Long-Term Outcomes of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Tapered and Fluted Modular Stem: A Mean Follow-Up of 16 Years

Cementless Femoral Component in Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A Registry Comparative Study Between Primary and Revision Stems

INTRODUCTION

Femoral component choice in revision hip arthroplasty is debated. An arthroplasty registry study was designed to compare the survival rates of revision hip arthroplasties performed for femoral component failure using noncemented primary stems or noncemented revision stems, aiming to assess (1) the survival rates of primary and revision stems and (2) the survival rates of primary and revision stems, in single-taper and modular versions.

METHODS

In a regional arthroplasty registry, 5,186 revision surgeries of femoral component using noncemented stems performed on residing patients were identified: 1,127 primary stems (21.7%) and 4,069 (78.3%) revision stems. Implants were additionally categorized according to modularity. The cohorts differed for demographic and implant-related features.

RESULTS

Primary stems achieved less than 10-year survival rates than revision stems (85.9% vs. 92.3%; P < 0.0001). Primary stems achieved lower 10-year survival rates with specific end points, aseptic loosening (P = 0.0005), and periprosthetic fracture (P < 0.0001) but not primary instability (P = 0.011). The survival rates of the four cohorts stratified for modularity demonstrated different 10-year survival rates (single-taper primary stems: 84.1%; modular primary stems: 87.9%; single-taper revision stems: 94.5%; modular revision stems: 91.2%; P < 0.0001). In revision surgeries due to aseptic loosening, primary stems achieved lower survival rates, especially in women aged more than 65 years (P = 0.021). Single-taper primary stems achieved lower performances than single-taper revision stems (P < 0.001).

DISCUSSION

Primary stems should be carefully adopted in femoral component revision surgeries, especially in women aged 65 years or older. Single-taper primary stems carried a notable rate of failures at 10 years in comparison to single-taper revision stems.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, therapeutic study.

Clinical and functional outcomes of a modular fluted titanium stem in complex hip surgery with femoral bone loss

Background

The tapered fluted titanium stem is a viable option for complex hip reconstruction. We therefore, evaluate the results of complex hip arthroplasty for femoral bone loss (Paprosky type IIIA to type IV femoral defect), using a modular fluted titanium stem.

Methods

Data for this retrospective study was collected from the medical records of the 2 participating orthopaedic units from December 2018 to December 2021. Twenty-seven patients who underwent reconstruction of femoral bone loss with a modular fluted titanium stem were included in this study. General, demographic and clinical data including patient's age, comorbidities, ambulatory status before and after surgery, blood transfusion, surgical complications, rehabilitation after surgery, length of stay in hospital (in days), readmission after surgery, implant details and mortality rate were recorded. Clinical evaluation was performed using the oxford hip score and 12-item short-form health survey (SF-12). Complications and survivorship were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival rate with 95 % confidence interval.

Results

The mean age for the cohort was 60.14 ± 11.58 years, with mean follow-up of 3.2 years for the study. The median pre-operative OHS was 10 (8), which improved to 39 (12) and 41 (4) at 1 and 2-year postoperative follow-up, respectively (P < 0. 001). The quality of life measures (SF-12 scores) in both mental and physical components showed progressive improvement at 2 years follow-up with P- value < 0.001. A total of five patients (18.5 %) had postoperative complications, including deep venous thrombosis in one patient, dislocations in two patients and one patient each with superficial and deep infection. The implant survival rate was 100 % at mean follow-up of 3.2 years.

Conclusions

Proximal femur reconstruction with a modular fluted titanium stem restores mobility, improves the quality of life and reduces pain significantly. It can be considered as a good option as a salvage procedure.

Contemporary Outcomes of Proximal Femoral Replacement as a Salvage Treatment in Nononcologic Severe Bone Loss

BACKGROUND

Severe proximal femoral bone loss remains a challenging problem in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Proximal femoral replacements (PFRs) are salvage options for severe bone loss in complex rTHA. The purpose of this study was to describe the survivorship and clinical outcomes of PFR for nononcologic indications.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 49 patients who underwent 50 PFRs from January 2014 to May 2021 at a single institution. Indications for PFR included periprosthetic femur fracture (n = 20), reimplantation after periprosthetic joint infection (n = 18), aseptic loosening with severe proximal femoral bone loss (n = 10), heterotopic ossification (n = 1), and instability (n = 1). The mean age was 70 years. The mean body mass index was 28 and 25 (50%) patients were women. The mean follow-up was three years. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to assess survivorship free from reoperation, rerevision, and dislocation.

RESULTS

The 2-year survivorship free from all-cause reoperation was 78%, and the 2-year survivorship free from rerevision was 87%. Overall, there were 11 (22%) reoperations, with indications including periprosthetic joint infection (n = 6), aseptic loosening (n = 2), hematoma evacuation (n = 1), instability (n = 1), and delayed wound healing (n = 1). There were eight (16%) patients who dislocated after PFR. The mean Hip Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement increased from 48 preoperatively to 77 at two years postoperatively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this series of PFRs performed in complex rTHA, there was low 2-year survivorship free from all-cause reoperation (78%) and rerevision (87%). Furthermore, the dislocation rate was high at 16%. However, only one patient (2%) was revised for femoral component aseptic loosening. This study highlights the complexity of these patients and the utilization of PFR as a salvage option.

Fracture of the Proximal Body of a Modern Cementless Modular Fluted Tapered Stem

Previous reports have described failures of modular fluted tapered femoral stems secondary to fatigue failure at the modular junction. However, the present study is the first reported case of modular fluted tapered femoral component failure involving atraumatic fracture of the proximal body following revision total hip arthroplasty. The failure occurred in a 52-year-old female with a history of postmenopausal osteoporosis on bisphosphonates who sustained an atraumatic fracture of the proximal body of a modular revision femoral stem. In the present case, revision THA utilizing a wider proximal body segment with proximal augmentation using strut allografts for biological and mechanical support provided the patient with a stable construct at 30-month follow-up.

A Consecutive Series of Vancouver B2 Periprosthetic Femur Fractures Treated With Contemporary Monoblock Versus Modular Revision Stems: Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Tapered fluted titanium (TFT) stems are the implant design of choice for managing Vancouver B2 periprosthetic femur fractures (PFFs), producing reliable results over the past few decades. The aim of this study was to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of Vancouver B2 PFFs treated with contemporary monoblock versus modular TFTs.

METHODS

A consecutive series of 113 patients (72 women, 64%, mean age 70 years [range, 26 to 96]) who had a B2 PFF were treated with either a monoblock (n = 42) or modular (n = 71) TFT stem between 2008 and 2021. The mean body mass index was 30 ± 7. The mean follow-up was 2.9 years. A radiographic review was performed to assess leg length and offset restoration, endosteal cortical contact length, and stem subsidence. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to determine survivorship without revision, reoperation, or dislocation.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the restoration of leg length (0.3 ± 8.0 mm) or offset (2.8 ± 8.2 mm) between the monoblock and modular cohorts (P > .05). Mean endosteal cortical contact length (47.2 ± 26.6 versus 46.7 ± 2 6.4 mm, P = .89) and stem subsidence (2.7 ± 3.5 versus 2.4 ± 3.2 mm, P = .66) did not differ. No difference in patient-reported outcome measures (Hip Disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score-Joint Replacement; Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey Physical and Mental; visual analog score; and Lower Extremity Activity Scale) between the groups was observed. Survivorship at 2 years free from reoperation, revision, and dislocation was 90.4, 90.3, and 97.6%, respectively, for the monoblock cohort; and 84.0, 86.9, and 90.0%, respectively, for the modular cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in radiographic or clinical outcomes were observed between patients treated with monoblock or modular TFTs in this large series of B2 PFFs.

Mid-term results of a cementless hip stem in femoral revision: how much diaphyseal press-fit do we need?

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this retrospective study was to analyze the clinical and functional outcome of a modular tapered revision hip stem after mid-term follow-up with a special focus on the length of the distal bicortical fixation of the cementless hip stem.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Follow-up examination was carried out for all patients with implantation of the Prevision hip stem between 2014 and 2019 to collect demographic, functional, and radiographic data.

RESULTS

44 patients with stem in situ were examined, and 61 patients could be included in the Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Oxford's hip score was 37.3 at the mean follow-up of 4.0 years. Two hip stem revisions were performed due to periprosthetic infection, which resulted in a hip stem survival rate of 96.7% (CI: 87.4-99.1%) at the final follow-up of 7.5 years. No aseptic hip stem revision was required. The length of bicortical distal fixation was in the interquartile range of 6.8 to 9.0 cm, which was associated with good bone healing and a low rate of subsidence (4.5%). Implant-associated complications were observed in 10 cases (21.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The modular revision hip stem provides promising results at medium-term follow-up, with satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes comparable to other modular revision hip stems. The presented length of bicortical distal fixation shows the practice of the study center and was associated with good implant survival, bone healing and radiological results.

REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT04833634 registered on April 6, 2021.

Long-term Outcomes of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Using a Modular Fluted Conical Femoral Stem

BACKGROUND

This study presents minimum 6-year follow-up data on the survival and satisfaction of an uncemented modular revision femoral system, following on from our previously published earlier results.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all revision hip arthroplasties performed at our institution between January 2005 and October 2012, using a single modular femoral revision system. Patient-reported outcomes were collected (satisfaction score and Oxford Hip Score). Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were reviewed for stem subsidence, and Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed for survival. A total of 115 femoral revisions were performed in 106 patients.

RESULTS

All-cause survival was 82% (95% confidence interval 74 to 91%) at 10.8 years, and 96% (95% confidence interval 90 to 100%) excluding septic failure. Of the 19 cases requiring reoperation, 16 were for infection, 2 for aseptic loosening, and 1 for mechanical failure. At final follow-up, 88.5% of patients were "satisfied" or "very satisfied".

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed excellent clinical results of a commonly used revision hip stem with at least 10 years follow-up. Satisfaction rates were high, with few aseptic failures. Stem subsidence was more common in revisions for infection, but did not correlate with lower satisfaction scores.

Analysis of modular taper fractures of the revision hip stem Prevision and comparison of the original and current taper design

Aims

The risk of mechanical failure of modular revision hip stems is frequently mentioned in the literature, but little is currently known about the actual clinical failure rates of this type of prosthesis. The current retrospective long-term analysis examines the distal and modular failure patterns of the Prevision hip stem from 18 years of clinical use. A design improvement of the modular taper was introduced in 2008, and the data could also be used to compare the original and the current design of the modular connection.

Methods

We performed an analysis of the Prevision modular hip stem using the manufacturer's vigilance database and investigated different mechanical failure patterns of the hip stem from January 2004 to December 2022.

Results

Two mechanical failure patterns were identified: fractures in the area of the distal fluted profile (distal stem fracture) and failure of the modular taper (modular fracture). A failure rate of 0.07% was observed for distal stem fracture, and modular fracture rates of 1.74% for the original and 0.013% for the current taper design.

Conclusion

A low risk of mechanical failure for both fracture types was observed compared to other known complications in revision hip arthroplasty. In addition, the data show that a design change did significantly reduce the risk of a modular fracture.