We followed prospectively 69 patients with 78 proximal femoral allografts performed for revision of total hip arthroplasty for an average of 36 months (range 29 to 68). Large fragment proximal femoral allografts and cortical strut allografts were successful in 85%. Grafts smaller than 3 cm in length (calcar grafts) were clinically successful in 81%, but 50% underwent significant radiographic resorption. We conclude that large proximal femoral allografts and cortical strut allografts provide dependable reconstruction of bone stock deficiencies during revision total hip arthroplasty

Introduction: The increasing utilization of total hip arthroplasty and the increasing life expectancy have brought an increasing incidence of revision hip arthroplasty. With severe acetabular, revision surgery with the use of standard cemented or press-fitted components is inadequate for fixation. In these cases the use of proximal femoral allograft can restore the deficiency. Purpose: To present a new technique and preliminary results of revision total hip arthroplasty using proximal femoral allograft prosthetic composites for massive ace-tabular bone loss. The technique uses the natural vector of forces in the intertrochanteric region in an opposite direction at the acetabular defect. Methods: From June 2000 to July 2001, seven patients underwent reconstruction of massive acetabular defects with proximal femoral allograft bone. The etiologies for bone loss were infection in 2 patients, aseptic loosening in 4 and acetabular protrusion in 2 patients. In 4 hips there were also femoral defects that was reconstructed with allograft. The average age of the patients was 69.8 years. All patients were wheel chair bound prior to surgery. Harris Hip Score was used to assess preoperative and follow-up function level. Results: Harris Hip Score improved significantly in all patients. All patients are ambulatory at follow-up. Complications included 2 dislocation and 2 deep-vein thrombosis. No allograft resorbtion was noted at follow-up. Conclusions: The proximal femoral allograft provides a solid construct for the acetabular cup in large acetabular bone defects. Although failure and complication rates might be higher than revision procedures with lesser bone defects, this reconstructive option for massive ace-tabular defects dramatically improves a patient’s function level

We reviewed and discussed the results of one hundred and fifty-five proximal femoral allografts for revision total hip replacement at an average of eleven years (range , five to twenty years).We looked at graft survivorship, functional results, radiographic assessment and complications. We concluded that this is an excellent technique for restoration of bone stock in the multiplied revised hip. To review the results of revision hip replacement with use of a proximal femoral allograft (PFA) to restore femoral bone stock. Between 1983 and 1998 a PFA – prosthetic composite was used to revise two hundred and twenty-seven hips in two hundred and ten patients. Of these two hundred and ten revisions involved an allograft longer than 8 cm. The average age of the patients at the time of revision was sixty-six years. The average number of previous total hip replacements was 2.2. Each patient was assigned a SF-12 score and a Short WOMAC Score. Radiographic assessment for trochanteric union, allograft-host union, component stability, graft fracture and resorption was performed. At an average of 11.2 years ( range, five to twenty years) after the revision, one hundred and eighty-five patients were alive, twenty-five patients had died and thirty were unavailable for follow-up. SF-12 and short WOMAC scores are still being calculated at the time of abstract submission. 4.4% of hips failed due to infection with 50% being successfully revised. Aseptic loosening of the construct occurred in 3.9% and 78% of these were revised at the time of follow-up. Nonunion of the allograft-host junction occurred in 4.8% and dislocation in 8.4%. Success was defined as a stable implant and no need for additional surgery at the time of follow-up. Success was noted in 84% of available cases. At an average of eleven years revision hip arthroplasties with a PFA are performing very well. This technique remains an excellent alternative when confronted with femoral bone loss in the revision hip setting

In Sheffield the senior author has a long experience in the use of massive circumferential proximal femoral allografts in complex revision hip arthroplasty. Sheffield has a well established bone harvesting and banking service, essential for this type of work. We wish to present the early experience with this technique in the UK. Between April 1992 and November 1998 a total of 33 circumferential proximal femoral allografts were used by one senior surgeon. They were all fresh frozen, cadaveric grafts. This time period was selected to allow a reasonable minimum follow-up period. Seven patients had died and two were lost to follow up, leaving a total of 24 patients to review. A step cut osteotomy was utilised and augmented with a cerclage wire and strut allograft where deemed necessary. The proximal femur was retained where possible. The component was cemented into the allograft only, in the majority of the cases. A cemented, collared prosthesis was used in over 85% of cases. Average follow up was 53 months. By the time of review 2 had undergone further revision, one for sepsis, one for aseptic loosening. A further patient had had revision of the acetabular component in isolation. One patient had recurrent sepsis but is currently being managed non–operatively. One patient required secondary surgery with plate and graft for symptomatic junctional non-union. Other complications included wound drainage, delaying discharge, in three patients and one chronic sciatic nerve palsy. The trochanter was considered radiologically united in 18 patients. Junctional union was considered to have occurred in 17 patients. Allograft resorption of 100% cortical thickness was seen in only 9 patients and in only one zone in 6 of these. Oxford hip scores were collected at follow-up. We recommend this technique in cases where bone loss is catastrophic and in specialist hands only

There are few medium- and long-term data on the outcome of the use of proximal femoral structural allografts in revision hip arthroplasty. This is a study of a consecutive series of 40 proximal femoral allografts performed for failed total hip replacements using the same technique with a minimum follow-up of five years (mean 8.8 years; range 5 to 11.5 years). In all cases the stem was cemented into both the allograft and the host femur. The proximal femur of the host was resected in 37 cases. There were four early revisions (10%), two for infection, one for nonunion of the allograft-host junction, and one for allograft resorption noted at the time of revision of a failed acetabular reconstruction. Junctional nonunion was seen in three patients (8%), two of whom were managed successfully by bone grafting, and bone grafting and plating respectively. Instability was observed in four (10%). Trochanteric nonunion was seen in 18 patients (46%) and trochanteric escape in ten of these (27%). The mean Harris hip score improved from 39 to 79. Severe resorption involving the full thickness of the allograft was seen in seven patients (17.5%). This progressed rapidly and silently, but has yet to cause failure of any of the reconstructions. Profound resorption of the allograft may be related to a combination of factors, including a slow form of immune rejection, stress shielding and resorption due to mechanical disuse with solid cemented distal fixation, and the absence of any masking or protective effect which may be provided by the retention of the bivalved host bone as a vascularised onlay autograft. Although continued surveillance is warranted, the very good medium-term clinical results justify the continued use of structural allografts for failed total hip replacements with severe loss of proximal femoral bone

Introduction. Revision hip arthroplasty with massive proximal femoral bone loss remains challenging. Whilst several surgical techniques have been described, few have reported long term supporting data. A proximal femoral allograft (PFA) may be used to reconstitute bone stock in the multiply revised femur with segmental bone loss of greater than 8 cm. This study reports the outcome of largest case series of PFA used in revision hip arthroplasty. Methods. Data was prospectively collected from a consecutive series of 69 revision hip cases incorporating PFA and retrospective analyzed. Allografts of greater than 8 cm in length (average 14cm) implanted to replace deficient bone stock during revision hip surgery between 1984 and 2000 were included. The average age at surgery was 56 years (range 32–84) with a minimum follow up of 10 years and a mean of 15.8 years (range). Results. From the original cohort four patients had died with the original PFA, 21 (30.4%) patients required further surgery with 14 (20.3%) of these needing revisions of the femoral component. The mean time to femoral revision was 9.5 years and Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis demonstrates a 79.9% PFA survivorship at 20 years. Discussion. Proximal femoral allograft affords long lasting reconstruction of the femoral component in revision hip surgery. We advocate PFA as an attractive option in the reconstruction of the hip in the presence of significant segmental bone loss in younger patients

Periprosthetic fracture management after hip arthroplasty is complicated by poor bone stock and loose femoral components. Using a prospective database, thirty-five fractures treated by proximal femoral allograft reconstruction were identified. Patients treated between 1989–2000 with minimum two- year results, were reviewed at a mean of 3.8 years. Twenty-six fractures were acute, and nine had failed previous treatment. Union of the PFA was achieved in all but five cases (83%). In twenty-eight cases (78%) no further surgery was required and patient ambulation was pain free. When conventional treatment is not possible, the use of a PFA provides encouraging results. Periprosthetic femoral fracture treatment is complicated by comminution, bone loss, and potentially loose femoral components. Treatment can include cast-braces, internal fixation, revision arthroplasty or the use of proximal femoral allograft composites (PFA). This study reports on thirty-five fractures treated with a PFA between 1989–2000. Five patients were lost and twelve patients (33%) were deceased. Follow-up averaged 3.8 years (range 0.1–11.3) with minimum two-year results in surviving patients. Six patients had either Rheumatoid arthritis or DDH with very narrow femoral canals. There were twenty-three acute fractures, five failures of non-operative management, four failures of ORIF and two fractured femoral stems. Fractures were classified by the Vancouver system with: B1–7%, B2–30%, B3–43% and C-20%. Prefracture functional scores revealed that 30% of patients had significant functional impairment and were awaiting revision arthroplasty. Patients had had an average of two previous surgical procedures (range 1–4). The mean length of the PFA was 14cm and union between graft and host bone was achieved in all but five cases (83%). Resorption of the graft was seen in eight cases (27%), lucent lines in six cases (20%) and implant migration in four cases (13%). Post revision arthroplasty Harris Hip and SF-36 scores revealed substantial disability in this patient group. Twenty-eight cases (73%) were deemed successful with patients not requiring further surgery and enjoying pain free ambulation. In fractures with unstable femoral components and inadequate bone stock or very narrow femoral canals few options are available. This technique provides encouraging results and a viable option when conventional treatment is not possible

Periprosthetic fracture management after hip arthroplasty is complicated by poor bone stock and loose femoral components. Using a prospective database, thirty-five fractures treated by proximal femoral allograft reconstruction were identified. Patients treated between 1989–2000 with minimum two- year results, were reviewed at a mean of 3.8 years. Twenty-six fractures were acute, and nine had failed previous treatment. Union of the PFA was achieved in all but five cases (83%). In twenty-eight cases (78%) no further surgery was required and patient ambulation was pain free. When conventional treatment is not possible, the use of a PFA provides encouraging results. Periprosthetic femoral fracture treatment is complicated by comminution, bone loss, and potentially loose femoral components. Treatment can include cast-braces, internal fixation, revision arthroplasty or the use of proximal femoral allograft composites (PFA). This study reports on thirty-five fractures treated with a PFA between 1989–2000. Five patients were lost and twelve patients (33%) were deceased. Follow-up averaged 3.8 years (range 0.1–11.3) with minimum two-year results in surviving patients. Six patients had either Rheumatoid arthritis or DDH with very narrow femoral canals. There were twenty-three acute fractures, five failures of non-operative management, four failures of ORIF and two fractured femoral stems. Fractures were classified by the Vancouver system with: B1–7%, B2–30%, B3–43% and C-20%. Prefracture functional scores revealed that 30% of patients had significant functional impairment and were awaiting revision arthroplasty. Patients had had an average of two previous surgical procedures (range 1–4). The mean length of the PFA was 14cm and union between graft and host bone was achieved in all but five cases (83%). Resorption of the graft was seen in eight cases (27%), lucent lines in six cases (20%) and implant migration in four cases (13%). Post revision arthroplasty Harris Hip and SF-36 scores revealed substantial disability in this patient group. Twenty-eight cases (73%) were deemed successful with patients not requiring further surgery and enjoying pain free ambulation. In fractures with unstable femoral components and inadequate bone stock or very narrow femoral canals few options are available. This technique provides encouraging results and a viable option when conventional treatment is not possible

Introduction: The reconstruction of the severely deficient proximal femur is more commonly achieved with a large composite proximal femoral allograft and a prosthesis. Aim: To review our experience with this technique in 19 revision total hip arthroplasties (18 patients) treated between December 1988 and January 1997. Cases: There were 15 females and three males. The average age was 56 years (32 to 78 years). The primary diagnoses included osteoarthritis (seven), rheumatoid arthritis (six), congenital dislocation (two), avascular necrosis (one), septic arthritis (one), and ankylosing spondylitis (one). Each underwent an average of three (range: one to 9) previous hip operations. The average time from the previous operation was 10.65 years (0.25 to 25). All hips had significant periprosthetic osteopenia and bone loss on preoperative radiographs. Five had previous infections with two subsequent Girdlestone arthroplasties. Six presented with periprosthetic fractures and loose components. The hips were approached posteriorly. A step cut was used to secure the host to allograft junction. The femoral component was cemented within the allograft and with a press-fit in the host bone. All but three cases had iliac crest bone graft and/or residual host bone chips added to the host-allograft site. The acetabulum was revised concurrently in 13 (two whole acetabular allografts). Results: The average period of follow-up was 57.6 months(range: 25 to 127 months). The time taken to heal was estimated radiographically as less than 8.5 months (range: three to 18 months). The average Harris Hip Scores improved from 25.6 to 75.53. One patient complained of persistent pain post-operatively. The complications included proximal migration of the greater trochanter in five, one infection that was converted to a Girdlestone excisional arthroplasty 27 months later, and seven patients with dislocations. Conclusions: Allograft prosthetic reconstruction of the proximal femur is a durable construct with up to ten years follow-up. This technique preserved host bone while providing additional bone for future reconstruction. There was substantial improvement in function with low complication rates

Between April 1992 and November 1998 we used 34 massive proximal femoral allografts for femoral reconstruction at revision hip arthroplasty. Seven patients have died and two have been lost to follow-up. There were thus 25 grafts in 24 patients for review. The mean follow-up was 53 months (16 to 101). By the time of the review two patients had undergone a further revision for failure of the allograft. Another had required secondary plating and grafting at the graft-host junction for symptomatic nonunion. One had recurrence of deep sepsis and was being managed conservatively. Trochanteric union was considered to have occurred radiologically in 16 of the 25 grafts and union at the host-graft junction in 20. Resorption of the allograft was significant in only two hips. We recommend this technique in cases in which femoral bone loss has been catastrophic

The treatment of substantial proximal femoral bone loss in young patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH) is challenging. We retrospectively analysed the outcome of 28 patients (30 hips) with DDH who underwent revision total hip replacement (THR) in the presence of a deficient proximal femur, which was reconstructed with an allograft prosthetic composite. The mean follow-up was 15 years (8.5 to 25.5). The mean number of previous THRs was three (1 to 8). The mean age at primary THR and at the index reconstruction was 41 years (18 to 61) and 58.1 years (32 to 72), respectively. The indication for revision included mechanical loosening in 24 hips, infection in three and peri-prosthetic fracture in three.

Six patients required removal and replacement of the allograft prosthetic composite, five for mechanical loosening and one for infection. The survivorship at ten, 15 and 20 years was 93% (95% confidence interval (CI) 91 to 100), 75.5% (95% CI 60 to 95) and 75.5% (95% CI 60 to 95), respectively, with 25, eight, and four patients at risk, respectively. Additionally, two junctional nonunions between the allograft and host femur required bone grafting and plating.

An allograft prosthetic composite affords a good long-term outcome in the management of proximal femoral bone loss in revision THR in patients with DDH, while preserving distal host bone.

Aim: Proximal femoral allografts are a rare but valuable option in severe femoral bone loss in revision hip arthroplasty. However, there are no long-term follow-up reports on their use. The purpose of this study was to review the average 11-year results of massive proximal femoral allografts used for severe bone loss in revision hip arthroplasty. Method: Sixty-three total hip arthroplasties in 60 consecutive patients were revised with a proximal femoral allograft and a prosthesis. The mean length of the allograft was fifteen centimeters. All patients had undergone at least one previous total hip arthroplasty, with a mean of 3.8 operations. Each patient was assessed before operation and at follow-up with a modified Harris hip score and radiographs. Results: At a mean follow-up of 11 years (range: nine to 15 years), 45 patients (75%) were alive, 14 patients (23 %) were deceased and one patient was lost to follow- up. The average preoperative Harris hip score was 30 points; at the latest follow-up the average score of those with the original graft in situ was 71. The deceased and lost patients represented 15 allografts (24%) with an average of five years and seven months follow-up. There were five failures for infection, four of which were successfully revised. Three hips failed with aseptic loosening at average 10 years and three months, two have been successfully re-revised and the third is awaiting revision. Success was defined as a postoperative increase in the Harris hip score of greater than twenty points, a stable implant, and no need for further surgery related to the allograft at the time of review. The success rate for all patients was 78% at an average of nine years follow-up. The success rate of those living was 77% at an average of 11 years follow-up. Conclusion: At an average of 11-years following proximal femoral allografts the clinical and radiological results were encouraging

The goals of revision arthroplasty of the hip are to restore the anatomy and achieve stable fixation for new acetabular and femoral components. It is important to restore bone stock, thereby creating an environment for stable fixation for the new components. The bone defects encountered in revision arthroplasty of the hip can be classified either as contained (cavitary) or uncontained (segmental). Contained defects on both the acetabular and femoral sides can be addressed by morselised bone graft that is compacted into the defect. Severe uncontained defects are more of a problem particularly on the acetabular side where bypass fixation such as distal fixation on the femoral side is not really an alternative. Most authors agree that the use of morselised allograft bone for contained defects is the treatment of choice as long as stable fixation of the acetabular component can be achieved and there is a reasonable amount of contact with bleeding host bone for eventual ingrowth and stabilisation of the cup. On the femoral side, contained defects can be addressed with impaction grafting for very young patients or bypass fixation in the diaphysis of the femur using more extensively coated femoral components or taper devices. Segmental defects on the acetabular side have been addressed with structural allografts for the past 15 to 20 years. These are indicated in younger individuals with Type 3A defects. Structural grafts are unsuccessful in Type 3B defects. Alternatives to the structural allografts are now being utilised with shorter but encouraging results in most multiply operated hips with bone loss. New porous metals such as trabecular metal (tantalum), which has a high porosity similar to trabecular bone and also has a high coefficient of friction, provide excellent initial stability. The porosity provides a very favorable environment for bone ingrowth and bone graft remodeling. Porous metal acetabular components are now more commonly used when there is limited contact with bleeding host bone. Porous metal augments of all sizes are being used instead of structural allografts in most situations. On the femoral side, metaphyseal bone loss, whether contained or uncontained, is most often addressed by diaphyseal fixation with long porous or tapered implants, modular if necessary. Distal fixation requires at least 4 centimeters of diaphyseal bone and in Type IV femurs, a choice must be made between a mega prosthesis or a proximal femoral allograft. The proximal femoral allograft can restore bone stock for future surgery in younger patients. The mega prosthesis which is more appropriate in the older population may require total femoral replacement if there is not enough diaphyseal bone for distal fixation with cement. Cortical struts are used for circumferential diaphyseal bone defects to stabilise proximal femoral allografts, to bypass stress risers and to serve as a biological plate for stabilising peri-prosthetic fractures

We have followed a consecutive series of revision hip arthroplasties, performed for severe femoral bone loss using anatomic specific proximal femoral allografts. Forty-nine revision hip arthroplasties, using anatomic specific proximal femoral allografts longer than five centimetres were followed for a mean of 10.4 years. The mean preoperative HHS improved from 42.9 points to 76.9 points postoperatively. Six hips (12.2%) were further revised, four for non-union and aseptic failure of the implant (8.2%), one for infection (2%), and one for host step-cut fracture (2%). Junctional union was observed in 44 hips (90%). Three hips underwent re-attachment of the greater trochanter for trochanteric escape (6.1%). Asymptomatic non-union of the greater trochanter was noticed in three hips (6.1%). Moderate allograft resorption was observed in five hips (10.2%). Two fractures of the host step-cut occurred (4.1%). There were four dislocations (8.2%), two of them developed in conjunction with trochanteric escape. By definition of success as increase of HHS by 20 points or more, and no need for any subsequent re-operation related to the allograft and/or the implant, a 75.5% rate of success was found. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis predicted 73% rate of survival at 12 years, with the need for further revision of the allograft and/or implant as the end point. We conclude that the good medium-term results with the use of large anatomic- specific femoral allografts justify their continued use in cases of revision hip arthroplasty with severe bone stock loss

Published experimental data on BMP-7(OP-1), carried by collagen type 1 (Osigraft), related to reconstructive surgery attest that: it accelerates and improves the incorporation of strut allograft; the combination of OP-1 with auto or allograft results in an improvement of critical size defect healing from radiological, histological and mechanical perspective. In human revision hip surgery, OP-1 has been used with morcellized allograft, proximal femoral allograft and bulk femoral head allograft for acetabular or femoral reconstruction: a faster and more evident new bone formation as well as a faster incorporation of grafts has been shown compared to what expected without OP-1 usage. Even if OP-1 usage in hip surgery is not approved by regulatory agencies, because of lack of randomised clinical studies, we decided to use it in patients with serious acetabular defects (II/III GIR). In our experience, we treated eight patients with OP1, in conjunction with allografts. Clinical, radiographic and densitometric analysis has been done at 3, 6 and 12 months. Preliminary densitometric results show that the quantity and features of new formed bone are superimposable to natural bone

A seventy-five-year-old female patient presented with pain and deformity of her left leg of three days duration. Hybrid THRA has been done 11 years ago at her left hip for the treatment of osteoarthritis. Massive osteolysis and pathologic fracture were observed on plain radiograph (Fig. 1). Revision THRA using an allograft prosthesis composite (APC) was planned for solution of extensive bone loss of the proximal femur. Surgical exposure was performed through extended trochanteric osteotomy with the patient supine. Step-cut osteotomy was done at the remained proximal part of host femur to make match with the distal part of APC. Meticulous removal of granulation tissues and remaining cement was done. As Acetabular cup was stable, 60 mm sized high-walled polyethylene liner was exchanged. Calcar reconstruction prosthesis was cemented into a proximal femoral allograft measuring 15 cm and cement at the vicinity of the step-cut osteotomy was removed for later bony union at interface. After solid fixation of APC with cement, the distal half of APC was cemented with the host femur. Step-cut osteotomy was wired and autogenous bone grafts from the greater trochanter were added at the interface. Leg length and stability were rechecked using a standard necked 28 mm metal head and reduction was done stably. Greater trochanter was fixed over the trimmed proximal allograft with multiple wiring and paper-thin host femur was enveloped around the femoral allograft using absorbable sutures. Following insertion of the closed suction drainage drains, closure was done as routine fashion and healing of the wound was uneventful (Fig. 2). An abduction brace was applied post operatively for a period of four weeks. Crutch walking with partial weight bearing was started at four weeks and crutch protection was applied for a period of six months. Incorporation of allograft with the host bone was observed on two-year follow-up radiographs. At seven-year follow-up, the patient walks well with a mild limp, and Harris score is 90. We report on a seven-year follow-up case of revision THRA with APC with references (Fig. 3)

Massive uncontained glenoid defects are a difficult surgical problem requiring reconstruction in the setting of either primary or revision total shoulder arthroplasty. Our aim is to present a new one-stage technique that has been developed in our institution for glenoid reconstruction in the setting of massive uncontained glenoid bone loss. We utilise a modified delto-pectoral approach to perform our dual biology allograft autograft glenoid reconstruction. The native glenoid and proximal femoral allograft are prepared and shaped to create a precisely matched contact surface, which permits axial compression to secure fixation. The surface of the glenoid is lateralised to at least the level of the coracoid. The central cancellous femoral allograft is removed and impaction autografting is performed prior to implantation of a glenoid base plate with 25-mm long centre peg. Two screws are inserted into the best quality native scapular bone available to ensure compression. A reverse shoulder arthroplasty is implanted. We have performed our dual-biology reconstruction of the glenoid in combination with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in 8 patients to date. The technique has been performed in the setting of massive uncontained glenoid defects without prostheses as well as in revisions from failed hemiarthroplasties and total shoulder arthroplasties. Our post-operative follow-up is now up to 32 months. CT scanning as early as 6 months demonstrates incorporation of the graft. There has been no evidence of loosening. None of our cases have been complicated by infection or peri-prosthetic fracture and there have been no dislocations. One patient sustained an acromial stress fracture at 9 months post-operatively after lifting a 100-pound gas cylinder. This was diagnosed on bone scan, had no impact on the construct and was managed in a sling for comfort. Another patient has developed Nerot grade I notching which substantially in all patients, with an average improvement of 6.6 on a 10-point scale. Our dual biology allograft-autograft reconstruction is a useful and elegant technique in the setting of massive uncontained defects of the glenoid, which permits the implantation of a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. We believe this technique to be reproducible and uses materials that are both readily available and familiar

We have followed a consecutive series of forty-nine revision hip arthroplasties (45 patients), performed for severe femoral bone loss using anatomic specific proximal femoral allografts longer than five centimetres. The patients were followed for a mean of 10.4 years, with a five year minimum follow-up. The mean preoperative Harris Hip Score improved from 42.9 points to 76.9 points postoperatively, an average improvement of 33.8 points. Six hips were further revised, for a failure rate of 12.2%, four for non-union and aseptic failure of the implant (8.2%), one for infection (2%), and one for host step-cut fracture (2%). Junctional union was observed in 44 hips (89.8%). Three hips underwent re-attachment of the greater trochanter for trochanteric escape (6.1%). Asymptomatic non-union of the greater trochanter were noticed in three hips (6.1%). Moderate allograft resorption was observed in five hips (10.2%), non were full-thickness graft resorption. Two fractures of the host step-cut occurred (4.1%). There were four dislocations (8.2%), two of them developed in conjunction with trochanteric escape. By definition of success as increase of HHS by 20 points or more, and no need for any subsequent re-operation related to the allograft and/or the implant, a 75.5% rate of success was found. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis predicted 73% rate of survival at 12 years, with the need for further revision of the allograft and/or implant as the end point. We conclude that the good medium-term results with the use of large anatomic-specific femoral allografts justify their continued use in cases of revision hip arthroplasty with severe bone stock loss

Introduction: Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has proven to be a highly successful procedure, but with its increased use there are an increasing number of joints requiring revision. A number of those patients requiring revision present with a severe loss of femoral bone stock around the failed femoral hip implant, which makes conventional revision techniques difficult or impossible. Materials and Methods: We have followed a consecutive series of forty-nine revisions THA (45 patients), performed for severe femoral bone loss using anatomic specific proximal femoral allografts longer than five centimetres. The patients mean age at the time of the index surgery was 63 (32–86) years. The patients were followed for a mean of 8.4 (5.2–16.6) years, with a five-year minimum follow-up. Results: The mean Harris Hip Score improved from 42.9 points preoperatively to 76.9 points at the last review. Fort-three of the hips (88%) had a successful outcome. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis predicted 83% rate of survival at 17 years. Six hips (12.2%) were further revised: four for non-union and aseptic failure of the implant, one for infection, and one for host step-cut fracture. Radiographicly, junctional union was observed in 44 hips (90%). Asymptomatic non-union of the greater trochanter were noticed in three hips (6.1%). Moderate allograft resorption was observed in five hips (10.2%), none were full-thickness graft resorption. The complications include trochanteric escape in three hips, host step-cut fractures in two hips, and four dislocations. Conclusion: We conclude that the good medium-term results with the use of large anatomic-specific femoral allografts justify their continued use in cases of revision hip arthroplasty with severe bone stock loss

This study constitutes the minimum 5-year follow-up (mean 8.8 years; range 5 – 11.5 years) of a consecutive series of 40 proximal femoral allografts performed for failed total hip arthroplasties using the same technique. Nine of these cases had been two stage reconstructions for the management of infected total hip replacements with bone loss. In all these cases the stem was cemented into both the allograft and the host femur. The host bone was resected in 37 cases, and the greater trochanter reattached with a cable grip in 33 cases and with wire and mesh in 3 cases. The patients were reviewed by an independent observer. There were 4 early revisions (10%): one for infection, one for non-union of the allograft host junction, and two following revision of a failed acetabular reconstruction. Three further acetabular revisions have since also been performed. Junctional nonunion was seen in 3 cases (8%), two of which were managed successfully with bone grafting and bone grafting and plating respectively. Instability was observed in 6 cases (15%). Trochanteric non-union was seen in 17 cases (42.5%) and trochanteric escape in 10 of these (25%). The mean Harris Hip Score improved from 39 to 79. Severe resorption involving the full thickness of the allograft was seen in 7 cases. This progressed rapidly and silently but has yet to lead to the failure of any of the reconstructions. Although there was a high early complication rate, the medium term survivorship is excellent, and the clinical outcomes highly satisfactory. The striking observation of severe allograft resorption may be related to a combination of factors. These include the absence of any masking or protective effect that the host bone may have proximally, and surface revascularisation with stress shielding secondary to solid cemented distal fixation. Although continued surveillance is warranted, these results justify the use of structural allografts for selected cases