Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is regarded as a critical factor contributing to the failure of primary and revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA). With the increasing prevalence of TJA, a significant increase in the incidence of PJI is expected. The escalating number of cases, along with the significant economic strain imposed on healthcare systems, place emphasis on the pressing need for development of effective strategies for prevention. PJI not only affects patient outcomes but also increases mortality rates, thus its prevention is a matter of vital importance. The longer-term survival rates for PJI after total hip and knee arthroplasty correspond with or are lower than those for prevalent cancers in older adults while exceeding those for other types of cancers. Because of the multifaceted nature of infection risk, a collaborative effort among healthcare professionals is essential to implementing diverse strategies for prevention. Rigorous validation of the efficacy of emerging novel preventive techniques will be required. The combined application of these strategies can minimize the risk of infection, thus their comprehensive adoption is important. Collectively, the risk of PJI could be substantially minimized by application of a multifaceted approach implementing these strategies, leading to improvement of patient outcomes and a reduced economic burden.

Treatment of femoral bone defects continues to be a challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA); therefore, meticulous preoperative evaluation of patients and surgical planning are required. This review provides a concise synopsis of the etiology, classification, treatment strategy, and prosthesis selection in relation to femoral bone loss in revision THA. A search of literature was conducted for identification of research articles related to classification of bone loss, management of femoral revision, and comparison of different types of stems. Findings of a thorough review of the included articles were as follows: (1) the Paprosky classification system is used most often when defining femoral bone loss, (2) a primary-length fully coated monoblock femoral component is recommended for treatment of types I or II bone defects, (3) use of an extensively porouscoated stem and a modular fluted tapered stem is recommended for management of types III or IV bone defects, and (4) use of an impaction grafting technique is another option for improvement of bone stock, and allograft prosthesis composite and proximal femoral replacement can be applied by experienced surgeons, in selected cases, as a final salvage solution. Stems with a tapered design are gradually replacing components with a cylindrical design as the first choice for femoral revision; however, further confirmation regarding the advantages and disadvantages of modular and nonmodular stems will be required through conduct of higher-level comparative studies.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes with use of short-curved stems versus standard-length single wedged stems over a minimum follow-up period of five years.
Materials and Methods: A retrospective study of primary total hip arthroplasties performed using the Fitmore^® stem (127 hips, 122 patients) and the M/L taper^® stem (195 hips, 187 patients) between October 2012 and June 2014 was conducted. The clinical and radiographic outcomes were obtained for evaluation over a minimum follow-up period of five years.
Results: In both the Fitmore^® and M/L taper^® groups, the mean Harris hip score improved from 52.4 and 48.9 preoperatively to 93.3 and 94.5 at the final follow-up, respectively (P=0.980). The mean Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index scores also improved from 73.3 and 76.8 preoperatively to 22.9 and 25.6 at the final follow-up, respectively (P=0.465). Fifteen hips (Fitmore^®: 14 hips; M/L taper^®: one hip, P<0.001) developed intraoperative cracks and were treated simultaneously with cerclage wiring. Radiography showed a radiolucent line in 24 hips in the Fitmore^® group and 12 hips in the M/L taper^® group (P=0.125). Cortical hypertrophy was detected in 29 hips (Fitmore^® group: 28 hips; M/L taper^® group: one hip, P<0.001).
Conclusion: Similarly favorable clinical and radiographic outcomes were achieved with use of both short-curved stems and standard-length single wedged stems. However, higher cortical hypertrophy and a higher rate of femoral crack were observed with use of Fitmore^® stems.

We report two cases of postoperative total hip arthroplasty periprostehtic fracture of the acetabulum which treated by open reduction with internal fixation without acetabular cup revision. From these cases, we should consider open reduction with internal fixation as the first treatment option in cases where spot welding of the cup to the host bone is observed.

Purpose: The prognosis of total hip replacement (THR) after open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) versus THR following non-operative treatment of acetabular fractures is unclear. Few studies have been conducted in this regard. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to perform an assessment and compare the functional outcomes for study subjects in the ORIF and non-ORIF groups during the follow-up period compared to baseline.
Materials and Methods: This longitudinal comparative study, which included 40 patients who underwent THR for either posttraumatic arthritis after fixation of an acetabular fracture or arthritis following conservative management of a fracture, was conducted for 60 months. Twenty-four patients had undergone ORIF, and 16 patients had undergone nonoperative/conservative management for acetabular fractures. Following THR, the patients were followed up for monitoring of functional outcomes for the Harris hip score (HHS) and comparison between the ORIF and non-ORIF groups was performed.
Results: The HHS showed significant improvement in both ORIF and non-ORIF groups. At the end of the mean follow-up period, no significant variation in scores was observed between the groups, i.e., ORIF group (91.61±6.64) compared to non-ORIF group (85.74±11.56). A significantly higher number of re-interventions were required for medial wall fractures and combined fractures compared to posterior fractures (P<0.05).
Conclusion: THR resulted in improved functional outcome during follow-up in both the groups; however, the ORIF group was observed to have better functional outcome. Re-intervention was not required for any of the posterior fractures at the end of the mean follow-up period.

Purpose: The direct anterior approach (DAA) for conducting total hip arthroplasty (THA) is gaining popularity worldwide. However, careful selection of patients and surgeon experience are important. Although promising outcomes have been reported in international studies, research on DAA in Southern and Southeast Asia has been limited.
Materials and Methods: This prospective study included 157 patients who underwent THA using the DAA between January 2019 and June 2022. The patients were divided into three groups for the comparison. Data on preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were acquired. Improvement of the surgeon’s performance to use of a DAA approach was examined using the CUSUM (cumulative summation method).
Results: The mean age of the patients was 43.9 years. Differences in intraoperative variables and complications were observed among the three groups, and improved outcomes were reported in later cases. Functional outcomes showed significant improvement, and no differences were observed between groups. The results of learning curve analysis indicated a shift towards consistent success after the 82nd case, reaching an acceptable rate of failure by the 118th case.
Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that DAA can offer benefits but there is a learning curve. Complications were initially high but began decreasing after approximately 80 cases. Careful selection of patients is critical, particularly in the effort to minimize being presented with a challenging case. This study provides insights that may be helpful to surgeons when considering DAA; however, further study is warranted.

Intraoperative acetabular fractures (IAFs), a complication seldomly encountered in total hip arthroplasty, are typically a result of the impact of insertion of a cementless press-fit cup. Factors that contribute to the risk of these types of fractures include poor bone quality, highly sclerotic bone, and the use of a press-fit cup that is excessively large. The approach to management of these fractures is dependent on when they are identified. Immediate stabilization measures should be implemented for management of fractures detected during surgery. When fractures are detected postoperatively, the decision regarding conservative treatment is dependent on the stability of the implant and the specific fracture pattern. In the majority of cases, effective treatment of an acetabular fracture detected intraoperatively can be administered using a multi-hole revision cup along with anchoring screws in the various regions of the acetabulum. Selection of plate osteosynthesis of the posterior column is recommended when there is a large posterior wall fragment or pelvic discontinuity. In cases where anatomical dimensions allow, cup-cage reconstruction may offer a promising alternative to a combined hip procedure. The number of reports addressing the management of IAFs is limited. This review focuses on outlining the strategies that are currently available for management of this seldomly encountered complication.

Purpose: This study sought to examine the utilization of bone health evaluations in geriatric hip fracture patients and identify risk factors for the development of future fragility fractures.
Materials and Methods: A consecutive series of patients ≥55 years who underwent surgical management of a hip fracture between September 2015 and July 2019 were identified. Chart review was performed to evaluate post-injury follow-up, performance of a bone health evaluation, and use of osteoporosis-related diagnostic and pharmacologic treatment.
Results: A total of 832 patients were included. The mean age of the patients was 81.2±9.9 years. Approximately 21% of patients underwent a comprehensive bone health evaluation. Of this cohort, 64.7% were started on pharmacologic therapy, and 73 patients underwent bone mineral density testing. Following discharge from the hospital, 70.3% of the patients followed-up on an outpatient basis with 95.7% seeing orthopedic surgery for post-fracture care. Overall, 102 patients (12.3%) sustained additional fragility fractures within two years, and 31 of these patients (3.7%) sustained a second hip fracture. There was no difference in the rate of second hip fractures or other additional fragility fractures based on the use of osteoporosis medications.
Conclusion: Management of osteoporosis in geriatric hip fracture patients could be improved. Outpatient follow-up post-hip fracture is almost 70%, yet a minority of patients were started on osteoporosis medications and many sustained additional fragility fractures. The findings of this study indicate that orthopedic surgeons have an opportunity to lead the charge in treatment of osteoporosis in the post-fracture setting.

Purpose: Hip fractures are associated with increased mortality. The identification of risk factors of mortality could improve patient care. The aim of the study was to identify risk factors of mortality after surgery for a hip fracture and construct a mortality model.
Materials and Methods: A cohort study was conducted on patients with hip fractures at two institutions. Five hundred and ninety-seven patients with hip fractures that were treated in the tertiary hospital, and another 147 patients that were treated in a secondary hospital. The perioperative data were collected from medical charts and interviews. Functional Assessment Measure score, Short Form-12 and mortality were recorded at 12 months. Patients and surgery variables that were associated with increased mortality were used to develop a mortality model.
Results: Mortality for the whole cohort was 19.4% at one year. From the variables tested only age >80 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists category, time to surgery (>48 hours), Charlson comorbidity index, sex, use of anti-coagulants, and body mass index <25 kg/m² were associated with increased mortality and used to construct the mortality model. The area under the curve for the prediction model was 0.814. Functional outcome at one year was similar to preoperative status, even though their level of physical function dropped after the hip surgery and slowly recovered.
Conclusion: The mortality prediction model that was developed in this study calculates the risk of death at one year for patients with hip fractures, is simple, and could detect high risk patients that need special management.

The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare the postoperative outcomes and complications of labral repair with those of labral reconstruction. An electronic search strategy was conducted from 1986 until August 2023 using the following databases: PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1-20). The primary objectives included the postoperative clinical outcomes determined by the number of patients who reached minimal clinical important difference (MCID) on the visual analog scale (VAS), modified Harris hip score (mHHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Subscale (HOS-SS), Hip Outcome Score-Activities of Daily Life (HOS-ADL), and International Hip Outcome Tool-12 (iHOT-12). In addition, analysis of the rate of revision arthroscopy, the rate of conversion to total hip arthroplasty (THA), the postoperative VAS, mHHS, HOS-SS, HOS-ADL, iHOT-12, nonarthritic hip score (NAHS), patient satisfaction, lower extremity function scale (LEFS), and the SF-12 (12-item shortform) was also performed. Any differences arising between the investigators were resolved by discussion. Seventeen studies were relevant to the inclusion criteria and were included in this meta-analysis. A higher rate of patients who reached MCID in the mHHS (P=0.02) as well as a higher rate of revision arthroscopy was observed for labral repair (P=0.03). The remaining studied outcomes were comparable. Despite the greater predictability of success in the reconstruction group, conduct of additional studies will be required for evaluation of the benefits of such findings. In addition, labral reconstruction is more technically demanding than a labral repair.