Aims. Uncemented implants are now commonly used at reimplantation of a two-stage revision total hip arthoplasty (THA) following periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, there is a paucity of data on the performance of the most commonly used uncemented femoral implants – modular
Non-modular tapered
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,
Aims. Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) allows an extremely accurate
measurement of early micromotion of components following arthroplasty. . Patients and Methods. In this study, RSA was used to measure the migration of 11 partially
cemented
Tapered,
We reviewed 25 patients in whom a MUTARS megaprosthesis with a conical
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. United Classification System (UCS) B2 and B3 periprosthetic fractures in total hip arthroplasties (THAs) have been commonly managed with modular tapered stems. No study has evaluated the use of monoblock
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 Unified Classification System (UCS), or Vancouver system, is a validated and widely used classification system to guide the management of periprosthetic femoral fractures. It suggests that well-fixed stems (type B1) can be treated with fixation but that loose stems (types B2 and B3) should be revised. Determining whether a stem is loose can be difficult and some authors have questioned how to apply this classification system to polished taper slip stems which are, by definition, loose within their cement mantle. Recent evidence has challenged the common perception that revision surgery is preferable to fixation surgery for UCS-B periprosthetic fractures around cemented polished taper slip stems. Indications for fixation include an anatomically reducible fracture and cement mantle, a well-fixed femoral bone-cement interface, and a well-functioning acetabular component. However, not all type B fractures can or should be managed with fixation due to the risk of early failure. This annotation details specific fracture patterns that should not be managed with fixation alone. Cite this article: