Retrospective and consecutive analysis of the long-term outcomes of the SBG stem: a 15-year follow-up study

Radiological identification of Zweymüller-type femoral stem prosthesis in revision cases

INTRODUCTION

Since 1979 the number of patients treated with femoral stems has continued to grow, as well as the number of stems with features similar to the Zweymüller prosthesis produced by different companies. Identification can be problematic in case requiring revision. In the present paper, we present an overview of morphometric differences between the different stem designs, which can be useful for radiologic identification in revision cases.

METHODS

By doing some research on the Internet of specialized sites and worldwide literature, we searched for all femoral stems agreeing with Zweymüller principles (cementless, straight, tapered, rectangular cross-sectioned femoral stems).

RESULTS

We found 26 different stems from different companies producing or having produced in the past the Zweymüller-type femoral stems for hip prosthesis.

DISCUSSION

Accurate preoperative identification of the Zweymüller femoral stem type may be of critical importance to eventual outcomes following revision surgery. Each manufacturer has different instruments specific to the removal of their primary implants, and ensuring they are available can simplify the revision procedure significantly. Exact pre-operative planning is also necessary for selecting the correct ball head in cases where a stem is well-fixed and can be left in situ. The commonly used notation "Eurocone 12/14" provides no information about the actual taper angle. Whenever the stem is left in situ, the exact specifications of the taper must therefore be obtained from the manufacturer in order to use a metal sleeve that precisely fits it and the ball head. Failure to do so may result in severe complications, such as metallosis. In cases where it is not possible to identify the taper angle, the surgeon may even consider removal of the stem, though this significantly increases the surgical procedure's invasiveness. Only a single, uniform standard taper, such as that offered until 1994 by CeramTec, can solve these issues in the future.

CONCLUSION

The survival rate of the Zweymüller stems after ten years was 96 % and the complication rate was very low. Pre-operative identification of the femoral implant is of considerable importance for planning and correctly implementing revision procedures.

Which implant should we use for primary total hip replacement? A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Many total hip implants are currently available on the market worldwide. We aimed to estimate the probability of revision surgery at ten years for each individual total hip implant and to compare these estimates with the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) benchmark.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of cohort studies. The methodological quality was assessed with use of the Assessment of Quality in Lower Limb Arthroplasty (AQUILA) checklist. We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. Additionally, national joint registries that were full members of the International Society of Arthroplasty Registers (ISAR) were hand searched. Studies in which the authors reported the survival probability for either the acetabular or the femoral component of primary total hip replacements with use of revision for any reason or for aseptic loosening at ten years as the end point, with at least 100 implants at baseline, and in which at least 60% of the patients had primary osteoarthritis were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

The search strategy revealed 5513 papers describing survival probabilities for thirty-four types of acetabular components and thirty-two types of femoral components. Eight types of acetabular cups and fifteen types of femoral stems performed better than the NICE benchmark.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend that surgeons performing a primary total hip replacement use an implant that outperforms the NICE benchmarks.