It is unclear whether cemented or uncemented hemiarthroplasty is the best treatment option in elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures. Previous randomized trials comparing cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty have conflicting results. We conducted a randomized controlled trial to compare cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty. This multicenter parallel-randomized controlled trial included patients of 70 years and older with a displaced femoral neck fracture (Garden type III or IV). Inclusion was between August 2008 and June 2012. Patients were randomized between a cemented hemiarthroplasty, type Müller Straight Stem or an uncemented hemiarthroplasty, type DB-10. Primary outcomes were complications, operation time, functional outcome (measured by Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) and Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS)) and mid-thigh pain. Health Related Quality of Life (HRQoL, expressed with the SF-12) was measured as an secondary outcome. Follow up was 1 year. In total 201 patients were included in the study (91 uncemented, 110 cemented hemiarthroplasties) The uncemented group showed more major local complications (intra- and postoperative fractures and dislocations) odds ratio (95% confidence interval) 3.36 (1.40 to 8.11). There was no difference in mean operation time (57.3 vs 55.4 min). There were no differences in functional outcomes (TUG 12.8 (9.4) vs. 13.9 (9.0), GARS 43.2 (19.7) vs. 39.2 (16.5)) and mid-thigh pain (18.6 vs 21.6%). Physical component SF-12 HRQoLwas lower in the uncemented group (30.3 vs. 35.3 p < 0.05 after six weeks, 33.8 vs 38.5 p < 0.05 after 12 weeks). A cemented hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients with a displaced femoral neck fracture results in less complications compared to an uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Netherlands Trial Registry; NTR 1508 , accepted date 27 okt 2008

Background and purpose — In the Netherlands about 40% of hip fractures are treated with a hemiarthroplasty (HA) or a total hip arthroplasty (THA). Although these procedures are claimed to have fewer complications than osteosynthesis (i.e., reoperation), complications still occur. Analyses of data from national registries with adequate completeness of revision surgery are important to establish guidelines to diminish the risk for revision. We identified risk factors for revision. Patients and methods — All patients older than 50 years of age with a hip fracture treated with arthroplasty by orthopedic surgeons and registered in the (national) Dutch arthroplasty register (LROI) were included in the study. In this register, patient characteristics and surgical details were prospectively collected. Revision surgery and reasons for revision were evaluated. A proportional hazard ratio model for revision was created using competing risk analysis (with death as competing risk). Results — 1-year revision rate of HA was (cumulative incidence function [CIF] 1.6% (95% CI 1.4–1.8) and THA 2.4% (CI 2.0–2.7). Dislocation was the most common reason for revision in both groups (HA 29%, THA 41%). Male sex, age under 80 years, posterolateral approach, and uncemented stem fixation were risk factors for revision in both THA and HA. THA patients with ASA classification III/IV were revised more often, whereas revision in the HA cohort was performed more often in ASA I/II patients. Interpretation — After arthroplasty of hip fractures, both a posterolateral approach and an uncemented hip stem have higher risks for revision surgery compared with an anterolateral approach and an cemented stem.

Introduction Up to one-third of patients with cerebral palsy (CP) develop hip migration. Current standard care for early hip migration is bilateral adductor-psoas tenotomy; however, the failure rate is relatively high with 34%–74% of patients with CP requiring secondary hip surgery. Using temporary medial hemiepiphysiodesis of the proximal femur (TMH-PF), the morphology of the hip can be changed. This technique aims to reduce further hip migration and the need for secondary surgical management. Further research is necessary to determine the benefit of TMH-PF in addition to adductor-psoas tenotomy. The hypothesis of this study is that TMH-PF combined with adductor-psoas release decreases the chance of progressive hip migration and the need for secondary hip surgery, compared with adductor-psoas release alone. Methods and analysis The GUIDANCE study is an open-label multicentre randomised controlled trial. Patients with CP aged between 2 and 8 years, with spastic CP—Gross Motor Function Classification System IV or V, hip abduction ≤40° and hip migration of 30%–50% can be included in this trial. They will be randomised into a control arm (adductor-psoas tenotomy) or an intervention arm (adductor-psoas tenotomy+TMH PH). The primary outcome will be treatment failure at 5-year follow-up. At 2-year follow-up a preliminary analysis will be performed. Secondary outcomes will be differences in patient-reported outcome measures (CPCHILD and CPG pain score), range of motion, radiological measurements including head shaft angle and hip migration percentage and three-dimensional (3D) morphological changes to the proximal femur. Furthermore, an analysis will be performed to identify predictors for treatment failure in both treatment arms. Ethics and dissemination The GUIDANCE study should provide evidence on the effectiveness of TMH-PF in addition to adductor-psoas tenotomy in children with CP with early hip migration. If beneficial, larger hip reconstructive procedures can be delayed or prevented, providing a distinct benefit for these vulnerable children. The study’s strengths lie in its methodological framework, incorporating randomised allocation and intervention assessment. The main limitation is the inability to blind the treating physician or the researcher for the treatment arm the participant is allocated to. The results of the GUIDANCE study will be presented at scientific meetings and published in international peer-reviewed journals. The aim is to publish the results at 2 years follow-up and 5 years follow-up and to publish the results of the analysis on the 3D morphology of the hip after TMH-PF. Individual de-identified participant data that underlie the results from the GUIDANCE study and the study protocol will be shared if requested. Trial registration number Clinical Trial Registry number: NCT06118736. Registered on 3 November 2023.