Background

The acetabular component has remained the weakest link in hip arthroplasty regarding achievement of long-term survival. Primary fixation is a prerequisite for long-term performance. For this reason, we investigated the stability of a unique cementless titanium-coated elastic monoblock socket and the influence of supplementary screw fixation.

Patient and methods

During 2006–2008, we performed a randomized controlled trial on 37 patients (mean age 63 years (SD 7), 22 females) in whom we implanted a cementless press-fit socket. The socket was implanted with additional screw fixation (group A, n = 19) and without additional screw fixation (group B, n = 18). Using radiostereometric analysis with a 2-year follow-up, we determined the stability of the socket. Clinically relevant migration was defined as > 1 mm translation and > 2º rotation. Clinical scores were determined.

Results

The sockets without screw fixation showed a statistically significantly higher proximal translation compared to the socket with additional screw fixation. However, this higher migration was below the clinically relevant threshold. The numbers of migratory sockets were not significantly different between groups. After the 2-year follow-up, there were no clinically relevant differences between groups A and B regarding the clinical scores. 1 patient dropped out of the study. In the others, no sockets were revised.

Interpretation

We found that additional screw fixation is not necessary to achieve stability of the cementless press-fit elastic RM socket. We saw no postoperative benefit or clinical effect of additional screw fixation.

Background and purpose In open-wedge, valgus osteotomy of the upper tibia, there are concerns regarding the initial stability and ability to retain the correction. Rehabilitation protocols vary depending on the osteotomy technique and the fixation method. Angle-stable implants offer superior initial stability. Early full weight bearing appears to be possible using these implants. In this prospective cohort study, we measured migration in open-wedge osteotomy in patients following an early full weight bearing protocol and compared the results to those from a historical cohort of open-wedge osteotomy patients who followed a standard protocol (full weight bearing after 6 weeks) using radiostereometry.

Methods 14 open-wedge osteotomies fixated with the angle-stable Tomofix implant were performed; patients were allowed full weight bearing as soon as pain and wound healing permitted. Radiostereometry was used to measure motion across the osteotomy at regular intervals. Improvement in pain and functional outcome were assessed postoperatively. The results were compared to those from a group of 23 patients who had undergone the same operation but had used a standard rehabilitation protocol.

Results There were no adverse effects because of the early full weight bearing protocol. There were no differences in motion at the osteotomy between groups as measured by radiostereometry. In both groups, pain and function improved substantially without any differences between groups. Patients in the early weight bearing group achieved the same result but in a shorter time.

Interpretation Tomofix-plate-fixated open-wedge high tibial osteotomy allows early full weight bearing without loss of correction.

The anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) consists of an anteromedial bundle (AMB) and a posterolateral bundle (PLB). A reconstruction restoring the functional two-bundled nature should be able to approximate normal ACL function better than the most commonly used single-bundle reconstructions. Accurate tunnel positioning is important, but difficult. The purpose of this study was to provide a geometric description of the centre of the attachments relative to arthroscopically visible landmarks. The AMB and PLB attachment sites in 35 dissected cadaver knees were measured with a 3D system, as were anatomical landmarks of femur and tibia. At the femur, the mean ACL centre is positioned 7.9 ± 1.4 mm (mean ± 1 SD) shallow, along the notch roof, from the most lateral over-the-top position at the posterior edge of the intercondylar notch and from that point 4.0 ± 1.3 mm from the notch roof, low on the surface of the lateral condyle wall. The mean AMB centre is at 7.2 ± 1.8 and 1.4 ± 1.7 mm, and the mean PLB centre at 8.8 ± 1.6 and 6.7 ± 2.0 mm. At the tibia, the mean ACL centre is positioned 5.1 ± 1.7 mm lateral of the medial tibial spine and from that point 9.8 ± 2.1 mm anterior. The mean AMB centre is at 3.0 ± 1.6 and 9.4 ± 2.2 mm, and the mean PLB centre at 7.2 ± 1.8 and 10.1 ± 2.1 mm. The ACL attachment geometry is well defined relative to arthroscopically visible landmarks with respect to the AMB and PLB. With simple guidelines for the surgeon, the attachments centres can be found during arthroscopic single-bundle or double-bundle reconstructions.