Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is challenging
when there is severe loss of bone in the proximal femur. The purpose
of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes
of revision THA in patients with severe proximal femoral bone loss
treated with a
Aims. Revision total hip arthroplasty in patients with Vancouver type B3 fractures with Paprosky type IIIA, IIIB, and IV femoral defects are difficult to treat. One option for Paprovsky type IIIB and IV defects involves modular cementless, tapered, revision femoral components in conjunction with distal interlocking screws. The aim of this study was to analyze the rate of reoperations and complications and union of the fracture, subsidence of the stem, mortality, and the clinical outcomes in these patients. Methods. A total of 46 femoral components in patients with Vancouver B3 fractures (23 with Paprosky type IIIA, 19 with type IIIB, and four with type IV defects) in 46 patients were revised with a transfemoral approach using a modular, tapered, cementless revision Revitan curved femoral component with distal cone-in-cone fixation and prospectively followed for a mean of 48.8 months (SD 23.9; 24 to 112). The mean age of the patients was 80.4 years (66 to 100). Additional distal interlocking was also used in 23 fractures in which distal cone-in-cone fixation in the isthmus was < 3 cm. Results. One patient (2.2%) died during the first postoperative year. After six months, 43 patients (93.5%) had osseous, and three had fibrous consolidation of the fracture and the bony flap, 42 (91.3%) had bony ingrowth and four had stable fibrous fixation of the stem. No patient had radiolucency around the interlocking screws and no screw broke. One patient had non-progressive subsidence and two had a dislocation. The mean Harris Hip Score increased from of 57.8 points (SD 7.9) three months postoperatively to 76.1 points (SD 10.7) 24 months postoperatively. Conclusion. The 2° tapered,
Aims. Although good clinical outcomes have been reported for monolithic tapered,
Tapered,
Tapered,
We report our experience of revision total hip
replacement (THR) using the Revitan curved modular titanium
If a surgeon is faced with altered lesser trochanter
anatomy when revising the femoral component in revision total hip
replacement, a peri-prosthetic fracture, or Paprosky type IIIb or
type IV femoral bone loss, a modular tapered stem offers the advantages
of accurately controlling femoral version and length. The splines
of the taper allow rotational control, and improve the fit in femoral
canals with diaphyseal bone loss. In general, two centimetres of diaphyseal
contact is all that is needed to gain stability with modular tapered
stems. By allowing the proximal body trial to rotate on a well-fixed
distal segment during trial reduction, appropriate anteversion can
be obtained in order to improve intra-operative stability, and decrease
the dislocation risk. However, modular stems should not be used for
all femoral revisions, as implant fracture and corrosion at modular
junctions can still occur. Cite this article:
Aims. The risk of mechanical failure of modular revision hip stems is frequently mentioned in the literature, but little is currently known about the actual clinical failure rates of this type of prosthesis. The current retrospective long-term analysis examines the distal and modular failure patterns of the Prevision hip stem from 18 years of clinical use. A design improvement of the modular taper was introduced in 2008, and the data could also be used to compare the original and the current design of the modular connection. Methods. We performed an analysis of the Prevision modular hip stem using the manufacturer’s vigilance database and investigated different mechanical failure patterns of the hip stem from January 2004 to December 2022. Results. Two mechanical failure patterns were identified: fractures in the area of the distal
Aims. Femoral revision component subsidence has been identified as predicting early failure in revision hip surgery. This comparative cohort study assessed the potential risk factors of subsidence in two commonly used femoral implant designs. Methods. A comparative cohort study was undertaken, analyzing a consecutive series of patients following revision total hip arthroplasties using either a tapered-modular (TM)
Tapered
Revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is projected
to increase by 137% from the years 2005 to 2030. Reconstruction of
the femur with massive bone loss can be a formidable undertaking.
The goals of revision surgery are to create a stable construct,
preserve bone and soft tissues, augment deficient host bone, improve
function, provide a foundation for future surgery, and create a
biomechanically restored hip. Options for treatment of the compromised femur
include: resection arthroplasty, allograft prosthetic composite
(APC), proximal femoral replacement, cementless fixation with a
modular tapered
Aims. The goals of this study were to define the risk factors, characteristics,
and chronology of fractures in 5417 revision total hip arthroplasties
(THAs). . Patients and Methods. From our hospital’s prospectively collected database we identified
all patients who had undergone a revision THA between 1969 and 2011
which involved the femoral stem. The patients’ medical records and
radiographs were examined and the relevant data extracted. Post-operative
periprosthetic fractures were classified using the Vancouver system.
A total of 5417 revision THAs were identified. Results. There were 668 intra-operative fractures, giving an incidence
of 12%. Fractures were three times more common with uncemented stems
(19%) than with cemented stems (6%) (p <
0.001). The incidence
of intra-operative femoral fracture varied by uncemented stem type:
fully-coated (20%); proximally-coated (19%); modular
When fracture of an extensively porous-coated
femoral component occurs, its removal at revision total hip arthroplasty
(THA) may require a femoral osteotomy and the use of a trephine.
The remaining cortical bone after using the trephine may develop
thermally induced necrosis. A retrospective review identified 11
fractured, well-fixed, uncemented, extensively porous-coated femoral
components requiring removal using a trephine with a minimum of
two years of follow-up. . The mean time to failure was 4.6 years (1.7 to 9.1, standard
deviation (. sd. ) 2.3). These were revised using a larger extensively
porous coated component,
Aims. To evaluate the hypothesis that failed osteosynthesis of periprosthetic
Vancouver type B1 fractures can be treated successfully with stem
revision using a transfemoral approach and a cementless, modular,
tapered revision stem with reproducible rates of fracture healing,
stability of the revision stem, and clinically good results. Patients and Methods. A total of 14 patients (11 women, three men) with a mean age
of 72.4 years (65 to 90) undergoing revision hip arthroplasty after
failed osteosynthesis of periprosthetic fractures of Vancouver type
B1 were treated using a transfemoral approach to remove the well-fixed
stem before insertion of a modular,
The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of liner malseating in two commonly used dual-mobility (DM) designs. Secondary aims included determining the risk of dislocation, survival, and clinical outcomes. We retrospectively identified 256 primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) that included a DM component (144 Stryker MDM and 112 Zimmer-Biomet G7) in 233 patients, performed between January 2012 and December 2019. Postoperative radiographs were reviewed independently for malseating of the liner by five reviewers. The mean age of the patients at the time of THA was 66 years (18 to 93), 166 (65%) were female, and the mean BMI was 30 kg/m2 (17 to 57). The mean follow-up was 3.5 years (2.0 to 9.2).Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to determine whether fixation, as opposed to revision arthroplasty, can be safely used to treat reducible Vancouver B type fractures in association with a cemented collarless polished tapered femoral stem (the Exeter). This retrospective cohort study assessed 152 operatively managed consecutive unilateral Vancouver B fractures involving Exeter stems; 130 were managed with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) and 22 with revision arthroplasty. Mean follow-up was 6.5 years (SD 2.6; 3.2 to 12.1). The primary outcome measure was revision of at least one component. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was performed. Regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for revision following ORIF. Secondary outcomes included any reoperation, complications, blood transfusion, length of hospital stay, and mortality.Aims
Methods
This aim of this study was to assess the reliability and validity of the Unified Classification System (UCS) for postoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) around cemented polished taper-slip (PTS) stems. Radiographs of 71 patients with a PFF admitted consecutively at two centres between 25 February 2012 and 19 May 2020 were collated by an independent investigator. Six observers (three hip consultants and three trainees) were familiarized with the UCS. Each PFF was classified on two separate occasions, with a mean time between assessments of 22.7 days (16 to 29). Interobserver reliability for more than two observers was assessed using percentage agreement and Fleiss’ kappa statistic. Intraobserver reliability between two observers was calculated with Cohen kappa statistic. Validity was tested on surgically managed UCS type B PFFs where stem stability was documented in operation notes (n = 50). Validity was assessed using percentage agreement and Cohen kappa statistic between radiological assessment and intraoperative findings. Kappa statistics were interpreted using Landis and Koch criteria. All six observers were blinded to operation notes and postoperative radiographs.Aims
Methods
We aimed to report the mid- to long-term rates of septic and aseptic failure after two-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip arthroplasty (THA). We retrospectively reviewed 96 cases which met the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria for PJI. The mean follow-up was 90 months (SD 32). Septic failure was assessed using a Delphi-based consensus definition. Any further surgery undertaken for aseptic mechanical causes was considered as aseptic failure. The cumulative incidence with competing risk analysis was used to predict the risk of septic failure. A regression model was used to evaluate factors associated with septic failure. The cumulative incidence of aseptic failure was also analyzed.Aims
Methods
There is a paucity of long-term studies analyzing risk factors for failure after single-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip arthroplasty (THA). We report the mid- to long-term septic and non-septic failure rate of single-stage revision for PJI after THA. We retrospectively reviewed 88 cases which met the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria for PJI. Mean follow-up was seven years (1 to 14). Septic failure was diagnosed with a Delphi-based consensus definition. Any reoperation for mechanical causes in the absence of evidence of infection was considered as non-septic failure. A competing risk regression model was used to evaluate factors associated with septic and non-septic failures. A Kaplan-Meier estimate was used to analyze mortality.Aims
Methods
We evaluated a large database with mechanical failure of a single uncemented modular femoral component, used in revision hip arthroplasty, as the end point and compared them to a control group treated with the same implant. Patient- and implant-specific risk factors for implant failure were analyzed. All cases of a fractured uncemented modular revision femoral component from one manufacturer until April 2017 were identified and the total number of implants sold until April 2017 was used to calculate the fracture rate. The manufacturer provided data on patient demographics, time to failure, and implant details for all notified fractured devices. Patient- and implant-specific risk factors were evaluated using a logistic regression model with multiple imputations and compared to data from a previously published reference group, where no fractures had been observed. The results of a retrieval analysis of the fractured implants, performed by the manufacturer, were available for evaluation.Aims
Methods