Cement-in-cement revision of the femoral component represents a widely practiced technique for a variety of indications. In this study we compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two polished tapered stems.

From our prospectively collated database we identified all patients undergoing cement-in-cement revision from January 2005 – 2013 who had a minimum of two years follow-up. All cases were performed by the senior author using either an Exeter short revision stem or the C-stem AMT high offset No 1. Patients were followed-up annually with clinical and radiological assessment.

Ninety-seven patients matched the inclusion criteria. There were 50 Exeter and 47 C-stem AMT components. There were no significant differences between the patient demographics in either group. Mean follow-up was 9.7 years. A significant improvement in OHS, WOMAC and SF-12 scores was observed in both cohorts. Leg lengths were significantly shorter in the Exeter group, with a mean of -4mm in this cohort compared to 0mm in the C-stem AMT group. One patient in the Exeter group had early evidence of radiological loosening. In total, 16 patients (15%) underwent further revision of the femoral component (seven in the C-stem AMT group and nine in the Exeter group). No femoral components were revised for aseptic loosening. There were two cases of femoral component fracture in the Exeter group.

Our series shows promising long-term outcomes for the cement-in-cement revision technique using either the Exeter or C-stem AMT components. These results demonstrate that cement-in-cement revision using a double or triple taper-slip design is a safe and reliable technique when used for the correct indications.

Aims

Cement-in-cement revision of the femoral component represents a widely practised technique for a variety of indications in revision total hip arthroplasty. In this study, we compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of two polished tapered femoral components.