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.

Periprosthetic fractures (PPF) of the femur following total hip arthroplasty represent a significant complication with a rising incidence. The commonest subtype is Vancouver B2 type, for which revision to a long uncemented tapered fluted stem is a widely accepted management. In this study we compare this procedure to the less commonly performed cement-in-cement revision.

All patients undergoing surgical intervention for a Vancouver B2 femoral PPF in a cemented stem from 2008 – 2018 were identified. We collated patient age, gender, ASA score, BMI, operative time, blood transfusion requirement, change in haemoglobin (Hb) level, length of hospital stay and last Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Radiographic analysis was performed to assess time to fracture union and leg length discrepancy. Complications and survivorship of implant and patients were recorded.

43 uncemented and 29 cement-in-cement revisions were identified. There was no difference in patient demographics between groups. A significantly shorter operative time was found in the cement-in-cement group, but there was no difference in transfusion requirement, Hb change, or length of hospital stay. OHS was comparable between groups. A non-significant increase in overall complication rates was found in the revision uncemented group, with a significantly higher dislocation rate. Time of union was comparable and there were no non-unions in the cement-in-cement group. A greater degree of stem subsidence was found in the uncemented group. There was no difference in any revision surgery required in either group. Three patients in the uncemented group died in the perioperative period, compared to none in the cement-in-cement group.

With appropriate patient selection, both cement-in-cement and long uncemented tapered stem revision represent appropriate treatment options for Vancouver B2 fractures.

Introduction

Cement in cement revision with preservation of the original cement mantle has become an attractive and commonly practised technique in revision hip surgery. Since introducing this technique to our unit we have used two types of polished tapered stem. We report the clinical and radiological outcomes for cement in cement femoral revisions performed using these prostheses.