Femoral revision for periprosthetic fracture in total hip arthroplasty

Periprosthetic fracture can create significant morbidity in the arthroplasty population. Patients with periprosthetic fracture have been shown to have worse outcomes and higher mortality than patients undergoing elective revision THA. In this review, we will focus on Vancouver B2 and B3 fractures. Both of these fracture types are associated with a loose primary prosthesis and warrant revision surgery. There are many different options for fixation choice of the femoral prosthesis, and preference has been evolving over the last 30 years. Currently, we use monoblock, tapered, fluted, titanium stems for all periprosthetic fracture revision surgeries.     

Implant stability in revision total hip arthroplasty: Allograft bone packing following extended proximal femoral osteotomy

One method of revising the femoral component in revision total hip arthroplasty in the presence of compromised femoral bone stock is to pack the upper femur with particulate allograft and then to cement the femoral component into the allograft bed. This technique is being used clinically with encouraging results. Additionally, surgical exposure of the femoral canal during revision total hip arthroplasty can be greatly improved with an extended trochanteric osteotomy, which is subsequently repaired with wires or cables. To assess the feasibility of performing the allograft bone packing technique following an extended trochanteric osteotomy, the stability of this construct in a cadaver model was measured, using micromotion sensing instruments and loads applied on a materials testing machine. The stability of the cemented allograft impaction construct following extended trochanteric osteotomy was comparable to the stability of the control construct, which consisted of a similar impacted allograft construct without osteotomy. The stability of the osteotomized side was comparable to that of the control side. It is concluded that the initial in vitro stability of the allograft impaction technique following extended proximal femoral osteotomy is adequate to justify experimental in vivo use.     

Posterior longitudinal split osteotomy for femoral component extraction in revision total hip arthroplasty

We present a technique of single posterior longitudinal split osteotomy. This technique allows the expansion of the proximal femur and easier extraction of uncemented femoral components. Since 1998 we have performed this osteotomy in 12 revision total hip arthroplasties in 11 patients who had either stable fibrous ingrowth or a small amount of bony ingrowth. All were revised to a cemented Exeter stem (Stryker Benoist Gerard, Caen, France). No patient required conversion from a longitudinal split to an extended trochanteric osteotomy. At mean follow-up of 48 months, there were significant improvements in both pain and function. There were no complications due to this technique. Mean in-cement taper engagement (subsidence) was 1.1 mm (range, 0-2 mm). Femoral impaction grafting did not adversely affect the cement mantle or increase in-cement taper engagement. With appropriate patient selection, this is a simple, reliable, and extensile technique to assist in the extraction of uncemented ongrowth femoral components whether hydroxyapatite-coated or not.     

Treatment of periprosthetic fractures around total hip arthroplasty with an extensively coated femoral component

Late periprosthetic fractures may occur around loose cemented femoral components, usually as a consequence of osteolytic bone deficiency. The management of these fractures should include revision total hip arthroplasty using techniques that achieve fracture healing and component stability. If a cementless component is to be used, osseointegration is desirable. Presented herein is a technique of revision total hip arthroplasty for this injury using a curved, extensively coated femoral component. Four cases have been followed for a minimum of 2 years. Each case achieved a good or excellent clinical outcome while radiographs demonstrated fracture healing and osseointegration.     

Role of a bone conserving short stem femoral component in revision total hip arthroplasty: A case report

Choice of the implant during revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) is crucial in younger patients due to the impaired quality of bone and deficient bone stock. The short femoral stem provides an appealing unorthodox alternative implant in young patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty. A classic revision total hip arthroplasty predominantly describes the use of conventional or long stem for revision of the femoral component. However, little is known about the use of short femoral stem in revision THA.This case report discusses the revision of cemented conventional femoral stem using a bone-conserving short-stem femoral implant with circumferential metaphyseal fixation, which is seldom reported in the literature. Associated benefits are less aggressive surgery with a reduction in blood loss, magnitude and duration of surgery by avoiding the removal of distal cement in the femur canal, thus making the femoral component revision easier. Moreover, it facilitates postoperative rehabilitation and recovery as well. Also, it preserves the femoral bone stock and offers a long term solution especially in young patients retaining the choice of using a conventional or long stem femoral implant should a second revision becomes imperative.     

Conversion total hip arthroplasty: Primary or revision total hip arthroplasty

Total hip arthroplasty (THA) is an increasingly common procedure among elderly individuals. Although conversion THA is currently bundled in a diagnosis related group (DRG) with primary THA, there is a lack of literature supporting this classification and it has yet to be identified whether conversion THA better resembles primary or revision THA. This editorial analyzed the intraoperative and postoperative factors and functional outcomes following conversion THA, primary THA, and revision THA to understand whether the characteristics of conversion THA resemble one procedure or the other, or are possibly somewhere in between. The analysis revealed that conversion THA requires more resources both intraoperatively and postoperatively than primary THA. Furthermore, patients undergoing conversion THA present with poorer functional outcomes in the long run. Patients undergoing conversion THA better resemble revision THA patients than primary THA patients. As such, patients undergoing conversion THA should not be likened to patients undergoing primary THA when determining risk stratification and reimbursement rates. Conversion THA procedures should be planned accordingly with proper anticipation of the greater needs both in the operating room, and for in-patient and follow-up care. We suggest that conversion THA be reclassified in the same DRG with revision THA as opposed to primary THA as a step towards better allocation of healthcare resources for conversion hip arthroplasties.     

Redefining revision total hip arthroplasty based on hospital admission status

This study examined patient demographics, length of hospital stay, and discharge disposition in those undergoing nonelective revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) vs elective rTHA. Data from 23 000 patients with hip revisions from 2005 through 2007 were extracted from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. We examined patient admission status, demographics, length of stay, and discharge location. We found that patients undergoing nonelective rTHA were older, were female, had more comorbidities, stayed an excess of 1.61 days in the hospital, and required a skilled care facility after discharge compared with those undergoing elective rTHA. We found that rTHA outcomes varied based on patient hospital admission status. Patients who elected to have rTHA had less comorbidities, cost, and likelihood of being discharged into a skilled care facility.     

Early outcome of a modular femoral component in revision total hip arthroplasty

Forty-six hips in 42 patients underwent revision surgery with a modular femoral component (ZMR; Zimmer, Warsaw, Ind). Thirty-nine hips with 2 to 5 years' follow-up were evaluated radiographically and clinically by the Harris hip score and WOMAC pain/stiffness/function scores. The Harris hip score improved from 47.4 to 72.3 (P<.001), with significant improvements in the WOMAC pain/stiffness/function scores. The mean subsidence was 4.4 mm, with 5 hips demonstrating significant subsidence of more than 5 mm. Four hips required reoperation, 1 due to failure of the femoral component. No early complications were encountered regarding the modular junction. Modular, cementless, extensively porous, coated femoral components have demonstrated early clinical and radiographic success. Distal intramedullary fit helps ensure initial stability; proximal modularity further maximizes fit while optimizing hip offset and length.     

Strut grafts in revision hip arthroplasty faced with femoral bone defects: an experimental analysis

Purpose

In total hip arthroplasty fixation of revision stems can be demanding due to femoral bone loss. Strut grafts are often used for bone augmentation and stabilization of the newly inserted prosthesis. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of strut grafts on primary stability under various stem fixation conditions.

Methods

Two different revision stems (cylindrical and conical shape) were implanted into synthetic femora. Following a semicircular transfemoral osteotomy, three deficient femoral bearings were simulated (bony lid reattached with cable wires; weakened lid reattached with cable wires; strut grafts placed to the weakened lid with cable wires). Relative micro-movements were measured between prostheses and bones due to an axial moment applied to the stems.

Results

Relative movements correlated to the stem shape. The cylindrical stem showed higher movements increasing significantly with a weakened bony lid and portrayed a slight decrease of movements with strut graft application. No unequivocal influence of the weakened lid could be detected for the conical implant. Strut graft application did not show an additional stabilizing effect.

Conclusions

The primary stability of the cylindrical fixation concept decreases with impaired fixation conditions of the femur. A clear restabilizing effect with strut grafts could not be proven. A decrease of primary stability due to the impaired bone could not be observed for the conical stem shape. Additionally, strut grafts do not enhance fixation for this stem shape. We conclude that surgeons should not rely on a stabilizing effect of strut grafts in revision hip surgery.     

Modified sliding trochanteric osteotomy in revision total hip arthroplasty

Traditional trochanteric sliding osteotomy preserves the lateral aspect of the greater trochanter, the abductors, and vastus lateralis in continuity. Our modification uses a lateral approach to the hip and osteotomy immediately anterior to the insertion of the posterior capsule and external rotators onto the greater trochanter. The osteotomy and attached abductors and vastus lateralis are translated anteriorly, leaving the posterior capsule and external rotators attached to the proximal femur. This surgical approach preserves the posterior soft-tissue stabilizing structures that resist posterior dislocation of the hip. In a retrospective review of 2 consecutive 2-year series of acetabular component revisions only between 1997 and 2001, 4 of 27 acetabular revisions using a traditional trochanteric slide subsequently dislocated; only 1 of 30 subsequent cases using a modified sliding trochanteric osteotomy dislocated. Modified sliding trochanteric osteotomy facilitated surgical exposure and produced a trend toward a lower dislocation rate that did not reach statistical significance with the small numbers of patients available.     

Principles of reconstruction in revision hip arthroplasty: Technique and results of bone grafts for treatment of femoral and acetabular deficits

Revision total hip arthroplasty is usually complicated by bone loss associated with osteolysis secondary to polyethylene debris or defects caused by migration of loose components. This bone loss manifests itself in a variety of femoral and acetabular defects which need to be classified and managed appropriately, due to the variance in results associated with revision arthroplasty. Cementless revision of these defects has demonstrated positive results. A calcar bearing prosthesis was utilized successfully in several grades of deficient femurs with impressive results. In the first study, 264 patients with minimally deficient femurs were treated with a calcar bearing prosthesis. An average follow-up of greater than 5 years (range, 3–10 years) exhibited a 4% revision rate. In a second study, in which cortical strut allografts were used to correct larger femoral defects, a similar follow-up yielded a 2.4% revision rate. The revisions in these series were usually a result of undersizing or attempting to support the prosthesis with graft material. Acetabular deficiencies are also successfully managed with graft material. In the natural acetabulum, most of the support comes from the cortical struts. The acetabulum is fairly easy to revise if the cortical structure is present. Acetabular reconstruction with structural bone loss is possible, but much more technique-dependent. Guest Lecture presented at the 26th meeting of the Japanese Society for Replacement Arthroplasty in Tokyo on February 2, 1996     

An analysis of stably fixed femoral components retained during revision total hip arthroplasty

This study was conducted to analyze the clinical and radiographic results of isolated acetabular revisions during which intact femoral stems were retained. Twenty-nine hips of 26 patients who were followed up for a minimum of 3 years were examined. The average time from primary operation to revision surgery was 9.2 years, and the average follow-up time after revision was 5 years. The average Harris hip scores improved from 56.4 to 89.8 points after revision surgery, and in all cases, the acetabular components and femoral stems were assessed as stable at the final follow-up. The average length of service of the femoral components was 14.2 years. In conclusion, we recommend that isolated acetabular revision be considered in cases with an acetabular component failure and a stable femoral component.     

Allograft reconstruction of large proximal femoral defects in revision total hip arthroplasty

Surgical Principles With the increasing frequency of total joint replacement, the orthopaedic surgeon is often confronted with cases of aseptic, time related loosening of total hip arthroplasties. This is compounded by the severe bone loss associated with loosening and the reaction to particular debris [3, 9, 11]. Conventional methods of revision can be difficult and even inadequate for some of these situations [2, 8, 15, 17]. The use of structural allografts for significant proximal femoral deficiencies can restore skeletal architecture and mechanical integrity to these patients. The aim of this technique is to allow the reconstruction of large structural defects with a physiologically compatible material rather than the traditional techniques of custom prosthetic replacement with or without extensive cement augmentation.     

Dual-mobility components obviate the need for constrained components in revision total hip arthroplasty–Affirms

Dual-mobility hip components provide an additional articular surface, with the goals of improving range of motion and overall stability. In many European centers, these components are used for primary total hip arthroplasty. However, their greatest utility may be to prevent and treat recurrent dislocation after revision total hip arthroplasty. Several retrospective series have shown satisfactory results for this indication at medium-term follow-up. There are important concerns with these components, including intraprosthetic dislocation and polyethylene wear causing chronic dislocation, but these are rare phenomena. At present, dual-mobility components are the preferred solution to manage recurrent dislocation in revision surgery.     

Risk factors for revision for early dislocation in total hip arthroplasty

Risk factors were investigated for revision for dislocation in primary total hip arthroplasties (THAs) between September 1, 1999, and December 31, 2004, as reported by the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. For 65 992 primary THAs, the only initial diagnoses with significantly increased relative risk (RR) of revision for dislocation compared to osteoarthritis were fractured neck of femur (RR, 2.03; P < .001), rheumatoid arthritis (RR, 2.01; P < .01), and avascular necrosis (RR, 1.57; P < .05). A total of 58 109 primary THAs for osteoarthritis were investigated for effect of age group, sex, and fixation method. There were 428 (0.7%) revisions for dislocation, 369 (0.8%) with a cementless acetabulum, and 59 (0.6%) with cemented acetabulum (RR, 1.59; P < .01). There is a significantly increasing risk of revision for dislocation as head size decreases (P < .001). Cementless acetabula, particularly with smaller heads, have a higher rate of revision for dislocation.     

Results of uncemented distal locked prosthesis in revision hip arthroplasty with proximal femoral bone loss: A retrospective study

Introduction:

Management of bone loss is a challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). A retrospective review was performed to study the use of uncemented distal locked prosthesis in cases with proximal femoral bone loss.

Materials and Methods:

Uncemented stems with distal interlocking were used in 65 hips during revision THAs with 38 hips having Paprosky IIIB/IV defects between January 1998 and February 2004. There were 48 males and 17 females in the study with an average age of 53 years (range 30-80 years). Radiographic and clinical outcome evaluation using the Harris hip score (HHS) were performed.

Results:

An improvement in HHS (mean: 33 points) was observed at final followup (mean: 9 years). Regeneration of proximal bone stock was observed without signs of loosening or subsidence and none of the stems were revised. Three patients developed recurrent dislocation while one had a stem subsidence of 1cm following removal of interlocking bolts.

Conclusion:

Uncemented distal locked prosthesis provide adequate stability in revision THA, aiding the reconstruction of bony deficiencies while avoiding the disadvantages of fully porous or cemented implants.     

A modified technique to extract fractured femoral stem in revision total hip arthroplasty: A report of two cases

INTRODUCTION

The removal of well-fixed broken femoral component and cement mantle can be extremely demanding, time consuming and potentially damaging to the host bone. Different methods have been described to extract broken femoral stem yet this remains one of the most challenging prospect to the revision hip surgeon.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

The authors present two cases underwent a modified sliding cortical window technique utilising a tungsten carbide drill, Charnley pin retractor and an orthopaedic mallet to aid extraction of a fractured cemented femoral stem in revision total hip arthroplasty.

DISCUSSION

The modified technique offers a simple and controlled method in extracting a well fixed fractured cemented femoral stem. It has the advantage of retaining the cement mantle with subsequent good seal of the femoral cortical window secured with cable ready system. Furthermore, tungsten carbide drill bit and Charnley pin retractor are relatively readily available to aid the extraction of the broken stem. Finally, it yields the option of implanting a standard femoral stem and obviates the need for bypassing the cortical window with long revision femoral component.

CONCLUSION

Fractured femoral stem is a rare yet a complex and very demanding prospect to both patients and hip surgeons. The sliding cortical window technique utilising tungsten carbide drill and Charnley pin retractor is technically easy and most importantly; preserves host bone stock with cement-in-cement revision hip arthroplasty. We believe this technique can be added to the armamentarium of revision hip surgeon when faced with the challenge of extracting a fractured cemented femoral stem.     

Extensile exposure of the hip for revision arthroplasty

The authors describe a lateral approach to the hip without trochanteric osteotomy that allows sufficient access to the femur and acetabulum for revision total hip arthroplasty. When bone loss is extensive, this approach permits massive autograft/allograft arthroplasty of the proximal femur and acetabulum. This approach follows anatomic muscle planes, maintains abductor function, and allows wound closure with a viable muscle cuff around the acetabulum and upper femur. The exposure is adequate for anatomic placement of components and correction of leg length discrepancy.     

Femoral revision in hip resurfacing compared with large-bearing metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty

It has been suggested that revision of the femoral component of hip resurfacing after femoral failure would be straightforward and have an outcome comparable to primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). We have compared the outcome of femoral side-only revision resurfacings to the results of primary modular large-bearing metal-on-metal THA. Fourteen consecutive patients underwent revision surgery of the failed femoral component, to a cemented tapered stem (CPT, Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana) with a large modular metal head (Smith and Nephew Orthopaedics Ltd, Memphis, Tennessee, or Adept, Finsbury Orthopaedics, Surrey, England). The acetabular component was found to be well fixed, well orientated, and was left in situ. The 14 matched patients in the primary THA group received the same components. At a mean follow-up of 49 months (range, 30-60 months), clinical outcome measured using the Oxford and Harris Hip Scores showed no significant difference (P = .11, P = .45, respectively). Operative time and blood loss were comparable for both groups. We conclude that revision of the failed femoral resurfacing component gives excellent results.