Introduction

There is much current debate concerning wear and corrosion at the taper junctions of large head total hip replacements, particularly metal-on-metal hips. Is such damage a modern concern or has it always occurred in total hip replacement but not previously noted. To investigate this five explanted V40 Exeter femoral stems (Stryker Howmedica) were obtained following revision surgery at a single centre. In all cases, the 24–26 mm femoral heads were still attached.

Recent NICE guidance recommends use of a well proven cemented femoral stem for hip hemiarthroplasty in management of fractured neck of femur. The Exeter Trauma Stem (ETS) has been designed based on the well proven Exeter hip stem. It has a double taper polished stem design, proclaimed to share geometry and surface finish with the Exeter hip. This study investigated the surface finish of the two stems in order to investigate the hypothesis that they were different. Two ETS and two Exeter stems were examined using a profilometer with a sensitivity of one nanometer. Macroscopic visual inspection showed that the two Exeter stems had significantly smoother surface finish than the ETS stems. The roughness average (RA) values on the ETS stems were approximately an order of magnitude higher than those of the Exeter stems, mean of 0.235μm compared with 0.025μm (p<0.0001). This difference in surface finish has implications for the biomechanical functioning of the stem. Previous change of the Exeter stem to a matt surface-finish in 1976 resulted in a significant increase in stem failure rates and an understanding of the importance of the polished surface-finish in order to function within a taper-slip philosophy. By changing the surface finish in the ETS stem, longevity of the implant may similarly be affected. Clinical results have yet to be published demonstrating this. We recommend the manufacturer reconsiders the surface finish of the ETS stem to ensure it functions as well as the Exeter primary stem with which it shares a design philosophy.