Background. Modular component options can assist the surgeon in addressing complex femoral reconstructions in total hip arthroplasty (THA) by allowing for customization of version control and proximal to distal sizing. Tapered stem fixation has a proven excellent track record in revision THA. Early reports by Cherubino et al. (Surg Technol Int 2010) 65 revision THA with an average follow up of 109 months (range, 76–131) demonstrate satisfactory integration in 100% of cases. Rodriguez et al.(J Arthroplasty 2009) report 96% survival in 102 revision THA at nearly 4 years average follow up. We review the early clinical results of a modular tapered femoral revision system. Methods. A query of our practice's arthroplasty registry revealed 60 patients (61 hips) who signed an IRB-approved general research consent allowing retrospective review, and underwent THA performed with the modular femoral revision system between December 2009 and April 2012. There were 35 men (58%) and 25 women (42%). Mean age was 65.1 years (range, 35–94) and BMI was 31.3 kg/m2 (range, 14–53). Procedures were complex primary in 1 hip, conversion in 6 (10%), revision in 32 (53%), and two-staged exchange for infection in 22 (33%). Two-thirds of the procedures included complete acetabular revision (n=40), while 31% (19) involved liner change only and 2 were isolated femoral revisions. Results. At an average follow-up of 1.5 years (maximum: 3.7 years) there have been no revisions or failures of the femoral component. Average Harris hip scores (0 to 100 possible) improved from 44.2 preoperatively to 66.0 at most recent evaluation, while the pain component (0 to 44 possible) improved from 15.8 to 31.2. Complications requiring surgical intervention included intraoperative periprosthetic femur fracture in one patient returned to the operating suite same day for open reduction internal fixation, which further required incision and debridement for superficial infection at 1 year postoperative; and two patients with dislocation and fracture of the greater trochanter treated with open reduction, revision of the head and liner, and application of cerclage cables, one of which required removal of a migrated claw 10 months later followed 2 weeks subsequently with incision and debridement for a non-healing wound. Postoperative radiographs were available for review for 59 THA in 58 patients. Analysis of the femoral component revealed satisfactory findings in 50 hips (85%) while 9 had radiographic changes that included bone deficit, osteolysis, or radiolucency in one or more zones. Conclusions. The early results of this modular femoral revision system are promising for the treatment of the deficient femur in complex primary and revision total hip arthroplasty. Patients with radiographic changes are advised to return for regular clinical and radiographic follow-up. Survival of the modular femoral component in this series was 100% at mean follow-up of 1.5 years and up to 3.7 years. While Harris hip clinical and pain scores were somewhat low at most recent evaluation, they were significantly improved over preoperative levels

INTRODUCTION

Recently, short shaped stem becomes popular in total hip arthroplasty (THA). Advantages of the short stem are preserving femoral bone stock, thought to be less thigh pain, suitable for minimally invasive THA. However, bony reaction around the short stem has not been well known. The purpose of this study was to compare the two years difference of radiographic change around the standard tapered round stem with the shorter tapered round stem.

INTRODUCTION

Recently, the short stem has become popular in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The advantages of the short stem are that it preserves femoral bone stock, possibly results in less thigh pain, and is suitable for minimally invasive THA. However, because of the short stem, malposition may happen during surgery. The purpose of this study was to compare the stem alignment, which was measured by CT, between the standard tapered round stem and the shorter tapered round stem.

Background. Tapered cementless femoral components have been used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) constructs for more than 20 years. The Synergy femoral component was introduced in 1996 as a second generation titanium proximally porous-coated tapered stem with dual offsets to better restore femoral offset at THA (Figure 1). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of the authors' experience using the Synergy stem at minimum 15 years of follow-up. Material and methods. We retrospectively reviewed a consecutive series of 102 patients (112 hips) who underwent surgery between November 1996 and October 1998 for primary THA using cementless Synergy stem with a minimum 15-years follow-up. The mean age at the time of surgery was 61 years, and the mean duration of follow-up was 16.3 years. Seventeen patients were lost at FU (8 died before the 15 years mark, 8 changed residency, 1 not willing to be seen) with no problems related to the replaced hip. Ninety-four hips in 85 patients were available for clinical and radiologic analysis. Clinical results of the 94 THAs with more than 15 years of follow-up were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively at 5, 10 and 15 years by means of standard evaluation tools: SF12, WOMAC and Harris Hip Score. Thigh pain frequency and intensity were also recorded. Radiographic analysis (Figure 2) was focused on stem alignment, bone ingrowth, radiolucent lines presence, width and progression, stress-shielding and heterotopic ossification (HTO). Student paired test and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were used for statistical analysis. Results. All clinical evaluation tools showed at 5-year FU, 10-year FU and at latest FU (15–17 years) a statistically significant improvement compared to the preoperative scores. We observed a not constant thigh pain in 5 hips (4.75%). Nine stems were revised due to polyethylene wear (3 cases), late periprosthetic fracture (2 cases), infection (2 cases), subsidence (1 case) and instability (1 case). Stem related revision was a case of subsidence, related to occult intraoperative calcar crack and early revised (within 1 year); cumulative stem-related survival rate at 15 years was 99%. Alignment was varus in 5 cases and valgus in 1. Bone in-growth was observed in 93 hips (98%). Radiolucent lines were uncommon, non progressive, less than 2 mm, in Gruen zones 2 and 6. Stress-shielding was present as cortical reaction in 5 femurs in Gruen zones 3 and 5. Fifteen cases of HTO (grade I and II in 12 case and grade III in 3 cases) were observed. Conclusions. The Synergy stem demonstrated excellent clinical and radiographic results at 15–17 years FU in 85 patients. Survivorship (with stem revision as end point) was 99% at 15 years. Thigh pain was uncommon and the level of activity and autonomy is excellent. Radiographically bone ingrowth is evident in all stems and radiolucent lines are “benign” with no aseptic loosening

INTRODUCTION

Wedge femoral stems used in total hip arthroplasty (THA) have evolved with modifications including shorter lengths, reduced distal geometries, and modular necks. Unlike fit and fill stems which contact most of the metaphysis, tapered wedge femoral stems are designed to achieve proximal medial/lateral fixation. These single taper, wedge stems have demonstrated positive clinical outcomes. The tapered wedge stem evaluated in this study has further reduced distal geometry to provide a wedge-fit within the metaphysis of the proximal femoral canal for all femur types (Dorr A, B, C). The objective of this study was to evaluate the early clinical outcomes, including femoral stem subsidence, of a tapered wedge femoral stem.

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.

The goals of revision total hip on the femoral side are to achieve long term stable fixation, improve quality of life and minimise complications such as intra-operative fracture or dislocation. Ideally these stems will preserve or restore bone stock. Modular titanium stems were first introduced in North America around 2000. They gained popularity as an option for treating Paprosky 3B and 4 defects.

Several studies at our institution have compared modular titanium stems with monoblock cobalt chromium stems. The main outcomes of interest were quality of life. We also looked at complications such as intra-operative fracture and post-operative dislocation. We also compared these 2 stems with respect to restoration or preservation of bone stock. In 2 studies we showed that modular titanium stems gave superior functional outcomes as well as decreased complications compared to a match cohort of monoblock cobalt chromium stems.

As mentioned, one of the initial reasons for introduction of these stems was to address larger femoral defects where failure rates with monoblock cobalt chromium stems were unacceptably high. We followed a group of 65 patients at 5–10 years post revision with a modular fluted titanium stem. Excellent fixation was obtained with no cases of aseptic loosening. However, there were 5 cases of fracture of the modular junction.

Due to concerns of fracture of the modular junction, more recently, at our institution, we have switched to almost 100% monoblock fluted titanium stems. We recently reviewed our first 100 cases of femoral revision with a monoblock stem. Excellent fixation was achieved with no cases of aseptic loosening. Quality of life outcomes were similar to our previous reported series on modular tapered titanium stems.

Both monoblock and modular fluted titanium stems can give excellent fixation and excellent functional outcomes. This leaves a choice for the surgeon. For the low volume revision surgeon modular tapered stems are probably the right choice.

Higher volume surgeons or surgeons very comfortable with performing femoral revision may want to consider monoblock stems. If one is making the switch it would be easiest to start with a simple case. Such a case would be one that can be done with a endofemoral approach. In this approach the greater trochanter is available as the key landmark for reaming. After the surgeon is comfortable with this stem more complex cases can easily be handled with the monoblock stem.

In summary, both modular and monoblock titanium stems are excellent options for femoral revision. As one becomes more familiar with the monoblock stem it can easily become your workhorse for femoral revision. At our institution we introduced a monoblock titanium stem in 2011. It started out at 50% of cases and now it is virtually used in almost 100% of revision cases.

Background

Aseptic loosening is rare with most cementless tapered stems in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA), however different factors can modify results. We ask if the shape and technique of three current different femoral components affects the clinical and radiological outcome after a minimum follow-up of ten years.

The goals of revision total hip on the femoral side are to achieve long term stable fixation, improve quality of life and minimise complications such as intra-operative fracture or dislocation. Ideally these stems will preserve or restore bone stock. Modular titanium stems were first introduced in North America around 2000. They gained popularity as an option for treating Paprosky 3B and 4 defects.

Several studies at our institution have compared the modular titanium stems with monoblock cobalt chromium stems. The main outcomes of interest were quality of life. We also looked at complications such as intra-operative fracture and post-operative dislocation. We also compared these 2 stems with respect to restoration or preservation of bone stock. In 2 studies we showed that modular titanium stems gave superior functional outcomes as well as decreased complications compared to a match cohort of monoblock cobalt chromium stems.

As mentioned one of the initial reasons for introduction of these stems was to address larger femoral defects where failure rates with monoblock cobalt chromium stems were unacceptably high. We followed a group of 65 patients at 5–10 years post-revision with a modular fluted titanium stem. Excellent fixation was obtained with no cases of aseptic loosening. However, there were 5 cases of fracture of the modular junction.

Due to concerns of fracture of the modular junction more recently at our institution we have switched to almost 100% monoblock fluted titanium stems. We recently reviewed our first 100 cases of femoral revision with monoblock stem. Excellent fixation was achieved with no cases of aseptic loosening. Quality of life outcomes were similar to our previous reported series on modular tapered titanium stems.

Both monoblock and modular fluted titanium stems can give excellent fixation and excellent functional outcomes. This leaves a choice for the surgeon. For the low volume revision surgeon modular tapered stems are probably the right choice.

Higher volume surgeons or surgeons very comfortable with performing femoral revision may want to consider monoblock stems. If one is making the switch it would be easiest to start with a simple case. Such a case would be one that can be done with an endofemoral approach. In this the greater trochanter is available as the key landmark for reaming. After the surgeon is comfortable with this stem more complex cases can easily be handled with the monoblock stem.

In summary, both modular and monoblock titanium stems are excellent options for femoral revision. As one becomes more familiar with the monoblock stem it can easily become your workhorse for femoral revision. At our institution we introduced a monoblock titanium stem in 2011. It started out at 50% of cases and now it is virtually used in almost 100% of revision cases.

The goals of revision total hip on the femoral side are to achieve long term stable fixation, improve quality of life and minimise complications such as intra-operative fracture or dislocation. Ideally these stems will preserve or restore bone stock. Modular titanium stems were first introduced in North America around 2000. They gained popularity as an option for treating Paprosky 3B and 4 defects.

Several studies at our institution have compared the modular titanium stems with monoblock cobalt chromium stems. The main outcomes of interest were quality of life. We also looked at complications such as intra-operative fracture and post-operative dislocation. We also compared these 2 stems with respect to restoration or preservation of bone stock. In two studies we showed that modular titanium stems gave superior functional outcomes as well as decreased complications compared to a matched cohort of monoblock cobalt chromium stems.

As mentioned one of the initial reasons for introduction of these stems was to address larger femoral defects where failure rates with monoblock cobalt chromium stems were unacceptably high. We followed a group of 65 patients at 5–10 years post-revision with a modular fluted titanium stem. Excellent fixation was obtained with no cases of aseptic loosening. However, there were 5 cases of fracture of the modular junction.

Due to concerns of fracture of the modular junction more recently, at our institution we have switched to almost 100% monoblock fluted titanium stems. We recently reviewed our first 100 cases of femoral revision with monoblock stem. Excellent fixation was achieved with no cases of aseptic loosening. Quality of life outcomes were similar to our previous reported series on modular tapered titanium stems.

Both monoblock and modular fluted titanium stems can give excellent fixation and excellent functional outcomes. This leaves a choice for the surgeon. For the low volume revision surgeon modular tapered stems are probably the right choice.

Higher volume surgeons or surgeons very comfortable with performing femoral revision may want to consider monoblock stems. If one is making the switch it would be easiest to start with a simple case. Such a case would be one that can be done through an endofemoral approach. In this the greater trochanter is available as the key landmark for reaming. After the surgeon is comfortable with this system more complex cases can easily be handled with the monoblock stem.

In summary, both modular and monoblock titanium stems are excellent options for femoral revision. As one becomes more familiar with the monoblock stem it can easily become your workhorse for femoral revision. At our institution, we introduced a monoblock titanium stem in 2011. It started out at 50% of cases and now it is virtually used in almost 100% of revision cases

Introduction

Cementless tapered wedge stems have shown excellent results over the last decade. Distal potting with inadequate proximal fit, as well as failure to achieve biologic fixation has led to thigh pain, loosening and implant failure. To support a variety of patient morphologies a novel tapered wedge stem was designed with reduced distal morphology, maximizing the proximal contact of the grit blasted surface. The objective of the study was to analyze the clinical outcomes of this stem design.

The most important advantage of modular revision stems is versatility - managing ALL levels of femoral bone loss (present before revision or created during revision). The surgeon quickly gains familiarity with the techniques and instruments for preparation and implantation and subsequently masters its use for all variety of situations. This allows the operating room staff to become comfortable with the instrumentation and components. This ability to use the stem in a variety of bone loss situations eliminates intraoperative shuffle (changes in the surgical plan resulting in more instruments being opened), as bone loss can be significantly under-estimated preoperatively or may change intraoperatively. Furthermore, distal fixation can be obtained simply and reliably.

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). This allows the surgeon to maximise patient functionality postoperatively. Additionally, the surgeon can control the diameter of the proximal body to ensure proper bony apposition, especially if an extended trochanteric osteotomy was made to obtain femoral exposure.

The most under-appreciated advantage is the straightforward instrumentation 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.

Background

A stem sitting proud (SP) or that above the final rasp position remains in some patients who undergo hip replacement using proximally coated tapered wedge stems. Surgeons may face challenges providing the best fit due to unpredictable stem seating. Zimmer Inc. introduced a new rasp to solve this issue but the clinical results of this rasp have not yet been published. Therefore, we aimed to address the following: 1) What is SP incidence using a proximally coated cementless tapered wedge stem? 2) Does the new rasp system improve seating height? 3) What are the risk factors of SP?

Background

Recently the taper wedged stems (TWS) are used widely in Japan because of good bone fixation and ease of the procedure. However, it is unclear how TWS get initial fixation in Japanese, especially dysplasia hip or elderly patients who had stovepipe canal. The purpose of this study is to evaluate initial bone fixation of the TWS in Japanese using computed tomography and to estimate biological bone fixation of the TWS using the Tomosynthesis.

The use of tapered, fluted, modular, distally fixing stems has increased in femoral revision surgery. The goal of this retrospective study was to assess mid- to long-term outcomes of this implant in femoral revision with bone loss. Seventy-one hips in 70 patients with a mean age of 68.5 years were followed for an average of 10 years. Pre-operative HHS averaged 50 and improved to an average of 87 post-operatively. Seventy-nine percent hips had Paprosky type 3A, 3B or 4 bone-loss and 44% had an associated proximal femoral osteotomy. All stems osseointegrated distally (100%). Two hips subsided >5mm (mean 8mm) but achieved secondary stability. Sixty-eight percent hips had evidence of bony reconstitution and 21% demonstrated diaphyseal stress-shielding. One stem fractured at its modular junction and was revised with a mechanical failure rate of 1.4%. Distal fixation and clinical improvement were reproducibly achieved with this stem design.

The use of tapered, fluted, modular, distally fixing stems has increased in femoral revision surgery. The goal of this retrospective study was to assess mid-term to long-term outcomes of this implant in femoral revision with bone-loss. Seventy-one hips in 70 patients with a mean age of 68.5 years were followed for an average of 10 years. Preoperative HHS averaged 50 and improved to an average of 87 postoperatively. Seventy-nine percent hips had Paprosky type 3A, 3B or 4 bone-loss and 44% had an associated proximal femoral osteotomy. All stems osseointegrated distally (100%). Two hips subsided >5mm (mean 8mm) but achieved secondary stability. Sixty-eight percent hips had evidence of bony reconstitution and 21% demonstrated diaphyseal stress- shielding. One stem fractured at its modular junction and was revised with a mechanical failure rate of 1.4%. Distal fixation and clinical improvement were reproducibly achieved with this stem design.

Cementless stem fixation is a widely used method of stem revision in North America and elsewhere in the World. There is abundant literature in its support. Most of the reports from 1985 to 2005 related to proximally or extensively porocoated designs, the former falling into disfavor with time because of unpredictable outcomes. With few exceptions (eg S-ROM) the modularity of these designs was limited to the head/neck junction. But this generation of designs was associated with some issues such as insertional fractures, limited control of anteversion (and risk of dislocation), limited applicability in the setting of severe bone loss (Paprosky Type 4 osteolysis or Vancouver Type B3 periprosthetic fracture), as well as ongoing concern relating to severe proximal stress shielding.

In the past decade we have seen the mounting use of a new design concept: tapered fluted titanium stems (TFTS), which incorporate the advantages of titanium (for less flexural rigidity), conical taper (for vertical taper-lock stability), longitudinal ribs and flutes (for rotational stability), and surface preparation which attracts bone on growth for long term fixation.

Four consecutive reports from our center have documented the superiority of the TFTS in our hands, with encouraging outcomes even when dealing with severe bone loss or periprosthetic fractures. There is an increasing body of other literature which reports a similar experience.

Furthermore, with increasing experience and confidence in this design, we now use a monoblock or non-modular design in greater than 95% of cases in which a TFTS is indicated at our center. This circumvents the potential drawbacks of stem modularity, including taper corrosion and taper junction fracture.

Objective

While the short-stem design is not a new concept, interest has risen with increasing utilization of less invasive techniques. Especially, short stems are easier to insert through the direct anterior approach. In the radiographic evaluation of patients who underwent primary uncemented total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a TaperLoc Microplasty femoral component (Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA), cortical hypertrophy was occasionally detected on three-month postoperative radiographs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the radiographic changes associated with cortical hypertrophy of the femur three months postoperatively.

Introduction

Dysplastic hip has not only deficiency of acetabulum but also femoral deformity. Therefore, selection of stem is important in cementless THA for dysplasia. Especially using of short stem should be challenge for deformed femur. We studied clinical performance and radiological findings after THA with triple tapered short stem (Optimys hip) for dysplastic hip.

The unacceptable failure rate of cemented femoral revisions led to many different cementless femoral designs employing fixation in the damaged proximal femur with biological coatings limited to this area. The results of these devices were uniformly poor and were abandoned for the most part by the mid 1990's.

Fully porous coated devices employing distal fixation in the diaphysis emerged as the gold standard for revisions with several authors reporting greater than 90% success rate at 8–10 years of follow-up. Surgical techniques and ease of insertion improved with the introduction of the extended trochanteric osteotomy as well as curved, long, fully porous coated stems with diameters up to 23 mm. The limits of these stems were stretched to include any stem diameter in which even 1–2 cm of diaphyseal contact could be achieved. When diaphyseal fixation was not possible (Type IV), the alternatives were either impaction grafting or allograft prosthetic composite (APC).

As the results of fully porous coated stems were very carefully scrutinised, it became apparent that certain types of bone loss did not yield the most satisfactory results both clinically and radiographically.

When less than 4 cm of diaphyseal press fit (Type IIIB) was achieved, mechanical failure rate (MFR) was over 25%. It also became apparent that even when there was 4–6 cm. diaphyseal contact (Type IIIA), and the stem diameter was 18 mm or greater, post-op pain and function scores were significantly less than those with smaller diameter stems. This was probably due to poorer quality bone.

Many of these Type IIIA and Type IIIB femurs had severe proximal torsional remodeling leading to marked distortion of anteversion. This made judging the amount of anteversion to apply to the stem at the time of insertion very difficult, leading to higher rates of dislocation. These distortions were not present in Type I and Type II femurs.

This chain of events which was a combination of minimal diaphyseal fixation, excessively stiff stems and higher dislocation rates led to the conversion to modular type stems when these conditions existed.

For the past 8 years, low modulus taper stems of the Wagner design have been used for almost all Type IIIA and Type IIIB bone defects. The taper design with fluted splines allows for fixation when there is less than 2 cm of diaphysis.

The results in these femurs even with diameters of up to 26 mm have led to very low M.F.R.'s and significantly less thigh pain. Independent anteversion adjustment is also a hug advantage in these modular stems. Similar success rates, albeit with less follow-up, have been noted in Type IV femurs.