Search for other papers by Charles Rivière in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Stefan Lazic in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Loïc Villet in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Yann Wiart in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Sarah Muirhead Allwood in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Justin Cobb in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Introduction In the 20th century, Sir John Charnley and Sir John Insall successfully introduced modern total joint replacements for hips (THA) and knees (TKA), respectively. In order to prevent implant fixation failure and accelerated
Search for other papers by Pablo A. Slullitel in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by José I. Oñativia in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Martin A. Buttaro in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Marisa L. Sánchez in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Fernando Comba in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Gerardo Zanotti in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Francisco Piccaluga in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Introduction Being the third most common cause of revision surgery following primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), peri-prosthetic joint infection (PJI) constitutes one of the most undesired complications, with a prevalence of 0.3% to 2
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
Background Treatment of bacterial septic arthritis in the native adult hip poses distinct challenges. The yearly incidence is estimated at about 4–10 per 100,000 patients worldwide; however, its real incidence is difficult to quantify. 1 – 3
Search for other papers by Thorsten Gehrke in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mustafa Citak in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Mustafa Akkaya in
Google Scholar
PubMed
number of revision total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed, the incidence of severe acetabular defects and related pelvic discontinuity (PD) has also been on the rise ( 5 , 6 ). The proper treatment strategy for challenging acetabular revision cases
Search for other papers by Alessandro Colombi in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Daniele Schena in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Claudio Carlo Castelli in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Introduction The evolution of hip replacements has increased patients’ expectations in terms of function and longevity. The main goal of surgery is full restoration of the original biomechanical setting of the hip affected by osteoarthritis
Search for other papers by Stig Storgaard Jakobsen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Søren Overgaard in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Kjeld Søballe in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Ole Ovesen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Bjarne Mygind-Klavsen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Christian Andreas Dippmann in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Michael Ulrich Jensen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jens Stürup in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jens Retpen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background The interest in treating hip pathologies, such as developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) and labral tears in patients without radiographic signs of osteoarthritis (OA), has rapidly increased
Search for other papers by Keith Tucker in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Klaus-Peter Günther in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Per Kjaersgaard-Andersen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jörg Lützner in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Jan Philippe Kretzer in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Rob G.H.H. Nelissen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Toni Lange in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Luigi Zagra in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Past Present AOANJRR (Australia) Yes Yes, but less than previously DHR/DKR (Denmark) Yes Yes EPRD (Germany) Yes 12% Hips KP National Implant Registries (USA) Yes 2–4% hips, 1% shoulders FAR (Finland
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Vejle Hospital, Vejle, Denmark
Search for other papers by Claus Varnum in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Alma Bečić Pedersen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Orthopaedics, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden
Search for other papers by Ola Rolfson in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Lund University, Skåne University Hospital, Department of Orthopedics, Malmö, Sweden
Search for other papers by Cecilia Rogmark in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Search for other papers by Ove Furnes in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
Search for other papers by Geir Hallan in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, Turku University Hospital, Turku, Finland
Search for other papers by Keijo Mäkelä in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Department of Surgery, Epworth HealthCare, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
Search for other papers by Richard de Steiger in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Centre for Hip Surgery, Wrightington Hospital, Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Trust, Lancashire, United Kingdom
Search for other papers by Martyn Porter in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Orthopaedic Research Unit, Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
Search for other papers by Søren Overgaard in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Background The establishment of total hip arthroplasty (THA) registers started in the Scandinavian countries in 1979. 1 Later on, several countries outside Scandinavia followed with the establishment of nationwide or regional THA
Search for other papers by Philip F. Dobson in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Michael R. Reed in
Google Scholar
PubMed
further reduced infection. Despite the ongoing evolution and refinement of surgical practice, surgical site infection (SSI) remains a risk for every patient, including those undergoing primary total hip and knee arthroplasty procedures, and is associated
Search for other papers by Pieter Bas de Witte in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Christiaan J A van Bergen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Babette L de Geest in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Floor Willeboordse in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Joost H van Linge in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Yvon M den Hartog in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Magritha (Margret) M H P Foreman-van Drongelen in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Renske M Pereboom in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Simon G F Robben in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Bart J Burger in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by M Adhiambo Witlox in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by Melinda M E H Witbreuk in
Google Scholar
PubMed
Introduction Developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) has a reported incidence of 3–4% in children under the age of 6 months. Actual dislocations are reported in 0.1–0.2% ( 1 ). If undiagnosed or untreated, consequences can be severe