Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

FEMORAL REVISION IN FAILED THA USING CEMENTLESS MODULAR STEMS



Abstract

Bone Loss is the main problem in failed total hip arthroplasties. Revision surgery must be conformed to the degree of the bone loss. Since 1986, 330 cases of failed THA underwent to revision surgery. Different solutions were adopted according to Paprosky femoral defects classification. In type I, a primary cementless stem was implanted (23%). In type II and IIIa, were proximal fixation is still possible to achieve, Mid PCA-Howmedica (5%) and modular S-ROM-J& J revision stems (18%) were implanted. In all the other degree of bone loss (IIIb–IV) cementless distal fixation stems, Long PCA-Howmedica (17 %), Wagner-Sulzer (18 %) and modular (MP-Link, Profemur-Wright) (19 %), were used. Patients were clinically and radiographically evaluated by HHS and according to Engh’s criteria. Best results were observed in Type I group (HHS=90). Long and mid PCA stems presented poor clinical (HHS=60) and radiographical results and required re-revision in 15% of cases. Intermediate results were observed in Wagner prostheses. Modular revision stems showed best results although earlier F-U. (HHS=80). Of these, re-revision surgery was performed in two cases, one of which because of infection and the other one due to severe thigh pain.

Cementless modular stems seem to be the most suitable technique. Distal fixation associated with proximal fill permit to manage the majority of femoral bone defects minimizing bone grafts. The modular stems, allow to conform the design of the components to the bone defects permitting to achieve primary stability (press-fit), restoring the centre of rotation and muscles tension, reducing pain and restoring hip function.

The abstracts were prepared by Nico Verdonschot. Correspondence should be addressed to him at Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, University Medical Centre, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.