Aims. Hip arthroplasty does not always restore normal anatomy. This is due to inaccurate surgery or lack of stem sizes. We evaluated the aptitude of four total hip arthroplasty systems to restore an anatomical and medialized hip rotation centre. Methods. Using 3D templating software in 49 CT scans of non-deformed femora, we virtually implanted: 1) small uncemented calcar-guided stems with two offset options (Optimys, Mathys), 2) uncemented straight stems with two offset options (Summit, DePuy Synthes), 3) cemented undersized stems (Exeter philosophy) with three offset options (CPT, ZimmerBiomet), and 4) cemented line-to-line stems (Kerboul philosophy) with proportional offsets (Centris, Mathys). We measured the distance between the templated and the anatomical and 5 mm medialized hip rotation centre. Results. Both rotation centres could be restored within 5 mm in 94% and 92% of cases, respectively. The cemented undersized stem performed best, combining freedom of stem positioning and a large offset range. The uncemented straight stem performed well because of its large and well-chosen offset range, and despite the need for cortical bone contact limiting stem positioning. The cemented line-to-line stem performed less well due to a small range of sizes and offsets. The uncemented calcar-guided stem performed worst, despite 24 sizes and a large and well-chosen offset range. This was attributed to the calcar curvature restricting the stem insertion depth along the femoral axis. Conclusion. In the majority of non-deformed femora, leg length, offset, and anteversion can be restored accurately with non-modular stems during 3D templating. Failure to restore hip biomechanics is mostly due to surgical inaccuracy. Small calcar guided stems offer no advantage to restore hip biomechanics compared to more traditional designs. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(7):476–485

Modularity in femoral revision evolved to address the specific weaknesses in the execution and results of the early Wagner SL stem, namely dislocations and subsidence. With modularity, distal canal fit can be achieved independently, and the proximal geometry can be created to re-establish the leg length and offset. The benefits of modularity relate specifically to being able to modify a plan intra-operatively based on the conditions that are encountered in mid battle. Inherent in this concept is the principle of predictability. The extent to which the conditions of operation may change requires alternatives to manage those changes. More importantly we need to be able to predict how an implant will sit in the bone. At the inception and with subsequent manifestations of modular fluted stems, our ability to predict where the final implant will seat based on the trial options that existed was poor. For this reason, some modular stem designs offered no trial. This was part of the imperative for modularity, so that if the implant set too high it could be easily removed with reaming a little deeper and put back in. If the stem sat more deeply than had been anticipated, the change could be compensated by an alteration in the proximal modular segment. Reproducible mid- to long-term results have been published with this type of stem. Potential negatives of the modular junction include stem breakage, fretting and corrosion, cost, and the need to accommodate a large sized proximal segment within the proximal femur. The most important feature in modern non-modular implants will be predictability. We need to be able to predict that the final reamer will sit at a particular level in the femoral bone, and the trial will reproduce this level, and the final implant will reproduce this level. More importantly, we need to be able to predict that implants will remain where they are put, and not subside. Subsidence has been causally associated with implant under-sizing, which is an error in surgical execution. As such, design features that optimise the ability to achieve intimate and broad endosteal contact between the implant and the bone can help reduce subsidence. These include precise, sharp reamers, implants in 1 mm increments, and trials that reproduce the position of the final implant. A larger implant is less likely to break, and we recommend preparation for the largest implant that the diaphysis can accommodate, often evident in the tactile feedback from the reamer, and the quality of the reamed bone being removed. Reaming is performed eccentrically in the proximal femur, so as to engage the diaphysis optimally. The need for a kink in the stem is important for modular stems, which have bulky proximal segments that can create conflict with the peritrochanteric bone in smaller patients. Non-modular stems can have a smaller proximal diameter, such that a straight stem can be accommodated in most revision cases. Early follow-up of a modern non-modular stem has shown excellent clinical improvement and reproducible ingrowth. Subsidence of > 10 mm occurred in 6 hips (6%), which is a notable improvement in historical values for this stem type, but remain short of some reports with modular stems. Improvements in goals and techniques of reaming and implantation are surely part of the improvements that have been documented, as well as those yet to be realised. Predictability will lead to simplicity and intuitiveness

The “keel” is the relatively short part of the undersurface of the tibial component that extends into the medullary canal. Most knee replacement systems have the capacity to attach modular stem extensions for enhanced intra-medullary fixation for revision. Diaphyseal length, large diameter stems may also guide positioning of trial components and are ideal for accurate surgical technique, even if fully cemented stems are eventually implanted. Smaller diameter non-modular stem extensions may be used for fully cemented fixation. They do not however guide component position very accurately and do not make sense for uncemented fixation. Revision surgery is different from primary surgery and enhanced fixation with some type of intramedullary fixation is highly appropriate, especially if constrained devices might be required. Options for enhanced intramedullary fixation are: 1. Fully cemented metaphyseal or shorter stems; 2. Diaphyseal engaging press fit stems; and 3. Very short fully cemented stems with trabecular metal cone fixation. Metaphyseal length press fit stems do not provide reliable fixation in revision TKA. Revision with primary components or constrained components without any stem extension is not advised

Modern modular revision stems employ tapered conical (TCR) distal stems designed for immediate axial and rotational stability with subsequent osseo-integration of the stem. Modular proximal segments allow the surgeon to achieve bone contact proximally with eventual ingrowth that protects the modular junction. The independent sizing of the proximal body and distal stem allows for each portion to obtain intimate bony contact and gives the surgeon the ability precisely control the femoral head center of rotation, offset, version, leg length, and overall stability. The most important advantage of modular revision stems is versatility - the ability to manage ALL levels of femoral bone loss (present before revision or created during revision). Used routinely, this allows the surgeon to quickly gain familiarity with the techniques and instruments for preparation and implantation and subsequently master the use for all variety of situations. This also allows the operating room staff to become comfortable with the instrumentation and components. Additionally, the ability to use the stem in all bone loss situations eliminates intra-operative shuffle (changes in the surgical plan resulting in more instruments being opened), as bone loss can be significantly under-estimated pre-operatively or may change intra-operatively. Furthermore, distal fixation can be obtained simply and reliably. Paprosky 1 femoral defects can be treated with a primary-type stem for the most part. All other femoral defects can be treated with a TCR stem. Fully porous coated stems also work for many revisions but why have two different revision stem choices available when the TCR stems work for ALL defects?. The most critical advantage is the ability to separate completely the critical task of fixation from other important tasks of restoring offset, leg length, and stability. Once fixation is secured, the surgeon can concentrate on hip stability and on optimization of hip mechanics (leg length and offset). The ability to do this allows the surgeon to maximise patient functionality post-operatively. Modular tapered stems have TWO specific advantages over monolithic stems in this important surgical task. The proximal body size and length can be adjusted AFTER stem insertion if the stem goes deeper than the trial. Further, proximal/distal bone size mismatch can be accommodated. The surgeon can control the diameter of the proximal body to ensure proper bony apposition independent of distal fitting needs. If the surgeon believes that proximal bone ingrowth is important to facilitate proximal bone remodeling, modular TCR stems can more easily accomplish this. The most under-appreciated advantage is the straightforward instrumentation system that makes the operation easier for the staff and the surgeon, while enhancing the operating room efficiency and reducing cost. Also, although the implant itself may result in more cost, most modular systems allow for a decrease in inventory requirements, which make up the cost differential. One theoretical disadvantage of modular revision stems is modular junction fracture, which can happen if the junction itself is not protected by bone. Ensuring proximal bone support can minimise this problem. Once porous ingrowth occurs proximally, the risk of junction fracture is eliminated. Even NON-modular stems fracture when proximal bone support is missing. Another theoretical issue is modular junction corrosion but this not a clinical one, since both components are titanium. One can also fail to connect properly the two parts during surgery

Corrosion in modular taper connections of total joint replacement has become a hot topic in the orthopaedic community and failures of modular systems have been reported. The objective of the present study was to determine in vivo titanium ion levels following cementless total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a modular neck system. A consecutive series of 173 patients who underwent cementless modular neck THA and a ceramic on polyethylene bearing was evaluated retrospectively. According to a standardized protocol, titanium ion measurements were performed on 67 patients using high-resolution inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. Ion levels were compared to a control group comprising patients with non-modular titanium implants and to individuals without implants. Although there was a higher range, modular-neck THA (unilateral THA: 3.0 μg/L (0.8–21.0); bilateral THA: 6.0 μg/L (2.0–20.0)) did not result in significant elevated titanium ion levels compared to non-modular THA (unilateral THA: 2.7 μg/L (1.1–7.0), p = 0.821; bilateral THA: 6.2 μg/L, (2.3–8.0), p = 0.638). In the modular-neck THA group, patients with bilateral implants had significantly higher titanium ion levels than patients with an unilateral implant (p < 0.001). Compared to healthy controls (0.9 μg/L (0.1–4.5)), both modular THA (unilateral: p = 0.029; bilateral p = 0.003) and non-modular THA (unilateral: p < 0.001; bilateral: p < 0.001) showed elevated titanium ion levels. The data suggest that the present modular stem system does not result in elevated systemic titanium ion levels in the medium term when compared to non-modular stems. However, more outliner were seen in modular-neck THA. Further longitudinal studies are needed to evaluate the use of systemic titanium ion levels as an objective diagnostic tool to identify THA failure and to monitor patients following revision surgery

Wear debris associated with CoCr bearings has been implicated in the development of adverse soft tissue reactions and pseudotumors following THA with large metal heads and following hip resurfacing. Additional concerns have been raised regarding trunion fretting and corrosion. Most recently, the neck-stem junction of some modular femoral stem designs have come under additional scrutiny. We undertook a review of patients who had undergone THA with a proximal modular junction stem design in order to ascertain the state of the junction in early follow up. We examined the records of all patients in our practice who had undergone uncomplicated, unilateral THA with the ARC stem (OmniLife Science, East Taunton, MA, USA) between April 2010 and April 2012. Office records, radiographs and laboratory data were included. Serum or blood cobalt and chromium ion levels were obtained at the one-year post-op visit or later or if the patient had unexpected pain. The test obtained (serum or blood) was dependent on the lab performing the study. In the study period 100 patients met the inclusion criteria and had metal ion levels available for review. No patient required revision for adverse soft tissue reaction or elevated metal ion levels. Cobalt levels fell with the normal lab ranges in the majority of patients with a very small percentage demonstrating levels slightly above the normal range. Chromium levels all fell within the expected normal range. One patient had a neck exchange for mechanical reasons at 8 weeks following primary THA. This patient went on to develop elevated serum cobalt levels and a large hip effusion. The hip was revised at one year to a non-modular stem. A modular proximal stem offers the advantages of addressing variable anatomy and allowing less soft tissue dissection. Some designs have enjoyed success while others have been withdrawn from the market due to fatigue failure, dissociation or metal-associated adverse reactions. Modular junction designs vary greatly which can impact their inherent stability and their ability to resist micro-motion. In this patient group the junction has shown good stability in early follow up as judged by clinical and laboratory data. Cobalt levels were all normal or well below the range considered suspicious for adverse reaction. Chromium levels all fell within the normal range. A case of an exchanged neck with retention of the stem was associated with high cobalt levels. We discuss several junction designs and their characteristics

Aims

United Classification System (UCS) B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures in total hip arthroplasties (THAs) have been commonly managed with modular tapered stems. No study has evaluated the use of monoblock fluted tapered titanium stems for this indication. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of a monoblock stems on implant survivorship, postoperative outcomes, radiological outcomes, and osseointegration following treatment of THA UCS B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures.

Aims

We present the clinical and radiological results at a minimum follow-up of 20 years using a second-generation uncemented total hip arthroplasty (THA). These results are compared to our previously published results using a first-generation hip arthroplasty followed for 20 years.

Objectives

Third-body wear is believed to be one trigger for adverse results with metal-on-metal (MOM) bearings. Impingement and subluxation may release metal particles from MOM replacements. We therefore challenged MOM bearings with relevant debris types of cobalt–chrome alloy (CoCr), titanium alloy (Ti6Al4V) and polymethylmethacrylate bone cement (PMMA).