Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) is currently one of the most widely performed surgical procedures in clinical orthopaedic practice. Despite the recorded number of uncemented implants has steadily increased in recent years, cemented fixation still remains the benchmark in THA, accounting for most of the procedures performed nowadays. The Friendly Short is a novel cemented short-stem that grants a less invasive and more bone conservative approach due to its shortened height and innovative cementing technique. It is indicated to treat elderly patients with the aim of preserving bone diaphysis while decreasing postoperative recovery times. Its instrument set allows to optimize the cement mantle thickness via an improved pressurization and stem centralization system. Aim of this prospective study was to evaluate functional recovery and implant stability after THA with this cemented short-stem.Introduction
Objectives
The use of a cemented implant instead of a spacer has been proposed due to the improved function in comparison with a spacer. Unfortunately the removal of a conventional cemented stem can be challenging. The use of a short cemented stem can overcome this problem. Between July 2011 and May 2013, 10 infected hips were treated with a short cemented stem as a spacer. The infected implants were cemented in 6 cases and cementless in 4 cases. Mean time from index operation was 3 years (range 0 to 8 years). It was the first treatment for infection in all cases. Antibiotic loaded cement and an all-poly cup was used in all cases. The bugs were staph aureus and staph epidermidis in most cases. A Friendly short cemented stem with specific cement restrictor and standard cementing tecnique was used in all cases. This stem has been successfully tested in over 200 patients and approved by TUV to be released on the marked. In all cases, the infection was successfully cured with antibiotics for a period ranging from 3 to 5 months. 2 patients were revised after the infection was cured for recurrent dislocation. No recurrent infection was found at the latest follow up. One stage revision is gaining in popularity for the decreased morbidity and better quality of life of the patients. Weak points of one-stage revision are slightly inferior results in terms of eradication of the infection and the fact that it can be done only with cemented implants. Cemented implants show inferior durability than cementless implants and are difficult to remove if revision is needed. The use of a short cemented stem can couple the advantages of one stage revision and the fact that it is easily removed if this is needed for various reasons (aseptic loosening, recurrent dislocation and periprosthetic fracture). Contraindications to this technique are severe bone loss in the acetabulum or in the proximal femur.