Search Results
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgery has shown dramatic changes in terms of increased number of procedures and of technical development in recent years. It has been described as “the operation of the 20th century” for the excellent results, the high satisfaction of the patients and the improvement of the quality of life.
-
A lot of variations have been introduced over the last few decades in THA especially in terms of indications (both in younger and older patients), techniques and devices (approaches, tissue preservation, biomaterials and industrial finishing), per-operative management (blood loss and pain control) and post-operative protocols (the so called “fast track” surgery). Looking at all these advances the emerging question is: have all of them been justified both in terms of improvement of the results for the patients and of the cost/benefit ratio from an economical point of view?
-
The purpose of this paper is to critically analyse the advantages and the disadvantages of the theoretically proposed “advances in hip arthroplasty” and attempt to understand which are justified of such “advances” nowadays, based on the international and the European perspective with a focus on the author’s personal clinical experience.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2017;2. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.2.170008. Originally published online at www.efortopenreviews.org
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Enrico Gallazzi in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is widely considered one of the most successful surgical procedures in orthopaedics. It is associated with high satisfaction rates and significant improvements in quality of life following surgery. On the other hand, the main cause of late revision is osteolysis and wear, often a result of failure of bearing surfaces.
-
Currently, several options are available to the surgeon when choosing the bearing surface in THA (ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC), ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoPE), metal-on-polyethylene (MoPE)), each with advantages and drawbacks.
-
Very few studies have directly compared the various combinations of bearings at long-term follow-up. Randomized controlled trials show similar short- to mid-term survivorship among the best performing bearing surfaces (CoC, CoXLPE and MoXLPE). Selection of the bearing surface is often ‘experience-based’ rather than ‘evidence-based’.
-
The aim of this paper is therefore to evaluate the main advantages and drawbacks of various types of tribology in THA, while providing practical suggestions for the surgeon on the most suitable bearing surface option for each patient.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2018;3 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.3.180300.
IRCCS Galeazzi Orthopedic Institute, Milan, Italy
Search for other papers by Luca Pierannunzii in
Google Scholar
PubMed
IRCCS Galeazzi Orthopedic Institute, Milan, Italy
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Acetabular bone loss is a relevant concern for surgeons dealing with a failed total hip arthroplasty.
-
Since the femoral head is no longer available, allografts represent the first choice for most reconstructive solutions, either as a structural buttress or impacted bone chips.
-
Even though fresh-frozen bone is firmly recommended for structural grafts, freeze-dried and/or irradiated bone may be used alternatively for impaction grafting. Indeed, there are some papers on freeze-dried or irradiated bone impaction grafting, but their number is limited, as is the number of cases.
-
Xenografts do not represent a viable option based on the poor available evidence but bioactive bioceramics such as hydroxyapatite and biphasic calcium phosphates are suitable bone graft extenders or even substitutes for acetabular impaction grafting.
-
Bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells and demineralised bone matrix seem to act as reliable bone graft enhancers, i.e. adjuvant therapies able to improve the biological performance of standard bone grafts or substitutes. Among these therapies, platelet-rich plasma and bone morphogenetic proteins need to be investigated further before any recommendations can be made.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2016;1:431-439. DOI:10.1302/2058-5241.160025
Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of Orthopaedics, Gothenburg, Sweden
Search for other papers by Georgios Tsikandylakis in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
Search for other papers by Soren Overgaard in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Region Västra Götaland, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Department of Orthopaedics, Gothenburg, Sweden
The Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register, Gothenburg, Sweden
Search for other papers by Johan Kärrholm in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Choice of articulating materials, head size and the design of the articulation will become decisive for the long-term performance of a total hip arthroplasty (THA) and especially in terms of risk for dislocation and wear-related problems. Here we account for common alternatives based on available studies and the evidence that can be derived from them.
-
Metal or ceramic femoral heads articulating against a liner or cup made of highly cross-linked polyethylene and ceramic-on-ceramic articulations have about similar risk for complications leading to revision, whereas the performance of metal-on-metal articulations, especially with use of big heads, is inferior. The clinical significance of problems related to ceramic-on-ceramic articulations such as squeaking remains unclear. With use of current technology ceramic fractures are rare.
-
Large femoral heads have the potential to increase the range of hip movement before impingement occurs and are therefore expected to reduce dislocation rates. On the other hand, issues related to bearing wear, corrosion at the taper-trunnion junction and groin pain may arise with larger heads and jeopardize the longevity of THA. Based on current knowledge, 32-mm heads seem to be optimal for metal-on-polyethylene bearings. Patients with ceramic-on-ceramic bearings may benefit from even larger heads such as 36 or 40 mm, but so far there are no long-term reports that confirm the safety of bearings larger than 36 mm.
-
Assessment of lipped liners is difficult because randomized studies are lacking, but retrospective clinical studies and registry data seem to indicate that this liner modification will reduce the rate of dislocation or revision due to dislocation without clear evidence of clinically obvious problems due to neck-liner impingement.
-
The majority of studies support the view that constrained liners and dual mobility cups (DMC) will reduce the risk of revision due to dislocation both in primary and revision THA, the latter gaining increasing popularity in some countries. Both these devices suffer from implant-specific problems, which seem to be more common for the constrained liner designs. The majority of studies of these implants suffer from various methodological problems, not least selection bias, which calls for randomized studies preferably in a multi-centre setting to obtain sufficient power. In the 2020s, the orthopaedic profession should place more effort on such studies, as has already been achieved within other medical specialties, to improve the level of evidence in the choice of articulation when performing one of the most common in-hospital surgical procedures in Europe.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:763-775. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.200002
Search for other papers by Fabio D’Angelo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luca Monestier in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Treatment of bacterial septic arthritis in the native adult hip joint can be challenging. Prompt diagnosis and treatment decisions can reduce the associated morbidity and mortality.
-
For this systematic review of the literature, we asked: (1) What are the treatment options? (2) What are the success rates and the outcomes after treatment? (3) Which antibiotic and duration of therapy are optimal?
-
We searched the electronic databases PubMed, Scopus, and Embase using the search terms “hip” or “native hip” and “septic arthritis” or “coxitis”. Studies were included if they reported on: (1) bacterial infection of the hip, (2) treatment, (3) success rate/outcomes, (4) follow-up. The final review included 19 studies. The quality of study reporting was evaluated with the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) questionnaire.
-
Three treatment options are: arthroscopy, single open surgery, and two-stage total hip arthroplasty (THA). A high success rate in infection eradication was reported for all three. Intravenous antibiotic therapy should be promptly initiated to eradicate septic arthritis and minimize potential sequelae and complications.
-
Arthroscopy, single open or two-stage THA were reported to be effective in treating bacterial septic arthritis of the native hip. The key to optimal outcome is early diagnosis and timely treatment.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:164-172. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200082
Search for other papers by Michela Saracco in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Vincenzo Ciriello in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Fabio D’Angelo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Giuseppe Solarino in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Giandomenico Logroscino in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Purpose
-
Intra-articular injection is a well-established and increasingly used treatment for the patient with mild-to-moderate hip osteoarthritis. The objectives of this literature review and meta-analysis are to evaluate the effect of prior intra-articular injections on the risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA) and to try to identify which is the minimum waiting time between hip injection and replacement in order to reduce the risk of infection.
Methods
-
The database of PubMed, Embase, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library was systematically and independently searched, according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta–Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. To assess the potential risk of bias and the applicability of the evidence found in the primary studies to the review, the Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) was used. The statistical analysis was performed by using the software ’R’ version 4.2.2.
Results
-
The pooling of data revealed an increased risk of PJI in the injection group that was statistically significative (P = 0.0427). In the attempt to identify a ’safe time interval’ between the injection and the elective surgery, we conducted a further subgroup analysis: in the subgroup 0–3 months, we noted an increased risk of PJI after injection.
Conclusions
-
Intra-articular injection is a procedure that may increase the risk of developing periprosthetic infection. This risk is higher if the injection is performed less than 3 months before hip replacement.
Search for other papers by Giuseppe Solarino in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Giovanni Vicenti in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Massimiliano Carrozzo in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Guglielmo Ottaviani in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Biagio Moretti in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Modular neck (MN) implants can restore the anatomy, especially in deformed hips such as sequelae of development dysplasia.
-
Early designs for MN implants had problems with neck fractures and adverse local tissue, so their use was restricted to limited indications.
-
Results of the latest generation of MN prostheses seem to demonstrate that these problems have been at least mitigated.
-
Given the results of the studies presented in this review, surgeons might consider MN total hip arthroplasty (THA) for a narrower patient selection when a complex reconstruction is required.
-
Long MN THA should be avoided in case of body mass index > 30, and should be used with extreme caution in association with high offset femoral necks with long or extra-long heads. Cr-Co necks should be abandoned, in favour of a titanium alloy connection.
-
Restoring the correct anatomic femoral offset remains a challenge in THA surgeries.
-
MN implants have been introduced to try to solve this problem. The MN design allows surgeons to choose the appropriate degree and length of the neck for desired stability and range of motion.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:751-758. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200064
Search for other papers by Christiaan P. van Lingen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luigi M. Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Harmen B. Ettema in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Cees C. Verheyen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
Large-head metal-on-metal (MoM) bearings were re-popularised in the late 1990s with the introduction of modern hip resurfacing (HR), followed closely by large metal head total hip arthroplasty (THA). A worldwide increase in the use of MoM hip arthroplasty subsequently saw a sharp decline, due to serious complications.
-
MoM was rapidly adopted in the early 2000s until medical device alerts were issued by government regulatory agencies and national and international organisations, leading to post-marketing surveillance and discontinuation of these implants.
-
Guidelines for MoM hip implant follow-up differ considerably between regulatory authorities worldwide; this can in part be attributed to missing or conflicting evidence.
-
The authors consider that the use of large-head MoM THA should be discontinued. MoM HR should be approached with caution and, when considered, should be used only in patients who meet all of the recommended selection criteria, which limits its indications considerably.
-
The phased introduction of new prostheses should be mandatory in future. Close monitoring of outcomes and long-term follow-up is also necessary for the introduction of new prostheses.
Cite this article: van Lingen CP, Zagra LM, Ettema HB, Verheyen CC. Sequelae of large-head metal-on-metal hip arthroplasties: current status and future prospects. EFORT Open Rev 2016;1:345-353. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.1.160014.
Search for other papers by Karl Stoffel in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Tamara Horn in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Michael Mueller in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Carsten Perka in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Henrik Eckardt in
Google Scholar
PubMed
-
The majority of periprosthetic femoral fractures are treated surgically.
-
Surgical treatment may be revision only, revision in combination with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), or ORIF only.
-
The treatment decision is dependent on whether the stem is loose or not, but loose stems are not always identified, resulting in unsatisfactory treatments.
-
This article presents an algorithmic approach to identifying loose stems around proximal femoral periprosthetic fractures, taking patient history, stem design, and plain radiographs into consideration. This approach may help identifying loose stems and increase the probability of effective treatments.
Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:449-456. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190086
Search for other papers by Carsten Perka in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Orthopedics, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Clinical Sciences, Lund University, Malmö, Sweden
Search for other papers by Maziar Mohaddes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
BG Kliniken – Klinikverbund der gesetzlichen Unfallversicherung gGmbH, Berlin, Germany
Search for other papers by Axel Ekkernkamp in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Niklas Keller in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Dirk Stengel in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Purpose
-
To assess utility, benefits, and risks of 4th-generation alumina–zirconia ceramic pairings in elective total hip arthroplasty (THA).
Methods
-
A comprehensive mixed-methods best-evidence synthesis using data from systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies, as well as joint replacement registries, was conducted to estimate overall revision and survival rates, periprosthetic infection, bearing fractures, and noise phenomena with 4th-generation alumina–zirconia ceramic versus other tribological couplings in elective THA. The systematic review part across multiple databases was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023418076), and individual study data were extracted for statistical re-analysis.
Results
-
Twenty overlapping systematic reviews, 7, 17, and 8 references from RCTs, cohort studies, and joint replacement registries form the basis of this work. According to current best evidence, it is (i) 15–33 times more likely that 4th-generation alumina–zirconia pairings avoid a revision for infection than causing a revision for audible noise, (ii) 38–85 times more likely that 4th-generation alumina–zirconia pairings avoid a revision for infection than causing a revision for ceramic head fractures, and (iii) three to six times more likely that 4th-generation alumina–zirconia pairings avoid a revision for infection than cause a revision for ceramic liner fractures.
Conclusion
-
Fourth-generation alumina–zirconia pairings in THA show a favorable benefit–risk ratio, with rare compound-specific adverse events and complications significantly outbalanced by long-term advantages, such as a markedly lower incidence of revision for infection.
