseudotumors, soft tissue masses containing necrotic tissue, around the hip joint. It appears these masses are more common in women and these patients show a higher level of iron in the blood. The cause is unknown and is probably multifactorial. There may be a toxic reaction to an excess of particulate metal wear debris or a hypersensitivity reaction to a normal amount of metal debris.

Metal hypersensitivity is a well-established phenomenon and is common, affecting about 10–15% of the population. Contact with metals can cause immune reactions such as skin hives, eczema, redness and itching. Although little is known about the short- and long-term pharmacodynamics and bioavailability of circulating metal degradation products in vivo, there have been many reports of immunologic type responses temporally associated with implantation of metal components. Individual case reports link hypersensitivity immune reactions with adverse performance of metallic clinical cardiovascular, orthopedic and plastic surgical and dental implants.

Metal toxicity

Most hip replacements consist of cobalt and chromium alloys, or titanium. Stainless steel is no longer used. All implants release their constituent ions into the blood. Typically these are excreted in the urine, but in certain individuals the ions can accumulate in the body. In implants which involve metal-on-metal contact, microscopic fragments of cobalt and chromium can be absorbed into the patient's bloodstream. There are reports of cobalt toxicity with hip replacement patients.

Nerve palsy

Post operative sciatic nerve palsy is another possible complication. The incidence of this complication is low. Femoral nerve palsy is another but much more rare complication. Both of these will typically resolve over time, but the healing process is slow. Patients with pre-existing nerve injury are at greater risk of experiencing this complication and are also slower to recover.

Chronic pain

A few patients who have had a hip replacement suffer chronic pain after the surgery. Groin pain can develop if the muscle that raises the hip (iliopsoas) rubs against the edge of the acetabular cup. Bursitis can develop at the trochanter where a surgical scar crosses the bone, or if the femoral component used pushes the leg out to the side too far. Also some patients can experience pain in cold or damp weather. Incision made in the front of the hip (anterior approach) can cut a nerve running down the thigh leading to numbness in the thigh and occasionally chronic pain at the point where the nerve was cut (a neuroma).

Death

Rates of death for elective hip replacements are much less than 1%.

Leg length inequality

The leg can be lengthened or shortened during surgery. Unequal legs are the most common complaint by patients after surgery with over lengthening the most common problem. Sometimes the leg seems long immediately after surgery when in fact both are equal length. An arthritic hip can develop contractures that make the leg behave as if it is short. When these are relieved with replacement surgery and normal motion and function are restored, the body feels that the limb is now longer than it was. If the legs are truly equal, the sense of inequality resolves within a month or two of surgery. If the leg is unequal, it will not. A shoe lift for the short leg, or in extreme cases, a corrective operation may be needed.

True leg length inequality may sometimes be caused by improper implant selection. The femoral component may be too large and stick out of the femur further than needed. The head ball selected may sit too proud on the stem. Stiffness in the lower back from arthritis or previous fusion surgery seems to magnify the perception of leg length inequality.

Modern process

 
A titanium hip prosthesis, with aceramic head and polyethyleneacetabular cup

The modern artificial joint owes much to the work of Sir John Charnley at Wrightington Hospital; his work in the field of tribology resulted in a design that almost completely replaced the other designs by the 1970s. Charnley's design consisted of three parts:

  1. stainless steel one-piece femoral stem and head
  2. polyethylene (originally teflon), acetabular component, both of which were fixed to the bone using
  3. PMMA (acrylic) bone cement

The replacement joint, which was known as the Low Friction Arthroplasty, was lubricated with synovial fluid. The small femoral head (78 in (22.2 mm)) was chosen for Charnley's belief that it would have lower friction against the acetabular component and thus wear out the acetabulum more slowly. Unfortunately, the smaller head dislocated more easily. Alternative designs with larger heads such as the Mueller prosthesis were proposed. Stability was improved, but acetabular wear and subsequent failure rates were increased with these designs. The Teflon acetabular components of Charnley's early designs failed within a year or two of implantation. This prompted a search for a more suitable material. A German salesman showed a polyethylene gear sample to Charnley's machinist, sparking the idea to use this material for the acetabular component. The ultra high molecular weight polyethyleneor UHMWPE acetabular component was introduced in 1962. Charnley's other major contribution was to use polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) bone cement to attach the two components to the bone. For over two decades, the Charnley Low Friction Arthroplasty, and derivative designs were the most used systems in the world. It formed the basis for all modern hip implants.

The Exeter hip stem was developed in the United Kingdom during the same time as the Charnley device. This is also a cemented device, but with a slightly different stem geometry. Both designs have shown excellent long-term durability when properly placed and are still widely used in slightly modified versions.

Early implant designs had the potential to loosen from their attachment to the bones, typically becoming painful ten to twelve years after placement. In addition, erosion of the bone around the implant was seen on x-rays. Initially, surgeons believed this was caused by an abnormal reaction to the cement holding the implant in place. That belief prompted a search for an alternative method to attach the implants. The Austin Moore device had a small hole in the stem into which bone graft was placed before implanting the stem. It was hoped bone would then grow through the window over time and hold the stem in position. Success was unpredictable and the fixation not very robust. In the early 1980s, surgeons in the United States applied a coating of small beads to the Austin Moore device and implanted it without cement. The beads were constructed so that gaps between beads matched the size of the pores in native bone. Over time, bone cells from the patient would grow into these spaces and fix the stem in position. The stem was modified slightly to fit more tightly into the femoral canal, resulting in the Anatomic Medullary Locking (AML) stem design. With time, other forms of stem surface treatment and stem geometry have been developed and improved.

Initial hip designs were made of a one-piece femoral component and a one-piece acetabular component. Current designs have a femoral stem and separate head piece. Using an independent head allows the surgeon to adjust leg length (some heads seat more or less onto the stem) and to select from various materials from which the head is formed. A modern acetabulum component is also made up of two parts: a metal shell with a coating for bone attachment and a separate liner. First the shell is placed. Its position can be adjusted, unlike the original cemented cup design which are fixed in place once the cement sets. When proper positioning of the metal shell is obtained, the surgeon may select a liner made from various materials.

To combat loosening caused by polyethylene wear debris, hip manufacturers developed improved and novel materials for the acetabular liners. Ceramic heads mated with regular polyethylene liners or a ceramic liner were the first significant alternative. Metal liners to mate with a metal head were also developed. At the same time these designs were being developed, the problems that caused polyethylene wear were determined and manufacturing of this material improved. Highly crosslinked UHMWPE was introduced in the late 1990s. The most recent data comparing the various bearing surfaces has shown no clinically significant differences in their performance. Potential early problems with each material are discussed below. Performance data after 20 or 30 years may be needed to demonstrate significant differences in the devices. All newer materials allow use of larger diameter femoral heads. Use of larger heads significantly decreases the chance of the hip dislocating, which remains the greatest complication of the surgery.

When currently available implants are used, cemented stems tend to have a better longevity than uncemented stems. No significant difference is observed in the clinical performance of the various methods of surface treatment of uncemented devices. Uncemented stems are selected for patients with good quality bone that can resist the forces needed to drive the stem in tightly. Cemented devices are typically selected for patients with poor quality bone who are at risk of fracture during stem insertion. Cemented stems are less expensive due to lower manufacturing cost, but require good surgical technique to place them correctly. Uncemented stems can cause pain with activity in up to 20% of patients during the first year after placement as the bone adapts to the device. This is rarely seen with cemented stems.

Once an uncommon operation reserved for frail patients with a limited life expectancy, hip replacement is now common, even among active athletes including race car drivers Bobby Labonte and Dale Jarrett, and the 8-time Major-winning American golfer Tom Watson, who shot a 67 in the opening round of the Masters Tournament in the year following his operation.

Techniques

There are several incisions, defined by their relation to the gluteus medius. The approaches are posterior (Moore), lateral (Hardinge or Liverpool), antero-lateral (Watson-Jones), anterior (Smith-Petersen) and greater trochanter osteotomy. There is no compelling evidence in the literature for any particular approach, but consensus of professional opinion favours either modified anterolateral (Watson-Jones) or posterior approach.

Posterior approach

The posterior (Moore or Southern) approach accesses the joint and capsule through the back, taking piriformis muscle and the short external rotators off the femur. This approach gives excellent access to the acetabulum and femur and preserves the hip abductorsand thus minimises the risk of abductor dysfunction post operatively. It has the advantage of becoming a more extensile approach if needed. Critics cite a higher dislocation rate, although repair of the capsule, piriformis and the short external rotators along with use of modern large diameter head balls reduces this risk.

Lateral approach

The lateral approach is also commonly used for hip replacement. The approach requires elevation of the hip abductors (gluteus medius and gluteus minimus) to access the joint. The abductors may be lifted up by osteotomy of the greater trochanter and reapplying it afterwards using wires (as per Charnley), or may be divided at their tendinous portion, or through the functional tendon (as per Hardinge) and repaired using sutures. Although this approach has a lower dislocation risk than the posterior approach, critics note that occasionally the abductor muscles do not heal back on, leading to pain and weakness which is often very difficult to treat.

Antero-lateral approach

The anterolateral approach develops the interval between the tensor fasciae latae and the gluteus medius.

Anterior approach

The anterior approach uses an interval between the sartorius muscle and tensor fasciae latae. Dr. Joel Matta and Dr. Bert Thomas have adapted this approach, which was commonly used for pelvic fracture repair surgery, for use when performing hip replacement. When used with older hip implant systems that had a small diameter head, dislocation rates were reduced compared to surgery performed through a posterior approach. With modern implant designs, dislocation rates are lower because supporting muscle tissue, Including the iliotibial tract, receives very little damage during the surgery. There is a 10% rate of numbness in the thigh following this approach, due to injury to the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve. The anterior approach results in a quicker and less painful recovery. Immediately following surgery patients are instructed to go about their normal hip function, including weight bearing activity and bending their hip freely.

Minimally invasive approach

The double incision surgery and minimally invasive surgery seeks to reduce soft tissue damage through reducing the size of the incision. However, component positioning accuracy and visualization of the bone structures is significantly impaired. This can result in unintended fractures and soft tissue injury. Surgeons using these approaches are advised to use intraoperative x-ray fluoroscopy or computer guidance systems.

Computer-assisted surgery techniques are also available to guide the surgeon to provide enhanced accuracy. Several commercial CAS systems are available for use worldwide. HipNav was the first system developed specifically for total hip replacement, and included navigation and preoperative planning based on a preoperative CT scan of the patient. Improved patient outcomes and reduced complications have not been demonstrated when these systems are used when compared to standard techniques.

Implants

 
Cement-free implant sixteen days after surgery. Femoral component is cobalt chromium combined with titanium which induces bone growth into the implant. Ceramic head. Acetabular cup coated with bone growth inducing material and held temporarily in place with a single screw.

The prosthetic implant used in hip replacement consists of three parts: the acetabular cup, the femoral component, and the articular interface. Options exist for different people and indications. The evidence for a number of newer devices is not very good, including: ceramic-on-ceramic bearings, modular femoral necks, and uncemented monoblock cups. Correct selection of the prosthesis is important.

Acetabular cup

The acetabular cup is the component which is placed into the acetabulum (hip socket). Cartilage and bone are removed from the acetabulum and the acetabular cup is attached using friction or cement. Some acetabular cups are one piece, while others are modular. One piece (monobloc) shells are either UHMWPE (ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene) or metal, they have their articular surface machined on the inside surface of the cup and do not rely on a locking mechanism to hold a liner in place. A monobloc polyethylene cup is cemented in place while a metal cup is held in place by a metal coating on the outside of the cup. Modular cups consist of two pieces, a shell and liner. The shell is made of metal, the outside has a porous coating while the inside contains a locking mechanism designed to accept a liner. Two types of porous coating used to form a friction fit are sintered beads or a foam metal design to mimic the trabeculae of cancellous bone and initial stability is influenced by under-reaming and insertion force. Permanent fixation is achieved as bone grows onto or into the porous coating. Screws can be used to lag the shell to the bone providing even more fixation. Polyethylene liners are placed into the shell and connected by a rim locking mechanism, ceramic and metal liners are attached with a Morse taper.

Femoral component

The femoral component is the component that fits in the femur (thigh bone). Bone is removed and the femur is shaped to accept the femoral stem with attached prosthetic femoral head (ball). There are two types of fixation: cemented and uncemented. Cemented stems use acrylic bone cement to form a mantle between the stem and to the bone. Uncemented stems use friction, shape and surface coatings to stimulate bone to remodel and bond to the implant. Stems are made of multiple materials (titanium, cobalt chromium, stainless steel, and polymer composites) and they can be monolithic or modular. Modular components consist of different head dimensions and/or modular neck orientations; these attach via a taper similar to a Morse taper. These options allow for variability in leg length, offset and version. Femoral heads are made of metal or ceramic material. Metal heads, made of cobalt chromium for hardness, are machined to size and then polished to reduce wear of the socket liner. Ceramic heads are more smooth than polished metal heads, have a lower coefficient of friction than a cobalt chrome head, and in theory will wear down the socket liner more slowly. As of early 2011, follow up studies in patients have not demonstrated significant reductions in wear rates between the various types of femoral heads on the market. Ceramic implants are more brittle and may break after being implanted.

Articular interface

The articular interface is not actually part of either implant, rather it is the area between the acetabular cup and femoral component. The articular interface of the hip is a simple ball and socket joint. Size, material properties and machining tolerances at the articular interface can be selected based on patient demand to optimise implant function and longevity whilst mitigating associated risks. The interface size is measured by the outside diameter of the head or the inside diameter of the socket. Common sizes of femoral heads are 28 mm (1.1 in), 32 mm (1.3 in) and 36 mm (1.4 in). While a 22.25 mm (78 in) was common in the first modern prostheses, now even larger sizes are available 38–54+. Larger diameter heads lead to increased stability and range of motion whilst lowering the risk of dislocation. At the same time they are also subject to higher stresses such as friction and inertia. Different combinations of materials have different physical properties which can be coupled to reduce the amount of wear debris generated by friction. Typical pairings of materials include metal on polyethylene (MOP), metal on crosslinked polyethylene (MOXP), ceramic on ceramic (COC), ceramic on crosslinked polyethylene (COXP) and metal on metal (MOM). Each combination has different advantages and disadvantages.

Metal-on-metal hip implant failure

By 2010, reports in the orthopaedic literature have increasingly cited the problem of early failure of metal on metal prostheses in a small percentage of patients. Failures may relate to release of minute metallic particles or metal ions from wear of the implants, causing pain and disability severe enough to require revision surgery in 1–3% of patients. Design deficits of some prothesis models, especially with heat-treated alloys and a lack of special surgical experience accounts for most of the failures. Surgeons at leading medical centers such as the Mayo Clinic have reported reducing their use of metal-on-metal implants by 80 percent over the last year in favor of those made from other materials, like combinations of metal and plastic. The cause of these failures remain controversial, and may include both design factors, technique factors, and factors related to patient immune responses (allergy type reactions). In the United Kingdom the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency commenced an annual monitoring regime for metal-on-metal hip replacement patients from May 2010. Data which is shown in The Australian Orthopaedic Association's 2008 National Joint replacement registry, a record of nearly every hip implanted in that country over the previous 10 years, tracked 6,773 BHR (Birmingham Hip Resurfacing) Hips and found that less than one-third of one percent may have been revised due to the patient's reaction to the metal component. Other similar metal-on-metal designs have not fared as well, where some reports show 76% to 100% of the people with these metal-on-metal implants and have aseptic implant failures requiring revision also have evidence of histological inflammation accompanied by extensive lymphocyte infiltrates, characteristic of delayed type hypersensitivity responses. It is not clear to what extent this phenomenon negatively affects orthopedic patients. However for patients presenting with signs of an allergic reactions, evaluation for sensitivity should be conducted. Removal of the device that is not needed should be considered, since removal may alleviate the symptoms. Patients who have allergic reactions to cheap jewelry are more likely to have reactions to orthopedic implants. There is increasing awareness of the phenomenon of metal sensitivity and many surgeons now take this into account when planning which implant is optimal for each patient.

On March 12, 2012, The Lancet published a study, based on data from the National Joint Registry of England and Wales, finding that metal-on-metal hip implants failed at much greater rates than other types of hip implants and calling for a ban on all metal-on-metal hips. The analysis of 402,051 hip replacements showed that 6.2% of metal-on-metal hip implants had failed within five years, compared to 1.7% of metal-on-plastic and 2.3% of ceramic-on-ceramic hip implants. Each 1 mm (0.039 in) increase in head size of metal-on-metal hip implants was associated with a 2% increase of failure. Surgeons of the British Hip Society are recommending that large head metal-on-metal implants should no longer be performed.

On February 10, 2011, the U.S. FDA issued a patient advisory on metal-metal hip implants, stating it was continuing to gather and review all available information about metal-on-metal hip systems. On June 27–28, 2012, an advisory panel met to decide whether to impose new standards, taking into account the The Lancet findings. No new standards, such as routine checking of blood metal ion levels, were set, but guidance was updated. Currently, FDA has not required hip implants to be tested in clinical trials before they can be sold in the U.S. Instead, companies making new hip implants only need to prove that they are "substantially equivalent" to other hip implants already on the market. The exception is metal-on-metal implants, which were not tested in clinical trials but because of the high revision rate of metal-on-metal hips, in the future the FDA has stated that clinical trials will be required for approval and that post-market studies will be required to keep metal on metal hip implants on the market.

Alternatives and variations

Conservative management

The first line approach as an alternative to hip replacement is conservative management which involves a multimodal approach of medication, activity modification and physical therapy. Conservative management can prevent or delay the need for hip replacement.

Hemiarthroplasty

Hemiarthroplasty is a surgical procedure which replaces one half of the joint with an artificial surface and leaves the other part in its natural (pre-operative) state. This class of procedure is most commonly performed on the hip after a subcapital (just below the head) fracture of the neck of the femur (a hip fracture). The procedure is performed by removing the head of the femur and replacing it with a metal or composite prosthesis. The most commonly used prosthesis designs are the Austin Moore prosthesis and the Thompson Prosthesis. More recently a composite of metal and HDPE which forms two interphases (bipolar prosthesis) has also been used. The bipolar prosthesis has not been shown to have any advantage over monopolar designs. The procedure is recommended only for elderly and frail patients, due to their lower life expectancy and activity level. This is because with the passage of time the prosthesis tends to loosen or to erode the acetabulum.

Hip resurfacing

Hip resurfacing is an alternative to hip replacement surgery. It has been used in Europe for over seventeen years and become a common procedure.

The minimally invasive hip resurfacing procedure is a further refinement to hip resurfacing.

Viscosupplementation

Current alternatives also include viscosupplementation, or the injection of artificial lubricants into the joint. Use of these medications in the hip is off label. The cost of treatment is typically not covered by health insurance organizations.

Some believe that the future of osteoarthritis treatment is bioengineering, targeting the growth and/or repair of the damaged, arthritic joint. Centeno et al. have reported on the partial regeneration of an arthritic human hip joint using mesenchymal stem cells in one patient. It is yet to be shown that this result will apply to a larger group of patients and result in significant benefits. The FDA has stated that this procedure is being practiced without conforming to regulations, but Centeno claims that it is exempt from FDA regulation. It has not been shown in controlled clinical trials to be effective, and costs over $7,000.

History

The earliest recorded attempts at hip replacement (Gluck T, 1891), which were carried out in Germany, used ivory to replace the femoral head (the ball on the femur).

On September 28, 1940 at Columbia Hospital in Columbia, South Carolina, Dr. Austin T. Moore (1899–1963), an American surgeon, reported and performed the first metallic hip replacement surgery. The original prosthesis he designed was a proximal femoral replacement, with a large fixed head, made of the Cobalt-Chrome alloy Vitallium. It was about a foot in length and it bolted to the resected end of the femoral shaft (hemiarthroplasty). A later version of Dr. Moore's prosthesis, the so-called Austin Moore, developed in Columbia, SC was introduced in 1952 is still in use today, although rarely. Like modern hip implants it is inserted into the medullary canal of the femur. It depends on bone growth through a hole in the stem for long-term attachment.