Background Although injury to the lateral femoral cutaneous nerve (LFCN) is a known complication of anterior approaches to the hip and pelvis, no study has quantified its' incidence in anterior arthroplasty procedures. Questions/purposes We therefore defined the incidence, functional impact, and natural history of LFCN neuropraxia after an anterior approach for both hip resurfacing (HR) and primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods We followed 132 patients who underwent an anterior hip approach (55 THA; 77 HR). We administered self-reported questionnaires for sensory deficits of LFCN, neuropathic pain score (DN4), visual analog scale, as well as SF-12, UCLA, and WOMAC scores at one year postoperatively. A subset of 60 patients (30 THA; 30 HR) was evaluated at two time intervals. Results One hundred seven patients (81%) reported LFCN neuropraxia with a mean severity score of 2.32/10 and a mean DN4 score of 2.42/10. Hip resurfacing had a higher incidence of neuropraxia as compared with THA: 91% versus 67%, respectively. No functional limitations were reported on SF-12, WOMAC, or UCLA scores. Of the subset of 60 patients followed over an average of 12 months, 53 (88%) reported neuropraxia at the first followup interval with only three (6%) having complete resolution at second followup. Improvement in DN4 scores was observed over time: 3.6 versus 2.5, respectively. Conclusions Although LFCN neuropraxia was a frequent complication after anterior approach THA, it did not lead to functional limitations in our patients. A decrease in symptoms occurred over time but only a small number of patients reported complete resolution. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

No abstract

No abstract

Background Many patients undergo both THA and spinal arthrodesis, and those patients may not fare as well as those who undergo one procedure but not the other. The mechanisms of how spinal arthrodesis affects patient function after THA remain unclear. Questions/purposes The aims of our study were to (1) determine how patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), including the Oxford hip score as well as

Background Numerous cementless femoral stem design variations are in clinical use. Because initial implant instability and micromotion are associated with aseptic loosening of the femoral component, migration analysis provides an early assessment of implant survivorship. Questions/purposes We determined the (1) migration pattern of the Accolade 1 cementless femoral stem; (2) clinical factors predisposing to stem migration; (3) selfreported patient outcomes; and (4) our current rate of aseptic stem loosening. Methods We retrospectively analyzed 81 femoral stems for aseptic migration using Ein-Bild-Roentgen-Analysefemoral component analysis. Postoperatively, patients completed the WOMAC and SF-12 questionnaires. We assessed radiographic factors potentially associated with subsidence: indices of bone shape and quality, canal fill of the implant, and radiographic signs of loosening. Minimum followup was 24 months (mean, 29 months; range, 24-48 months). Results The average subsidence at 24 months was 1.3 mm (range, 0-1.5 mm). In the first 2 years, 36% of stems subsided more than 1.5 mm. Large stem size was associated with subsidence. Radiolucent lines ([ 1.5 mm in three zones) were present in 10% of stems and associated with lower questionnaire scores. The 5-year survivorship for aseptic loosening of the 367 stems was 97% with revision as end point and 95% for radiographic failure.

Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

No abstract

Background: Optimum management for the elderly acetabular fracture remains undefined. Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) in this population does not allow early weight-bearing and has an increased risk of failure. This study aimed to define outcomes of total hip arthroplasty (THA) in the setting of an acetabular fracture and compared delayed THA after acetabular ORIF (ORIF delayed THA) and acute fixation and THA (ORIF acute THA). Methods: All acetabular fractures in patients older than 60 years who underwent ORIF between 2007 and 2018 were reviewed (n ¼ 85). Of those, 14 underwent ORIF only initially and required subsequent THA (ORIF delayed THA). Twelve underwent an acute THA at the time of the ORIF (ORIF acute THA). The ORIF acute THA group was older (81 ± 7 vs 76 ± 8; P < .01) but had no other demographic-or injuryrelated differences compared with the ORIF delayed THA group. Outcome measures included operative time, length of stay, complications, radiographic assessments (component orientation, leg-length discrepancy, heterotopic ossification), and functional outcomes using the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Results: Operative time (P ¼ .1) and length of stay (P ¼ .5) for the initial surgical procedure (ORIF only or ORIF THA) were not different between groups. Four patients had a complication and required further surgeries; no difference was seen between groups. Radiographic assessments were similar between groups. The ORIF acute THA group had a significantly better OHS (40.1 ± 3.9) than the ORIF delayed THA group (33.6 ± 8.5) (P ¼ .03). Conclusion:In elderly acetabulum fractures, ORIF acute THA compared favorably (a better OHS, single operation/hospital visit, equivalent complications) with ORIF delayed THA. We would thus recommend that in patients with risk factors for failure requiring delayed THA (eg, dome or roof impaction) that ORIF acute THA be strongly considered.