Top

International Orthopaedics

Published in:

01-05-2012 | Original Paper

Revision total hip arthroplasty using a cementless tapered revision stem in patients with a mean age of 82 years

Authors: Daniel Neumann, Lothar Dueckelmann, Christoph Thaler, Ulrich Dorn

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 5/2012

Abstract

Purpose

A tapered straight cementless stem was used for revision in a group of old and very old patients. We wanted to know whether the use of this implant could achieve satisfactory results despite age and osteoporosis.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed data of 77 elderly patients (77 hips) who underwent revision in cemented and uncemented primary total hip arthroplasties (THA). The patients had a mean age of 82.2 years (range, 75–92 years) at revision surgery. They were monitored for a mean follow up of 7.1 years (range, 5.0–10.2 years). During the minimum follow-up period 11 patients died of unrelated causes, leaving 66 patients (66 hips) for evaluation.

Results

During the period of study three stems failed due to aseptic loosening, three hips dislocated and were successfully treated by closed reduction and bracing. No infection, osteolysis or significant stress shielding around the stems was observed. The survivorship at an average of 7.1-year follow-up was 95.5%.

Conclusions

These results indicate that this stem is an excellent alternative in revision THA in patients of 75 years or older.

Korovessis P, Repantis T (2009) High medium-term survival of Zweymüller slr-plus stem used in femoral revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(8):2032–2040PubMedCrossRef

Boehm P, Bischel O (2004) The use of tapered stems for femoral revision surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 420:148–159CrossRef

Chang JD, Kim TY, Rao MB, Lee SS, Kim IS (2011) Revision total hip arthroplasty using a tapered, press-fit cementless revision stem in elderly patients. J Arthroplasty 26(7):1045–1049

Zweymüller K, Steindl M, Melmer T (2005) Anterior windowing of the femur diaphysis for cement removal in revision surgery. Clin Orthop 441:227–236PubMedCrossRef

Zweymüller K (2007) Good results with an uncoated grit-blasted tapered straight stem at ten years. Interact Surg 2:197–205CrossRef

Della Valle CJ, Paprosky WG (2004) The femur in revision total hip arthroplasty evaluation and classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res 420:55–60PubMedCrossRef

D’Aubigne RM, Postel M (1954) Functional results of hip arthroplasty with acrylic prosthesis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 36:451–475

Harris WH (1969) Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Jt Surg Am 51:737–755

Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC (1979) Modes of failure of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–27PubMed

10.

Engh CA, Bobyn JD (1988) The influence of stem size and extent of porous coating on femoral bone resorption after primary cementless hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 231:7–28PubMed

11.

Gundolf F (2007) Compression cerclage. In: 25 years of biologic fixation, Ed.: Friedrich N, Santore R. Elsevier, Urban+Fischer, Munich

12.

Dohmae Y, Bechtold JE, Sherman RE et al (1988) Reduction in cement-bone interface shear strength between primary and revision arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 236:214–220PubMed

13.

Holt G, Hook S, Hubble M (2011) Revision total hip arthroplasty: the femoral side using cemented implants. Int Orthop 35(2):267–273PubMedCrossRef

14.

Paprosky WG, Greidanus NV, Antoniou J (1999) Minimum 10-year-results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 369:230–242PubMedCrossRef

15.

Christie MJ, DeBoer DK, Tingstad EM et al (2000) Clinical experience with a modular noncemented femoral component in revision total hip arthroplasty: 4- to 7-year results. J Arthroplast 15:840–846CrossRef

16.

Kwong LM, Miller AJ, Lubinus P (2003) A modular distal fixation option for proximal bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty: a 2- to 6-year follow-up study. J Arthroplast 18:94–98CrossRef

17.

Krishnamurthy AB, MacDonald SJ, Paprosky WG (1997) 5- to 13-year follow-up study on cementless femoral components in revision surgery. J Arthroplasty 12:839–844PubMedCrossRef

18.

Weiss RJ, Beckman MO, Enocson A et al (2011) Minimum 5-year follow-up of a cementless, modular, tapered stem in hip revision arthroplasty. J Arthroplast 1:16–23CrossRef

19.

Kolstad K, Adalberth G, Mallmin H et al (1996) The Wagner revision stem for severe osteolysis. 31 hips followed for 1.5–5 years. Acta Orthop Scand 67:541–546PubMedCrossRef

20.

Weber M, Hempfing A, Orler R et al (2002) Femoral revision using the Wagner stem: results at 2–9 years. Int Orthop 26:36–39PubMedCrossRef

21.

Mertl P, Philippot R, Rosset P, Migaud H, Tabutin J, Van de Velde D (2011) Distal locking stem for revision femoral loosening and periprosthetic fractures. Int Orthop 35(2):275–282PubMedCrossRef

22.

Parvizi J, Pour AE, Keshavarzi NR, D'Apuzzo M, Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ (2007) Revision total hip arthroplasty in octogenarians. A case-control study. J Bone Jt Surg Am 89(12):2612–2618CrossRef

23.

Meek RM, Garbuz DS, Masri BA et al (2004) Intraoperative fracture of the femur in revision total hip arthroplasty with a diaphyseal fitting stem. J Bone Jt Surg Am 86A:480–484

24.

Lintner F, Huber M, Böhm G, Attems J, Wais R (1996) Der Schneide-Schleif Effekt als wichtiger Parameter zur ossären Einheilung zementfreier Pfannen (German). In: Zweymüller K (ed) 15 Jahre Zweymüller Hüftprothese. Verlag Hans Huber, Bern

Title: Revision total hip arthroplasty using a cementless tapered revision stem in patients with a mean age of 82 years
Authors: Daniel Neumann
Lothar Dueckelmann
Christoph Thaler
Ulrich Dorn
Publication date: 01-05-2012
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: International Orthopaedics / Issue 5/2012
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-011-1379-3

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Revision total hip arthroplasty using a cementless tapered revision stem in patients with a mean age of 82 years

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 5/2012

Femoroacetabular impingement syndrome management: arthroscopy or open surgery?

Management of Vancouver B2 and B3 femoral periprosthetic fractures using a modular cementless stem without allografting

Subsidence of a cementless femoral component influenced by body weight and body mass index

Higher BMP receptor expression and BMP-2-induced osteogenic differentiation in tendon-derived stem cells compared with bone-marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells

Results of forty two computer-assisted double level osteotomies for severe genu varum deformity

Failure rate of a rotating hinge knee design due to yoke fracture of the hinged tibial insert: a retrospective data analysis and review of the literature