Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 3/2017

01-03-2017 | In Brief

Classifications In Brief: The Paprosky Classification of Femoral Bone Loss

Authors: David A. Ibrahim, MD, Navin D. Fernando, MD

Published in: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® | Issue 3/2017

Login to get access

Excerpt

Projections suggest that the incidence of revision THA performed in the United States will nearly double by 2030, resulting in as many as 96,700 such procedures per year [2, 18]. Various indications for hip revision exist, including aseptic loosening, periprosthetic joint infection, fracture, recurrent instability, and more recently, adverse local tissue reactions resulting from metal corrosion. Regardless of the cause of the revision, achieving rigid femoral fixation between the implant and the host bone at the time of revision is essential. The extent of femoral bone loss may represent a substantial impediment to achieving this goal, and as such, having a thoughtful approach to evaluating bone loss is very important. …
Literature
1.
go back to reference Aribindi R, Barba M, Solomon MI, Arp P, Paprosky W. Bypass fixation. Orthop Clin North Am. 1998;29:319–329.CrossRefPubMed Aribindi R, Barba M, Solomon MI, Arp P, Paprosky W. Bypass fixation. Orthop Clin North Am. 1998;29:319–329.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Vail TP, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:128–133.CrossRefPubMed Bozic KJ, Kurtz SM, Lau E, Ong K, Vail TP, Berry DJ. The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:128–133.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Brady OH, Garbuz DS, Masri BA, Duncan CP. The reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification of femoral fractures after hip replacement. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:59–62.CrossRefPubMed Brady OH, Garbuz DS, Masri BA, Duncan CP. The reliability and validity of the Vancouver classification of femoral fractures after hip replacement. J Arthroplasty. 2000;15:59–62.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Brown NM, Foran JR, Valle CJ, Moric M, Sporer SM, Levine BR, Paprosky WG. The inter-observer and intra-observer reliability of the Paprosky femoral bone loss classification system. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29:1482–1484.CrossRefPubMed Brown NM, Foran JR, Valle CJ, Moric M, Sporer SM, Levine BR, Paprosky WG. The inter-observer and intra-observer reliability of the Paprosky femoral bone loss classification system. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29:1482–1484.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Chung LH, Wu PK, Chen CF, Chen WM, Chen TH, Liu CL. Extensively porous-coated stems for femoral revision: reliable choice for stem revision in Paprosky femoral type III defects. Orthopedics. 2012;35:e1017–1021.CrossRefPubMed Chung LH, Wu PK, Chen CF, Chen WM, Chen TH, Liu CL. Extensively porous-coated stems for femoral revision: reliable choice for stem revision in Paprosky femoral type III defects. Orthopedics. 2012;35:e1017–1021.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Cross MB, Paprosky WG. Managing femoral bone loss in revision total hip replacement: fluted tapered modular stems. Bone Joint J. 2013;95(11 suppl A):95–97. Cross MB, Paprosky WG. Managing femoral bone loss in revision total hip replacement: fluted tapered modular stems. Bone Joint J. 2013;95(11 suppl A):95–97.
7.
go back to reference D’Antonio J, McCarthy JC, Bargar WL, Borden LS, Cappelo WN, Collis DK, Steinberg ME, Wedge JH. Classification of femoral abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;296:133–139. D’Antonio J, McCarthy JC, Bargar WL, Borden LS, Cappelo WN, Collis DK, Steinberg ME, Wedge JH. Classification of femoral abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993;296:133–139.
8.
go back to reference Della Valle CJ, Paprosky WG. The femur in revision total hip arthroplasty evaluation and classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;420:55–62. Della Valle CJ, Paprosky WG. The femur in revision total hip arthroplasty evaluation and classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;420:55–62.
9.
go back to reference Engelbrecht E, Heinert K. Klassifikation und Behandlungsrichtlinien von Knochensubstanzverlusten bei Revisionsoperationen am Hüftgelenk — mittelfristige Ergebnisse. Primär- und Revisions-Alloarthroplastik Hüft- und Kniegelenk. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag;1987:189–201. Engelbrecht E, Heinert K. Klassifikation und Behandlungsrichtlinien von Knochensubstanzverlusten bei Revisionsoperationen am Hüftgelenk — mittelfristige Ergebnisse. Primär- und Revisions-Alloarthroplastik Hüft- und Kniegelenk. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag;1987:189–201.
10.
go back to reference Engh CA, Glassman AH. Cementless revision of failed total hip replacement: an update. In: Tullos HS, ed. Instructional Course Lectures. Vol 40. Chicago, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons;1991:189–197. Engh CA, Glassman AH. Cementless revision of failed total hip replacement: an update. In: Tullos HS, ed. Instructional Course Lectures. Vol 40. Chicago, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons;1991:189–197.
11.
go back to reference Gozzard C, Blom A, Taylor A, Smith E, Learmonth I. A comparison of the reliability and validity of bone stock loss classification systems used for revision hip surgery. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:638–642.CrossRefPubMed Gozzard C, Blom A, Taylor A, Smith E, Learmonth I. A comparison of the reliability and validity of bone stock loss classification systems used for revision hip surgery. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:638–642.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Gross AE, Allan DG, Lavoie GJ, Oakeshott RD. Revision arthroplasty of the proximal femur using allograft bone. Orthop Clin North Am. 1993;24:705–715.PubMed Gross AE, Allan DG, Lavoie GJ, Oakeshott RD. Revision arthroplasty of the proximal femur using allograft bone. Orthop Clin North Am. 1993;24:705–715.PubMed
13.
go back to reference Haddad FS, Masri BA, Garbuz DS, Duncan CP. Femoral bone loss in total hip arthroplasty: classification and preoperative planning. Instr Course Lect. 2000;49:83–96.PubMed Haddad FS, Masri BA, Garbuz DS, Duncan CP. Femoral bone loss in total hip arthroplasty: classification and preoperative planning. Instr Course Lect. 2000;49:83–96.PubMed
14.
go back to reference Haydon CM, Mehin R, Burnett S, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ. Revision total hip arthroplasty with use of a cemented femoral component: results at a mean of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1179–1185.CrossRefPubMed Haydon CM, Mehin R, Burnett S, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB, McCalden RW, MacDonald SJ. Revision total hip arthroplasty with use of a cemented femoral component: results at a mean of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1179–1185.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Johnston RC, Fitzgerald RH Jr, Harris WH, Poss R, Muller ME, Sledge CB. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of total hip replacement: a standard system of terminology for reporting results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990;72:161–168.CrossRefPubMed Johnston RC, Fitzgerald RH Jr, Harris WH, Poss R, Muller ME, Sledge CB. Clinical and radiographic evaluation of total hip replacement: a standard system of terminology for reporting results. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990;72:161–168.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Klein GR, Parvizi J, Rapuri V, Wolf CF, Hozack WJ, Sharkey PF, Purtill JJ. Proximal femoral replacement for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1777–1781.PubMed Klein GR, Parvizi J, Rapuri V, Wolf CF, Hozack WJ, Sharkey PF, Purtill JJ. Proximal femoral replacement for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1777–1781.PubMed
17.
go back to reference Krishnamurthy AB, MacDonald SJ, Paprosky WG. 5- to 13-year follow-up study on cementless femoral components in revision surgery. J Arthroplasty. 1997;12:839–847.CrossRefPubMed Krishnamurthy AB, MacDonald SJ, Paprosky WG. 5- to 13-year follow-up study on cementless femoral components in revision surgery. J Arthroplasty. 1997;12:839–847.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:780–785.PubMed Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:780–785.PubMed
19.
go back to reference Mallory TH. Preparation of the proximal femur in cementless total hip revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;235:47–60. Mallory TH. Preparation of the proximal femur in cementless total hip revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;235:47–60.
20.
go back to reference Meneghini RM, Hallab NJ, Berger RA, Jacobs JJ, Paprosky WG, Rosenberg AG. Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2006;1:5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Meneghini RM, Hallab NJ, Berger RA, Jacobs JJ, Paprosky WG, Rosenberg AG. Stem diameter and rotational stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2006;1:5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Moon KH, Kang JS, Lee SH, Jung SR. Revision total hip arthroplasty using an extensively porous coated femoral stem. Clin Orthop Surg. 2009;1:105–109.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Moon KH, Kang JS, Lee SH, Jung SR. Revision total hip arthroplasty using an extensively porous coated femoral stem. Clin Orthop Surg. 2009;1:105–109.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Paprosky WG, Aribindi R. Hip replacement: treatment of femoral bone loss using distal bypass fixation. Instr Course Lect. 2000;49:119–130.PubMed Paprosky WG, Aribindi R. Hip replacement: treatment of femoral bone loss using distal bypass fixation. Instr Course Lect. 2000;49:119–130.PubMed
23.
go back to reference Paprosky WG, Greidanus NV, Antoniou J. Minimum 10-year-results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999;369:230–242.CrossRef Paprosky WG, Greidanus NV, Antoniou J. Minimum 10-year-results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999;369:230–242.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Paprosky WG, Lawrence J, Cameron H. Femoral defect classification: clinical application. Orthop Rev. 1990;19(suppl 9):9–17. Paprosky WG, Lawrence J, Cameron H. Femoral defect classification: clinical application. Orthop Rev. 1990;19(suppl 9):9–17.
25.
go back to reference Paprosky WG, Weeden SH. Extensively porous-coated stems in femoral revision arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2001;24:871–872.PubMed Paprosky WG, Weeden SH. Extensively porous-coated stems in femoral revision arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2001;24:871–872.PubMed
26.
go back to reference Parry MC, Whitehouse MR, Mehendale SA, Smith LK, Webb JC, Spencer RF, Blom AW. A comparison of the validity and reliability of established bone stock loss classification systems and the proposal of a novel classification system. Hip Int. 2010;20:50–55.PubMed Parry MC, Whitehouse MR, Mehendale SA, Smith LK, Webb JC, Spencer RF, Blom AW. A comparison of the validity and reliability of established bone stock loss classification systems and the proposal of a novel classification system. Hip Int. 2010;20:50–55.PubMed
27.
go back to reference Parvizi J, Bender B, Sim F. Revision total hip arthroplasty with femoral bone loss: proximal femoral replacement. In: Wiesel SW, ed. Operative Techniques in Orthopaedic Surgery. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011:823–830. Parvizi J, Bender B, Sim F. Revision total hip arthroplasty with femoral bone loss: proximal femoral replacement. In: Wiesel SW, ed. Operative Techniques in Orthopaedic Surgery. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011:823–830.
28.
go back to reference Raut VV, Siney PD, Wroblewski BM. Outcome of revision for mechanical stem failure using the cemented Charnley’s stem: a study of 399 cases. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11:405–410.CrossRefPubMed Raut VV, Siney PD, Wroblewski BM. Outcome of revision for mechanical stem failure using the cemented Charnley’s stem: a study of 399 cases. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11:405–410.CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Saleh KJ, Holtzman J, Gafni A, Saleh L, Davis A, Resig S, Gross AE. Reliability and intraoperative validity of preoperative assessment of standardized plain radiographs in predicting bone loss at revision hip surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:1040–1046.CrossRefPubMed Saleh KJ, Holtzman J, Gafni A, Saleh L, Davis A, Resig S, Gross AE. Reliability and intraoperative validity of preoperative assessment of standardized plain radiographs in predicting bone loss at revision hip surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:1040–1046.CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Sheth NP, Melnic CM, Rozell JC, Paprosky WG. Management of severe femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin N Am. 2015;46:329–342, ix. Sheth NP, Melnic CM, Rozell JC, Paprosky WG. Management of severe femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin N Am. 2015;46:329–342, ix.
31.
go back to reference Shih ST, Wang JW, Hsu CC. Proximal femoral megaprosthesis for failed total hip arthroplasty. Chang Gung Med J. 2007;30:73–80.PubMed Shih ST, Wang JW, Hsu CC. Proximal femoral megaprosthesis for failed total hip arthroplasty. Chang Gung Med J. 2007;30:73–80.PubMed
32.
go back to reference Sidor ML, Zuckerman JD, Lyon T, Koval K, Cuomo F, Schoenberg N. The Neer classification system for proximal humeral fractures: an assessment of interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75:1745–1750.CrossRefPubMed Sidor ML, Zuckerman JD, Lyon T, Koval K, Cuomo F, Schoenberg N. The Neer classification system for proximal humeral fractures: an assessment of interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75:1745–1750.CrossRefPubMed
33.
go back to reference Siebenrock KA, Gerber C. The reproducibility of classification of fractures of the proximal end of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75:1751–1755.CrossRefPubMed Siebenrock KA, Gerber C. The reproducibility of classification of fractures of the proximal end of the humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75:1751–1755.CrossRefPubMed
34.
go back to reference Te Stroet MA, Rijnen WH, Gardeniers JW, van Kampen A, Schreurs BW. Satisfying outcomes scores and survivorship achieved with impaction grafting for revision THA in young patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473:3867–3875.CrossRef Te Stroet MA, Rijnen WH, Gardeniers JW, van Kampen A, Schreurs BW. Satisfying outcomes scores and survivorship achieved with impaction grafting for revision THA in young patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473:3867–3875.CrossRef
35.
go back to reference te Stroet MA, Rijnen WH, Gardeniers JW, van Kampen A, Schreurs BW. The outcome of femoral component revision arthroplasty with impaction allograft bone grafting and a cemented polished Exeter stem: a prospective cohort study of 208 revision arthroplasties with a mean follow-up of ten years. Bone Joint J. 2015;97:771–779.CrossRef te Stroet MA, Rijnen WH, Gardeniers JW, van Kampen A, Schreurs BW. The outcome of femoral component revision arthroplasty with impaction allograft bone grafting and a cemented polished Exeter stem: a prospective cohort study of 208 revision arthroplasties with a mean follow-up of ten years. Bone Joint J. 2015;97:771–779.CrossRef
36.
go back to reference Valle CJ, Paprosky WG. Classification and an algorithmic approach to the reconstruction of femoral deficiency in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85(suppl 4):1–6.CrossRefPubMed Valle CJ, Paprosky WG. Classification and an algorithmic approach to the reconstruction of femoral deficiency in revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85(suppl 4):1–6.CrossRefPubMed
37.
go back to reference Weeden SH, Paprosky WG. Minimal 11-year follow-up of extensively porous-coated stems in femoral revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17(suppl 1):134–137.CrossRefPubMed Weeden SH, Paprosky WG. Minimal 11-year follow-up of extensively porous-coated stems in femoral revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002;17(suppl 1):134–137.CrossRefPubMed
38.
go back to reference Wraighte PJ, Howard PW. Femoral impaction bone allografting with an Exeter cemented collarless, polished, tapered stem in revision hip replacement: a mean follow-up of 10.5 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1000–1004.CrossRefPubMed Wraighte PJ, Howard PW. Femoral impaction bone allografting with an Exeter cemented collarless, polished, tapered stem in revision hip replacement: a mean follow-up of 10.5 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1000–1004.CrossRefPubMed
39.
go back to reference Yu R, Hofstaetter JG, Sullivan T, Costi K, Howie DW, Solomon LB. Validity and reliability of the Paprosky acetabular defect classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:2259–2265.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Yu R, Hofstaetter JG, Sullivan T, Costi K, Howie DW, Solomon LB. Validity and reliability of the Paprosky acetabular defect classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:2259–2265.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Classifications In Brief: The Paprosky Classification of Femoral Bone Loss
Authors
David A. Ibrahim, MD
Navin D. Fernando, MD
Publication date
01-03-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® / Issue 3/2017
Print ISSN: 0009-921X
Electronic ISSN: 1528-1132
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-016-5012-z

Other articles of this Issue 3/2017

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research® 3/2017 Go to the issue