Minimum 2-Year Outcomes of a Modern Monoblock Titanium Fluted Tapered Revision Stem for Complex Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty

被引:0
作者
Alqahtani, Yousef [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Somerville, Lyndsay E. [3 ,4 ]
Vasarhelyi, Edward M. [3 ,4 ]
Howard, James L. [3 ,4 ]
Lanting, Brent A. [3 ,4 ]
Naudie, Douglas D. R. [3 ,4 ]
MacDonald, Steven J. [3 ,4 ]
McCalden, Richard W. [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Western Univ, Dept Surg, Div Orthopaed Surg, London, ON, Canada
[2] Western Univ, Schulich Sch Med & Dent, Hip & Knee Adult Reconstruct, London, ON, Canada
[3] London Hlth Sci Ctr, London, ON, Canada
[4] Western Univ, Schulich Sch Med & Dent, Dept Surg, Div Orthopaed Surg, London, ON, Canada
关键词
revision total hip arthroplasty; outcomes; titanium fluted tapered stems; monoblock stems; survival; CONSIDERABLE BONE LOSS; POROUS-COATED STEMS; TERM FOLLOW-UP; FEMORAL REVISION; FIXATION; PROSTHESIS; CEMENTLESS; DIFFERENCE; STABILITY; FACE;
D O I
10.1016/j.arth.2024.03.035
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Modular titanium fluted tapered (TFT) stems have demonstrated excellent clinical success for femoral revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) surgery. This study reports the short-term outcomes of a novel modern monoblock TFT stem used for revision and complex primary THA with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Methods: We identified 126 patients who received a single monoblock TFT stem: 26 patients for complex THA (failed fracture fixation) and 100 patients for revision THA. The reasons for revision THA included 40 for previous periprosthetic joint infection, 42 for aseptic loosening, 9 for trunnionosis, and 9 for peri-prosthetic fractures. The Paprosky grading for femoral bone loss at the time of surgery and the measured subsidence of femoral stems at 3-month follow-up were determined. We evaluated the number and indications for reoperations. Results: The mean time from surgery was 3.9 years (range, 2.0 to 6.9). A paired t-test analysis showed significant improvement from preoperative versus postoperative clinical outcome scores (P < .001) for Harris Hip Score (38.76 +/- 15.24 versus 83.42 +/- 15.38), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (45.6 +/- 19.0 versus 69.9 +/- 21.3), Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey Physical component (31.7 +/- 8.1 versus 37.8 +/- 11.3), and Veterans RAND 12 Item Health Survey Mental component (48.2 +/- 12.2 versus 51.6 +/- 12.5). The Paprosky grading for femoral bone loss was Grade 1 (3.9%), Grade 2 (35.7%), Grade 3A (47.6%), Grade 3B (11.1%), and Grade 4 (1.6%) cases. There were 18 reoperations (14.7%), with 13 for peri-prosthetic joint infection (7 treated with implant retention and 6 treated with a 2-stage revision), 4 for instability, and 1 for acetabular aseptic loosening. There were no aseptic failures of the stem. Conclusions: This novel modern monoblock TFT stem provided reliable femoral fixation and has increasingly supplanted the use of modular TFT stems for complex primary and revision surgery in our institution. (c) 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:S208 / S212
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Impact of Frailty on Outcomes After Primary and Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty
    Johnson, Rebecca L.
    Abdel, Matthew P.
    Frank, Ryan D.
    Chamberlain, Alanna M.
    Habermann, Elizabeth B.
    Mantilla, Carlos B.
    JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2019, 34 (01) : 56 - +
  • [42] Results of revision total hip arthroplasty with Anatomic BR stem: 10-year minimum follow-up
    Tsukeoka, Tadashi
    Lee, Tae Hyun
    Tsuruoka, Hiroaki
    Murata, Tadao
    Suzuki, Masahiko
    MODERN RHEUMATOLOGY, 2011, 21 (05) : 482 - 487
  • [43] Revision total hip arthroplasty in patients with femoral bone loss using tapered rectangular femoral stem: a minimum 10 years' follow-up
    Wang, Jian
    Dai, Wen-Li
    Lin, Ze-Ming
    Shi, Zhan-Jun
    HIP INTERNATIONAL, 2020, 30 (05) : 622 - 628
  • [44] Modular versus monoblock stem in revision total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zampogna, Biagio
    Papalia, Giuseppe Francesco
    Parisi, Francesco Rosario
    Luciano, Claudia
    Zampoli, Andrea
    Vorini, Ferruccio
    Marongiu, Giuseppe
    Marinozzi, Andrea
    Farsetti, Pasquale
    Papalia, Rocco
    ANNALS OF JOINT, 2023, 8
  • [45] Comparison of two tapered fluted modular titanium (TFMT) stems used in revision hip arthroplasty from a single center
    Pawar, Rajesh
    Yap, Rye
    Blow, Jody
    Garabadi, Mohanrao
    Rowsell, Mark
    Minhas, Hasnat
    Antapur, Prasad
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDICS, 2022, 34 : 196 - 200
  • [46] Association of Sex With Risk of 2-Year Revision Among Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty
    Chen, Amanda
    Paxton, Liz
    Zheng, Xinyan
    Peat, Raquel
    Mao, Jialin
    Liebeskind, Alexander
    Gressler, Laura E.
    Marinac-Dabic, Danica
    Devlin, Vincent
    Cornelison, Terri
    Sedrakyan, Art
    JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2021, 4 (06)
  • [47] Outcomes of Mixed Femoral Fixation Technique Using Both Cement and Ingrowth in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: Minimum 2-Year Follow-up
    Yin, Tsung-Cheng
    Yen, Shih-Hsiang
    Kuo, Feng-Chih
    Wang, Jun-Wen
    JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, 2015, 30 (10) : 1815 - 1819
  • [48] Revision total hip arthroplasty using a fluted, tapered, modular stem follow-up method for a mean of three years: A preliminary study
    Xing, Shu-Xing
    Huang, Qiang
    Li, Zheng-Jiang
    Li, Yong-Kui
    Ban, Zhao-Nan
    FRONTIERS IN PHYSIOLOGY, 2023, 14
  • [49] Clinical and radiographic outcomes of long monoblock, hydroxyapatite-coated stem in revision hip arthroplasty with extended trochanteric osteotomy: a multicenter study
    Xin, Peng
    Yang, Jianfeng
    Chen, Guangxing
    Wang, Yiming
    Wang, Yan
    Zhang, Guoqiang
    JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 2024, 19 (01)
  • [50] Uncemented femoral revision arthroplasty using a modular tapered, fluted titanium stem 5-to 16-year results of 163 cases
    Wirtz, Dieter C.
    Gravius, Sascha
    Ascherl, Rudolf
    Thorweihe, Miguel
    Forst, Raimund
    Noeth, Ulrich
    Maus, Uwe M.
    Wimmer, Matthias D.
    Zeiler, Guenther
    Deml, Moritz C.
    ACTA ORTHOPAEDICA, 2014, 85 (06) : 562 - 569