Medium-Term Outcome of Titanium Uncemented Stems in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

Abstract

Purpose.

To assess the medium-term outcome of titanium uncemented modular tapered stems in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Methods.

A questionnaire was mailed to 421 patients who underwent revision THA using a titanium uncemented modular tapered stem. 66 of whom underwent re-revision THA. The questionnaire was composed to reveal the Charnley classification, the modified 12-item Oxford hip score, and the Devane patient activity level.

Results.

323 (77%) of the patients responded. The mean follow-up time was 6.6 years. 12 patients underwent bilateral revision THA. The mean Oxford hip score was 35.7, compared to 35.8 for all-component revision at postoperative month 6 in the New Zealand Joint Registry. The median Oxford hip scores for the subgroups of the stem-only revision (n=92), all-component revision (n=215), and re-revision (n=16) were 38, 39.9, and 30, respectively. The difference was significant between all-component revision and re-revision (adjusted p=0.003), and between stem-only revision and re-revision (adjusted p=0.037). Regarding patient distribution according to the Charnley class and the Devane patient activity level, the difference was significant between the mean Oxford hip scores of Charnley classes B and C (adjusted p=0.017), and between the Devane patient activity levels of Charnley classes A and C (adjusted p=0.043).

Conclusion.

The medium-term outcome of revision THA using a titanium uncemented modular tapered stem was comparable to that reported for other stems.

Keywords

arthroplasty,replacement,hip hip prosthesis reoperation

References

Pellicci

Wilson

Jr Sledge

Salvati

Ranawat

Poss

. Long-term results of revision total hip replacement. A follow-up report. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985;67:513–6.

Howie

Wimhurst

McGee

Carbone

Badaruddin

. Revision total hip replacement using cemented collarless double-taper femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007;89:879–86.

Haydon

Mehin

Burnett

Rorabeck

Bourne

McCalden

. Revision total hip arthroplasty with use of a cemented femoral component. Results at a mean of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86:1179–85.

Gie

Linder

Ling

Simon

Slooff

Timperley

. Impacted cancellous allografts and cement for revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1993;75:14–21.

Halliday

English

Timperley

Gie

Ling

. Femoral impaction grafting with cement in revision total hip replacement. Evolution of the technique and results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2003;85:809–17.

Kerboull

Hamadouche

Kerboull

. Impaction grafting in association with the Charnley-Kerboull cemented femoral component: Operative technique and two- to 16-year follow-up results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2009;91:304–9.

Bohm

Bischel

. Femoral revision with the Wagner SL revision stem: Evaluation of one hundred and twenty-nine revisions followed for a mean of 4.8 years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001;83:1023–31.

Isacson

Stark

Wallensten

. The Wagner revision prosthesis consistently restores femoral bone structure. Int Orthop 2000;24:139–42.

Grunig

Morscher

Ochsner

. Three- to 7-year results with the uncemented SL femoral revision prosthesis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1997;116:187–97.

10.

Engh

Bobyn

Glassman

. Porous-coated hip replacement. The factors governing bone ingrowth, stress shielding, and clinical results. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1987;69:45–55.

11.

Engh

O'Connor

Jasty

McGovern

Bobyn

Harris

. Quantification of implant micromotion, strain shielding, and bone resorption with porous-coated anatomic medullary locking femoral prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1992;285:13–29.

12.

Paprosky

Greidanus

Antoniou

. Minimum 10-year results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1999;369:230–42.

13.

Moon

Kang

Lee

Jung

. Revision total hip arthroplasty using an extensively porous coated femoral stem. Clin Orthop Surg 2009;1:105–9.

14.

McInnis

Horne

Devane

. Femoral revision with a fluted, tapered, modular stem seventy patients followed for a mean of 3.9 years. J Arthroplasty 2006;21:372–80.

15.

Bohm

Bischel

. The use of tapered stems for femoral revision surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004;420:148–59.

16.

Charnley

. Low friction arthroplasty of the hip: Theory and practise. Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1979:61.

17.

Kalairajah

Azurza

Hulme

Molloy

Drabu

. Health outcome measures in the evaluation of total hip arthroplasties: A comparison between the Harris hip score and the Oxford hip score. J Arthroplasty 2005;20:1037–41.

18.

Murray

Fitzpatrick

Rogers

Pandit

Beard

Carr

. The use of the Oxford hip and knee scores. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2007;89:1010–4.

19.

Dawson

Fitzpatrick

Carr

Murray

. Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1996;78:185–90.

20.

Devane

Horne

Martin

Coldham

Krause

. Three-dimensional polyethylene wear of a press-fit titanium prosthesis. Factors influencing generation of polyethylene debris. J Arthroplasty 1997;12:256–66.

21.

Migaud

Jobin

Chantelot

Giraud

Laffargue

Duquennoy

. Cementless metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty in patients less than 50 years of age: Comparison with a matched control group using ceramic-on-polyethylene after a minimum 5-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 2004;19(8 Suppl 3):S23–8.

22.

The New Zealand Joint Registry, Ten-Year Report, January 1999 to December 2008. Available at: http://www.cdhb.govt.nz/njr/reports/A2D65CA3.pdf. Accessed January 2010.

23.

Amstutz

Jinnah

Mai

. Revision of aseptic loose total hip arthroplasties. Clinical Orthopedics 170:21–33, 1982. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004;420:2–9.

24.

Shaju

Hasan

D'Souza

McMahon

Masterson

. The 22-mm vs the 32-mm femoral head in cemented primary hip arthroplasty long-term clinical and radiological follow-up study. J Arthroplasty 2005;20:903–8.

25.

Warren

Thompson

Fletcher

. Transfemoral implantation of the Wagner SL stem. The abolition of subsidence and enhancement of osteotomy union rate using Dall-Miles cables. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2002;122:557–60.