Background. Revision THA presents significant challenges for the surgeon when the proximal femur is deficient or mechanically unreliable. The aim of this study is to assess the clinical and functional results of the use of tumor enndoprosthesis to reconstruct the proximal femur when there is massive bone loss. Patients and Methods. A prospective study was conducted involving 10 cases. The follow up of the cases ranged from 12 months to 30 months with a mean period of an average of 23months. The indications for revision surgery were aseptic loosening in 9 cases and septic loosening in one case Harris hip score was used for pre and postoperative clinical evaluation of the patients. Results. At the latest follow up the Harris Hip scores improved from a preoperative average of 16 (range, 3-47), to a postoperative average of 75.6 (range, 66-94). The complications that we encountered in the study included one case of superficial wound infection, another case developed sciatic nerve palsy postoperatively. No other complications were reported. Conclusion. Revision hip replacement in proximally compromised femurs presents a significant surgical challenge. When there is massive proximal femoral bone loss proximal fitting revision stems do not achieve adequate fixation hence the use of tumor prosthesis is indicated

Introduction and Aims: This study evaluates the effect of risedronate (Actonel) on proximal femoral bone loss after total hip arthroplasty (THA). Studies have shown that alendronate (Fosamax) reduces periprosthetic bone loss after primary THA. We hypothesise that patients who take risedronate, post-THA, will have less bone loss than patients not taking risedronate. Method: All patients in this prospective study undergo uncemented THA and follow the same post-operative protocol. Patients in the study group take five mg of risedronate daily, beginning five to seven days pre-operatively, and continuing for 24 months after surgery. Patients randomised to the control group do not receive risedronate. Dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans of the operated proximal femur are performed on all patients pre-operatively, three to seven days post-operatively, and then six weeks, six months, one year and two years post-operatively. Longitudinal changes in bone mineral density (BMD) are compared within and between the two groups. Results: Analysis of data for female subjects showed the percent change in BMD (g/cm. 2. ) for the control group at six months was −9.71% and for the study group −4.55%. Longitudinal changes in BMD between groups were examined using repeated measures analysis within each gender and were found to be significantly different between groups of females (p=.05). A similar trend was observed among the male subjects. One and two-year prospective data will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: Bone loss after THA can increase the rate of failure of THA and cause revision surgery to be more complex and have compromised outcomes. Short-term data reveal significantly decreased bone loss after uncemented THA among patients taking risedronate

We evaluated thirty six patients who underwent revision total hip arthroplasty for Vancouver type B periprosthetic femoral fractures. The implant used was a modular proximal femoral replacement stem cemented distally. All the patients were treated at Wrightington Hospital and included 15 males and 21 females. The primary diagnosis was OA in 28, RA in 2, AVN following femoral neck fractures in 3 and hip dysplasia in 3. The average age of patients was 75 years.

The fractures and bone loss were classified according to the Vancouver classification and included 23 B2 and 13 B2 fractures. The mechanism of injury was minor fall in 24 patients, spontaneous in 8 and intraoperative injury in 4.

Using a trans-trochanteric approach the existing prosthesis was removed and a long stem modular femoral stem was inserted bypassing the area of proximal femoral fracture/bone loss. Patients were typically mobilised within the first post-operative week. The patients were clinically and radiologically followed up at regular intervals. Fracture healing with significant improvement in bone stock was noted in 17 patients under 6 months, 13 patients at 12 months and 6 patients at 18 months.

Our series show that use of distally cemented long stem proximal femoral replacement prosthesis allows restoration of proximal bone stock and fracture healing in patients where conventional prostheses cannot be used because of massive bone loss in the proximal femur. This special modular prosthesis bypasses the area of bone loss/periprosthetic fracture, thus avoiding the need for bone allograft or other major reconstructive surgery in elderly patients.

Aims. With increasing burden of revision hip arthroplasty (THA), one of the major challenges is the management of proximal femoral bone loss associated with previous multiple surgeries. Proximal femoral arthroplasty (PFA) has already been popularized for tumour surgeries. Our aim was to describe the outcome of using PFA in these demanding non-neoplastic cases. Methods. A retrospective review of 25 patients who underwent PFA for non-neoplastic indications between January 2009 and December 2015 was undertaken. Their clinical and radiological outcome, complication rates, and survival were recorded. All patients had the Stanmore Implant – Modular Endo-prosthetic Tumour System (METS). Results. At mean follow-up of 5.9 years, there were no periprosthetic fractures. Clearance of infection was achieved in 63.6% of cases. One hip was re-revised to pseudo arthroplasty for deep infection. Instability was noted in eight of the hips (32%), of which seven needed further surgery. Out of these eight hips with instability, five had preoperative infection. Deep infection was noted in five of the hips (20%), of which four were primarily revised for infection. One patient had aseptic loosening of the femoral component and awaits revision surgery. The Kaplan-Meier survivorship free of revision of any component for any reason was 72% (95% confidence interval (CI) 51.3% to 92.7%), and for revisions of only femoral component for any reason was 96% (95% CI 86.3% to 105.7%) at five years. Conclusion. Dislocation and infection remain the major cause for failure, particularly in patients with pre-existing infection. The use of dual mobility cups, silver-coated implants, and less aggressive postoperative rehabilitation regimens would possibly aid in the reduction of complications. PFA performed in patients with periprosthetic fracture seem to fair better. This study supports the judicious use of PFA in non-oncological revision hip arthroplasties, and that they be performed by experienced revision arthroplasty surgeons. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(3):229–235

Infected non-unions of proximal femoral fractures are difficult to treat. If debridement and revision fixation is unsuccessful, staged revision arthroplasty may be required. Non-viable tissue must be resected, coupled with the introduction of an antibiotic-eluting temporary spacer prior to definitive reconstruction. Definitive tissue microbiological diagnosis and targeted antibiotic therapy are required. In cases of significant proximal femoral bone loss, spacing options are limited. We present a case of a bisphosphonate-induced subtrochanteric fracture that progressed to infected non-union. Despite multiple washouts and two revision fixations, the infection remained active with an unfavourable antibiogram. The patient required staged revision arthroplasty including a proximal femoral resection. To enable better function by maintaining leg length and offset, a custom-made antibiotic-eluting articulating temporary spacer, the Cement-a-TAN, was fabricated. Using a trochanteric entry cephalocondylar nail as a scaffold, bone cement was moulded in order to fashion an anatomical, patient-specific, proximal femoral spacer. Following resolution of the infection, the Cement-a-TAN was removed and a proximal femoral arthroplasty was successfully performed. Cement-a-TAN is an excellent temporary spacing technique in staged proximal femoral replacement for infected non-union of the proximal femur where there has been significant bone loss. It preserves mobility and maintains leg length, offset and periarticular soft-tissue tension

Background: It is difficult to achieve a successfull revision total hip arthroplasty when a patient has severe proximal femoral bone loss. From a biomechanical viewpoint, cementless fixation of a tapered stem has some advantages compared with other techniques to treat severe proximal femoral bone loss in reconstructive hip surgery. Methods: We reviewed 129 consecutive revision arthroplasties of the femoral component in which the tapered Wagner self-locking revision stem was used. The indication for revision was aseptic loosening in 97 hips, periprosthetic feacture in 13 (one of which also had an infection), and septic loosening in 16. In the 3 remaining hips, a Wagner revision stem was inserted during a second stage reimplantation after the performance of a Girdlestone resection arthroplasty to treat chronic deep infection. the prerevision defects were classified with the system described by Pak et al. as well as with our system. A functional evaluation of the patients and a survival analysis of the revision stems were performed. Results: The mean follow-up of patients without rerevision of the stem was 8.1 years (range, 5.1 – 14.1 years). Six revision stems required rerevision (malpositioning, one stem; subsidence, one stem; periprosthetic fracture, one stem; deep infection, three stems) between 0.13 and 4.6 years postoperatively. Using removal of the stem for any cause as end point, the cumulative survival at 14.1 years was 95.2%. The average Merle d‘Aubigné score improved from 7.7 points preoperatively to 14.4 points at the latest follow-up. Because of new bone formation, the most recent radiographs showed clear, good, or excellent restoration of the proximal femur in 88% of patients. Conclusions: Because of the encouraging results of implantation the Wagner revision stem, the principle of tapered revision stems with distal fixation obiously is a successfull technique. Considering possible late complications such as osteolysis of the femur, aseptic loosening, periprosthetic fracture and late infection, the shortest stem that ensures sufficient mechanical stability should be used. It may be easier to achieve high primary stability in short stems with a tapered design than with other short stem designs

With increasing burden of revision hip arthroplasty, one of the major challenge is the management of bone loss associated with previous multiple surgeries. Proximal femoral replacement (PFR) has already been popularised for tumour surgeries. The inherent advantages of PFR over allograft –prosthesis system, which is the other option for addressing severe bone loss include, early weight bearing and avoidance of non-union and disease transmission. Our study explores PFR as a possible solution for the management of complex hip revisions. Thirty consecutive hips (29 patients) that underwent PFR between January 2009 and December 2015 were reviewed retrospectively for their clinical and radiological outcomes. The Stanmore METS system was used in all these patients. Mean age at the index surgery (PFR) was 72.69 years (range 50–89) with number of previous hip arthroplasties ranging from 1–5. At mean follow up of 32.27 months, there were no peri-prosthetic fractures and no mechanical failure of the implants. Clearance of infection was achieved in 80% of cases. There was 1 early failure due to intra-operative perforation of femoral canal needing further revision and two were revised for deep infection. Instability was noted in 26.7% (8) of the hips, of which, 87.5% (7) needed further revision with constrained sockets. Out of these 8 hips with instability, 5 had pre-operative infection. Deep infection was noted in 20% (6) of the hips, of which, 5 were primarily revised with PFR for septic loosening. However, further surgeries were essential for only 3 patients. One patient has symptomatic aseptic acetabular loosening and 1 had asymptomatic progressive femoral side loosening (lost to follow up). Severe proximal femoral bone loss in complex revision arthroplasties has necessitated the use of PFR prosthesis. Our study supports the fact that PFR is probably a mechanically viable option for complex revisions. Significant numbers of dislocations and infections could be attributed to the poor soft tissue envelope around the hip. Further surgical techniques in the form use of dual mobility cups and silver coated PFR implants need to be explored

Abductor deficiency after THA can result from proximal femoral bone loss, trochanteric avulsion, muscle destruction associated with infection, pseudotumor, ALTR to metal debris, or other causes. Whiteside has described a transfer of the tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus to the greater trochanter for treatment of absent abductors after THA. Transposition of the tensor muscle requires raising an anterior soft tissue flap to the lever of the interval between the tensor muscle and sartorius, which is the same interval used in an anterior approach to the hip. The muscle is transected distally and transposed posteriorly to attach to the proximal femur. This can result in soft tissue redundancy between the posterior tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus. This interval is separated and the anterior gluteus maximis also attached to the proximal femur. Relatively large unconstrained (36 mm heads) were not found to be effective in controlling dislocation in patients with abductor deficiency. In our practice, 11 patients with abductor deficiency were treated with Whiteside's tensor muscle transfer and an unconstrained large diameter femoral head. The mean pre-operative abductor strength was 2.2 and improved to 3.2 post-operatively. One patient sustained a dislocation four weeks after surgery which was treated with open reduction. All of the other hips have remained stable. The combination of a large head and tensor muscle transposition may be a viable alternative to use of a fully constrained component in patients with deficient abductors after THA

The management of proximal femoral bone loss is a significant challenge in revision hip arthroplasty. A possible solution is the use of a modular proximal femur endoprosthesis (EPR). Although the survivorship and functional outcome of megaprostheses used in tumour surgery has been well described, outcome of EPRs used in revision hip surgery has received less attention. The aim of this study was to determine the 5-year outcome following proximal femur EPR and determine factors that influence it. This was a retrospective consecutive case series of all EPRs (n=80) performed for non-neoplastic indications, by 6 surgeons, in our tertiary referral centre, between 2005–2014. Patient demographics and relevant clinical details were determined from notes. The most common indications for the use of EPRs included infection (n=40), peri-prosthetic fracture (n=12) and failed osteosynthesis of proximal femoral fractures/complex trauma (n=11). Outcome measures included complication and re-operation rates, implant survival and assessment of functional outcome using the Oxford-Hip-Score (OHS). The mean age at surgery was 69 years and mean follow-up was 4 (0 – 11) years. The mean number of previous hip operations was 2.4 (range: 0 – 17). Twenty-five patients sustained a complication (31%), the most common being infection (n=9) and dislocation (n=4). By follow-up, further surgery was required in 18 (22%) hips, 9 of which were EPR revisions. 5-yr implant survivorship was 87% (95%CI: 76 – 98%). Mean OHS was 28 (range: 4 – 48). Inferior survival and outcome were seen in EPRs performed for the treatment of infection. Infection eradication was achieved in 34/41 with the index EPR procedure and in 40/41 hips by follow-up. Limb salvage was achieved in all cases and acceptable complication- and re-operation rates were seen. EPRs for periprosthetic fractures and failed osteosynthesis had best outcome. We recommend the continued use of proximal femur EPR in complex revision surgery

Failure of the femoral component after a primary or revision THA is commonly associated with some degree of femoral bone loss. Depending on the quantity and quality of the remaining host bone, femoral stem revision can be challenging. Twenty patients with severe proximal femoral bone loss due to prosthetic loosening were treated by Wagner cementless self-locking revision stems with a mean follow up of 24 months (range 18–36 months). The indication of revision surgery was aseptic loosening in 16 patients and septic loosening in 4 cases. At the end of the follow up the mean Harris hip score increased from 35 to 86 points. Definite radiographic evidence of bone regeneration in the bony defects was achieved within 3 months in all patients. Implantation of a Wagner cementless selflocking revision stem provided satisfactory results. The Wagner SL Revision prosthesis, firmly and rotationally stable fixed in the medullary cavity of the healthy bone distal from the original prosthetic bed, with its conical longitudinal ribs and cementless anchorage, bridges the defective prosthetic bed and hereby leads to a condition of relative mechanical stability. With time, there is active ossification in the old prosthetic bed, replacing lost bone

In this report, porous tantalum was used to achieve abductor tendon reattachment to structural allograft of the proximal femur in salvage reconstruction of a failed total hip arthroplasty. In each case, a porous tantalum segment with trapezoidal cross section was fixed to a dovetail joint of complementary geometry cut into the lateral greater trochanter. Fixation of the porous tantalum to the allograft was supplemented with polymethylmethacrylate cement. Residual abductors were mobilized from the surrounding soft tissues and secured against the porous tantalum segment with a short greater trochanteric reattachment device and cables. Patients were followed up at 73 and 80 months. Harris Hip Scores of 74 and 80 respectively were found. Both were unlimited community ambulators without support, had negative Trendelenberg signs, and were satisfied with the clinical outcomes. This preliminary experience suggests that porous tantalum has potential application in cases of severe proximal femoral bone loss involving abductor deficiency

Abductor deficiency after THA can result from proximal femoral bone loss, trochanteric avulsion, muscle destruction associated with infection, pseudotumor, ALTR to metal debris, or other causes. Constrained acetabular components are indicated to control instability after THA with deficient abductors. However, the added implant constraint also results in greater stresses at the modular liner-locking mechanism of the constrained component and bone-implant fixation interface, which can contribute to mechanical failure of the constrained implant or mechanical loosening. Use of large heads has been effective in reducing the rate of dislocation after primary THA. However, relatively large (36mm) heads were not found to be effective in controlling dislocation in patients with abductor deficiency. Dual mobility implants which can provide considerably larger head diameters than 36mm may offer an advantage in improving stability in patients with abductor deficiency. However the utility of these devices in controlling instability after THA with deficient abductors has not been established. Whiteside has described a transfer of the tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus to the greater trochanter for treatment of absent abductors after THA. Transposition of the tensor muscle requires raising an anterior soft tissue flap to the lever of the interval between the tensor muscle and sartorius, which is the same interval used in an anterior approach to the hip. The muscle is transected distally and transposed posteriorly to attach to the proximal femur. This can result in soft tissue redundancy between the posterior tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus. This interval is separated and the anterior gluteus maximus also attached to the proximal femur. The transposed tensor muscle provides muscle coverage over the greater trochanter, which may be beneficial in controlling lateral hip pain. In our practice, 11 patients were treated with Whiteside's tensor muscle transfer. Six patients had absent abductors, one had an avulsed greater trochanter, and four intact but weak abductors. One patient had a muscle transposition alone, one had an ORIF of the greater trochanter and muscle transposition, two had a muscle transposition and head/liner exchange, three had a muscle transposition and cup revision, two had a femoral revision and liner exchange with muscle transposition, and two had a muscle transposition with both component revision. None of the patients had constrained components. The mean pre-operative abductor strength was 2.2 (0/5 in four patients 3/5 in four patients, and 4/5 in three patients). Pre-operative lateral hip pain was none or mild in two patients, moderate in three, and severe in six patients. Mean post-operative abductor strength was 3.2 (2/5 in four patients, 3/5 in three, 4/5 in two, 5/5 in two patients). Post-operative lateral hip pain was none in five and mild in six patients. One patient sustained a dislocation four weeks after surgery which was treated with open reduction. All of the other hips have remained stable. Treatment of patients with hip instability and abductor deficiency has generally required use of a constrained acetabular component. In our experience, transfer of the tensor muscle and anterior gluteus maximus to the greater trochanter can improve abductor strength by one grade and also reduce lateral hip pain. The combination of a large head and tensor muscle transposition may be a viable alternative to use of a fully constrained component in patients with deficient abductors after THA. However, the need for implant constraint should also be individualised and based on factors such as the viability of the transposed muscle, patient compliance with post-operative activity restrictions, femoral head/neck ratio, and cup position

Introduction. Revision hip arthroplasty with massive proximal femoral bone loss remains challenging. Whilst several surgical techniques have been described, few have reported long term supporting data. A proximal femoral allograft (PFA) may be used to reconstitute bone stock in the multiply revised femur with segmental bone loss of greater than 8 cm. This study reports the outcome of largest case series of PFA used in revision hip arthroplasty. Methods. Data was prospectively collected from a consecutive series of 69 revision hip cases incorporating PFA and retrospective analyzed. Allografts of greater than 8 cm in length (average 14cm) implanted to replace deficient bone stock during revision hip surgery between 1984 and 2000 were included. The average age at surgery was 56 years (range 32–84) with a minimum follow up of 10 years and a mean of 15.8 years (range). Results. From the original cohort four patients had died with the original PFA, 21 (30.4%) patients required further surgery with 14 (20.3%) of these needing revisions of the femoral component. The mean time to femoral revision was 9.5 years and Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis demonstrates a 79.9% PFA survivorship at 20 years. Discussion. Proximal femoral allograft affords long lasting reconstruction of the femoral component in revision hip surgery. We advocate PFA as an attractive option in the reconstruction of the hip in the presence of significant segmental bone loss in younger patients

Introduction:. Significant proximal femoral remodeling occurs after total hip arthroplasty (THA), with regions of bone loss, and regions of hypertrophy. This study compared three implants for changes in femoral bone mineral density over 2 years following primary uncemented hip arthroplasty with a conventional stem (THA), a novel femoral neck-sparing short hip stem (NS-THA), and resurfacing hip arthroplasty (RHA). Methods:. Seventy-one patients participated in this non-randomized, prospective study. All patients had a diagnosis of osteoarthritis and underwent primary uncemented hip arthroplasty. Dual Energy XRay Absorptomitry (DXA) scans were performed at preoperative, 3–7 days post-op, 6 weeks, 6 months, one, and two years post-op. Using custom 2 cm zones, 19 zones were observed for percent changes in bone mineral density (BMD). Radiographs and Harris Hip scores were obtained at each visit. Results:. Age, gender, and BMI were found to be statistically different with fewer females and lower age in the RHA group, and a lower age in the NS-THA group. In all three groups, regions that were located proximally were shown to be the most susceptible to bone loss. Combined 2 cm zones 1C/7C, 2A/6A, and 2B/6B showed statistical significance (p < 0.05). Bone loss in the proximal regions was 8–10% lower with the femoral neck-sparing short stem, and least in the RHA group, causing little to no BMD loss in proximal regions. Radiographic outcomes and clinical results including Harris Hip scores were equal between the groups. Conclusion:. Consistent with our hypothesis, it was found that hip arthroplasty with a conventional stem resulted in the highest proximal femoral bone loss, and resurfacing arthroplasty was associated with the least bone loss. The femoral neck-sparing short stem ameliorated the bone loss seen with traditional hip arthroplasty, and approximated the bone preservation seen with hip resurfacing. The short stem neck-sparing device may provide some of the benefits of hip resurfacing, but could potentially have wider indications for use

Massive proximal femoral bone loss can be a complex problem, despite various modern technical and implant solutions. Due to inadequate bone stock and missing proximal fixation possibilities, including larger segmental osseous defects, the use of a mega prosthesis might become necessary. Coverage of the segmental bone loss in combination with distal fixation, can be achieved in either cemented or non-cemented techniques. Some implant types allow for additional fixation of the gluteal muscles, attached with non-absorbable sutures or synthetic mesh grafts. Although first reports about partial or even complete femoral replacement are available since the 1960's, larger case series or technical reports are rare within the literature and limited to some specialised centers. Most series are reported by oncologic centers, with necessary larger osseous resections of the femur. The final implantation of any mega prosthesis system requires meticulous planning, especially to calculate the appropriate leg length of the implant and resulting leg length. Combination of a posterior hip with a lateral knee approach allows for the enlargement to a total femur replacement, if necessary. The lateral vastus muscle is detached and the entire soft tissues envelope can be displaced medially. After implant and cement removal, non-structural bone might be resected. Trial insertion is important, due to the variation of overall muscle tension intraoperatively and prevention of early or late dislocation. Currently the use of proximal modular systems, including length, offset and anteversion adaption, became the technique of choice for these implant systems. However, just very few companies offer yet such a complete system, which might also be expanded to a total femur solution. We were able to evaluate our Endo-Klinik results of total-femur replacements within 100 consecutive patients in non-infected cases, after a mean follow up time of five years. There we “only” 68% patients without complications, main complications included: 13% revealed a deep infection; dislocation was found in 6%, material failure and consequent breakage in 3%, persistent patellar problems in 2% and finally 1% with peroneal nerve palsy. These results show that a total-femur replacement is associated with a high complication rate, even in non-infected patient cohorts

Reasons for bone loss in septic hip prosthesis include osteolysis caused by the infection in itself and by the mechanical loosening, while implant removal and the necessary bone debridment usually ends in a even more severe bone loss. In two stage revision surgery the use of a long stem antibiotic-loaded pre-formed cement spacer (Spacer G – Tecres s.r.l., Italy) appears particularly useful to allow mechanical stability and antibiotic local elution even in the presence of wide proximal femoral bone loss. After two months the revision is performed with non-cemented long stem modular implants (Profemur – Wright-Cremascoli) without the need for massive bone grafts. Recently we have also started using growth factors to stimulate bone stock reconstitution. In all the patients a double antibiotic therapy is administered after the first and second stage procedures for 6–8 weeks. The results obtained (54 patients, follow-up 2 – 5 years) according to this protocol show the absence of infection recurrence, 10 cranial spacer dislocation, not treated, 2 revision prosthesis dislocations, that required open reduction, 1 transient femoral nerve palsy. The described technique, used according to a proper protocol, allows to obtain good results, in the medium term follow-up

Aim: The purpose of our study is to present the survival results, clinical outcome and complications from the use of APC in cases with a history of periprosthetic infection. Materials and Methods: Between 1986 and 1999, twenty-two patients (twenty-two hips) 11 male and 11 female (mean age 57.5 years – range 38 to 77 years) with massive bone loss (Paprosky IIIA 2 cases, IIIB 4 cases, and IV 16 cases) were included to our study. They all had a history of periprosthetic infection after an average of 3.3 (range 1 to 5) revision hip arthroplasties and were submitted to a two stage revision arthroplasty using an allograft-prosthesis composite. Results: At an average follow-up of eleven years (range, eight to twenty years), 14 patients were alive, 7 patients died, and 1 patient was lost to follow-up. The ten year survival of the allograft-prosthesis composites was 74.9 per cent (95 per cent confidence interval 55.1 to 94.7 per cent, 4 cases remaining at risk). Seven cases presented with APC failure needing re-revision, 2 due to re-infection (4 and 23 months from revision by the same microorganism species as for the initial infection (Staph aureus to both cases), 3 due to allograft non union (at 21, 43, 79 months) and 2 cases due to graft resorption (164, 175 months post revision). Delayed healing and wound drainage occurred to 2 more cases. Conclusion: Reconstruction of massive proximal femoral bone loss with an allograft-implant composite is a demanding procedure. Biologic means of reconstruction is a major advantage preserving bone stock for future surgery. However, high complication rate should be considered

Objective: Revision total hip arthroplasty in cases of proximal femoral bone loss due to osteolysis and loosening is challenging for surgeon and implants. The use of tapered fluted modular titanium femoral stem in these situations may offer the advantage of better biomechanical reconstruction with a design that ensure primary stability and promotes bone integration. Method: We studied retrospectively 83 cases of femoral reconstruction with the PFM-R stem. Paprosky classification was used to qualify bone defects on preoperative radiological evaluation. Demographic, clinical and intraoperative data were collected, along with any complications. Clinical (W.O.M.A.C. function score) and radiological follow-up was performed at a minimum of 12 months. Results: The mean follow-up was 44 months (23 to 66 months). Five patients were lost to follow-up. 48% of patients had at least one previous revision. The mean post operative WOMAC score was 83. 91% of patients had no significant limb length discrepancy. Stabilization or regression of osteolytic lesions was observed in 75% of revised femur. Complications were 8 dislocations, 7 fractures and 3 infections. A correlation was found between the risk of dislocation and the number of previous revision surgery. Out of 14 cases revised for infection, one had a recurrence. Discussion: This study confirmed the benefits of the PFM-R stem in difficult femoral revision in term of limb length equalization, stability of fixation, regression of osteolytic lesions and improved clinical function

Aseptic loosening and osteolysis may cause significant periprosthetic femoral bone destruction, often necessitating bypass of the deficient proximal femur to obtain stable fixation in the distal diaphysis. The purpose of the present study was to report our results of femoral component revision using a distally locked revision femoral stem for the treatment of the severe proximal femoral bone loss. We evaluated 21 hips in 20 patients who underwent revision hip arthroplasty associated with Paprosky grade-IIIB or IV femoral deficiencies. Three hips were associated with a Vancouver type-B3 periprosthetic femoral fracture. The mean age at the time of revision was 70.8 (51–82) years old with 5 men and 15 women. The mean duration of follow-up was 5.1 years. The femoral implant used for the revision was the Cannulok Revision Prosthesis in 16 hips and the Huckstep interlocking stem in five. Gaps between the stem and the host bone were filled and impacted with bone chips and morselized bone prior to stem insertion. One femoral implants were resected because of deep infection Subsidence was absent and stable fixation was achieved in all patients. Non-progressive radiolucent lines in zones 1 and 7 according to Gruen’s classification were detected in five cases. Cortical hypertrophy around the interlocking screws were seen in ten cases. No disadvantages or complications of the interlocking screws were observed. All the fractures have united within three to five months. Intraoperative fractures in the diaphyseal area occurred in five hips in which trochanteric osteotomy was used. A diaphyseal fixation of the femoral stem with distal interlocking screws appears to provide primary axial and rotational stability of the prosthesis and early mobilization. This implant may provide a satisfactory alternative for the management of revision hip surgery in the presence of a loose femoral component with massive bone loss. Longer-term follow-up data from this study will be needed to confirm these outcomes

Aseptic loosening and osteolysis may cause significant periprosthetic femoral bone destruction, often necessitating bypass of the deficient proximal femur to obtain stable fixation in the distal diaphysis. The purpose of the present study was to report our results of femoral component revision using a distally locked revision femoral stem for the treatment of the severe proximal femoral bone loss. We evaluated 21 hips in 20 patients who underwent revision hip arthroplasty associated with Paprosky grade-IIIB or IV femoral deficiencies. Three hips were associated with a Vancouver type-B3 periprosthetic femoral fracture. The mean age at the time of revision was 70.8 (51–82) years old with 5 men and 15 women. The mean duration of follow-up was 5.1 years. The femoral implant used for the revision was the Cannulok Revision Prosthesis in 16 hips and the Huckstep interlocking stem in five. Gaps between the stem and the host bone were filled and impacted with bone chips and morselized bone prior to stem insertion. One femoral implants were resected because of deep infection Subsidence was absent and stable fixation was achieved in all patients. Non-progressive radiolucent lines in zones 1 and 7 according to Gruen’s classification were detected in five cases. Cortical hypertrophy around the interlocking screws were seen in ten cases. No disadvantages or complications of the interlocking screws were observed. All the fractures have united within three to five months. Intraoperative fractures in the diaphyseal area occurred in five hips in which trochanteric osteotomy was used. A diaphyseal fixation of the femoral stem with distal interlocking screws appears to provide primary axial and rotational stability of the prosthesis and early mobilization. This implant may provide a satisfactory alternative for the management of revision hip surgery in the presence of a loose femoral component with massive bone loss. Longer-term follow-up data from this study will be needed to confirm these outcomes