Intermediate-term radiographic and patient outcomes in revision hip arthroplasty with a modular calcar design and porous plasma coating

Medium-term follow-up of 92 femoral component revisions using a third-generation cementing technique

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Very little has been published on the outcome of femoral cemented revisions using a third-generation cementing technique. We report the medium-term outcome of a consecutive series of patients treated in this way.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This study included 92 consecutive cemented femoral revisions performed in our department with a third-generation cementing technique and without instrumented bone impaction grafting between 1996 and 2007. The average age of the patients at revision was 66 (25-92) years. None of the patients were lost to follow-up. At review in December 2013, 55 patients were still alive and had a non-re-revised femoral revision component in situ after a mean follow-up of 11 (5-17) years.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative Harris hip score was 50, and improved to 73 at final follow-up. 2 patients died shortly after the revision surgery. 1 stem was re-revised for aseptic loosening; this was also the only case with radiolucent lines in all 7 Gruen zones. A femoral reoperation was performed in 19 hips during follow-up, and in 14 of these 19 reoperations the femoral component was re-revised. Survivorship at 10 years, with femoral re-revision for any reason as the endpoint, was 86% (95% CI: 77-92). However, excluding 8 patients with reinfections after septic index revisions and 1 with hematogenous spread of infection from the survival analysis, the adjusted survival for re-revision for any reason at 10 years was 92% (95% CI: 83-96). With re-revision for aseptic loosening as endpoint, the survival at 10 years was 99% (CI: 90-100).

INTERPRETATION

Femoral component revision with a third-generation cemented stem results in acceptable survival after medium-term follow-up. We recommend the use of this technique in femoral revisions with limited loss of bone stock.

Satisfying outcomes scores and survivorship achieved with impaction grafting for revision THA in young patients

BACKGROUND

The increasing number of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) performed in younger patients will inevitably generate larger numbers of revision procedures for this specific group of patients. Unfortunately, no satisfying revision method with acceptable survivorship 10 years after revision has been described for these patients so far.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

The purposes of this study were to (1) analyze the clinical outcome; (2) complication rate; (3) survivorship; and (4) radiographic outcome of cemented revision THA performed with impaction bone grafting (IBG) on both the acetabular and femoral sides in one surgery in patients younger than 55 years old.

METHODS

During the period 1991 to 2007, 86 complete THA revisions were performed at our institution in patients younger than 55 years. In 34 of these 86 revisions (40%), IBG was used on both the acetabular and femoral sides in 33 patients. Mean patient age at revision surgery was 46.4 years (SD 7.6). No patient was lost to followup, but three patients died during followup. None of the deaths were related to the revision surgery. The mean followup for the surviving hips was 11.7 years (SD 4.6). We also analyzed complication rate.

RESULTS

The mean Harris hip score improved from 55 (SD 18) preoperatively to 80 points (SD 16) at latest followup (p = 0.009). Six hips underwent a rerevision (18%): in four patients, both components were rerevised; and in two hips, only the cup was revised. Patient 10-year survival rate with the endpoint of rerevision for any component for any reason was 87% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67%-95%) and with the endpoint of rerevision for aseptic loosening, the survival rate was 97% (95% CI, 80%-100%). In total six cups were considered radiographically loose, of which four were rerevised. Three stems were radiographically loose, of which none was rerevised.

CONCLUSIONS

IBG is a valuable biological revision technique that may restore bone stock in younger patients. Bone stock reconstruction is important, because these patients likely will outlive their revision implants. Bone reconstruction with impaction grafting may facilitate future revisions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.