Management of Severe Bone Defects in Femoral Revision following Total Hip Arthroplasty
- PMID: 38825819
- PMCID: PMC11162874
- DOI: 10.5371/hp.2024.36.2.101
Management of Severe Bone Defects in Femoral Revision following Total Hip Arthroplasty
Abstract
Treatment of femoral bone defects continues to be a challenge in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA); therefore, meticulous preoperative evaluation of patients and surgical planning are required. This review provides a concise synopsis of the etiology, classification, treatment strategy, and prosthesis selection in relation to femoral bone loss in revision THA. A search of literature was conducted for identification of research articles related to classification of bone loss, management of femoral revision, and comparison of different types of stems. Findings of a thorough review of the included articles were as follows: (1) the Paprosky classification system is used most often when defining femoral bone loss, (2) a primary-length fully coated monoblock femoral component is recommended for treatment of types I or II bone defects, (3) use of an extensively porouscoated stem and a modular fluted tapered stem is recommended for management of types III or IV bone defects, and (4) use of an impaction grafting technique is another option for improvement of bone stock, and allograft prosthesis composite and proximal femoral replacement can be applied by experienced surgeons, in selected cases, as a final salvage solution. Stems with a tapered design are gradually replacing components with a cylindrical design as the first choice for femoral revision; however, further confirmation regarding the advantages and disadvantages of modular and nonmodular stems will be required through conduct of higher-level comparative studies.
Keywords: Bone loss; Femur; Revision surgery; Total hip arthroplasty.
Conflict of interest statement
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Similar articles
-
Nonmodular Tapered Fluted Titanium Stems Osseointegrate Reliably at Short Term in Revision THAs.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017 Jan;475(1):186-192. doi: 10.1007/s11999-016-5091-x. Epub 2016 Sep 26. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2017. PMID: 27672012 Free PMC article.
-
Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes of Modular Tapered Fluted Stems for Femoral Revision for Paprosky III and IV Femoral Defects or Vancouver B2 and B3 Femoral Fractures.J Arthroplasty. 2020 Apr;35(4):1069-1073. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.11.039. Epub 2019 Nov 30. J Arthroplasty. 2020. PMID: 31870582
-
Impaction Bone Grafting for Severe Femoral Bone Loss: Surgical Technique in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty.JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2022 Feb 16;12(1):e20.00043. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.20.00043. eCollection 2022 Jan-Mar. JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2022. PMID: 35692723 Free PMC article.
-
Management of femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty.Hip Int. 2015 Jul-Aug;25(4):380-7. doi: 10.5301/hipint.5000272. Epub 2015 Aug 23. Hip Int. 2015. PMID: 26351121 Review.
-
Massive bone loss: allograft-prosthetic composites and beyond.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012 Nov;94(11 Suppl A):61-4. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B11.30791. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012. PMID: 23118384 Review.
Cited by
-
Short-Term Complications of Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty of the Acetabular, Femoral, or Both Components: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database Study.Arthroplast Today. 2025 Aug 11;34:101793. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2025.101793. eCollection 2025 Aug. Arthroplast Today. 2025. PMID: 40832478 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of Safety and Efficacy of Cell Therapy Based on Osteoblasts Derived from Umbilical Cord Mesenchymal Stem Cells for Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head: Study Protocol for a Single-Center, Open-Label, Phase I Clinical Trial.Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2024 Oct 13;17(10):1366. doi: 10.3390/ph17101366. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39459006 Free PMC article.
References
-
- 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;89:780–5. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00222. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00222. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Patel A, Pavlou G, Mújica-Mota RE, Toms AD. The epidemiology of revision total knee and hip arthroplasty in England and Wales: a comparative analysis with projections for the United States. A study using the National Joint Registry dataset. Bone Joint J. 2015;97-B:1076–81. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.97B8.35170. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.97B8.35170. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Ong KL, Mowat FS, Chan N, Lau E, Halpern MT, Kurtz SM. Economic burden of revision hip and knee arthroplasty in Medicare enrollees. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;446:22–8. doi: 10.1097/01.blo.0000214439.95268.59. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000214439.95268.59. - DOI - PubMed
-
- Dixon T, Shaw M, Ebrahim S, Dieppe P. Trends in hip and knee joint replacement: socioeconomic inequalities and projections of need. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63:825–30. doi: 10.1136/ard.2003.012724. https://doi.org/10.1136/ard.2003.012724. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Vanhegan IS, Malik AK, Jayakumar P, Ul Islam S, Haddad FS. A financial analysis of revision hip arthroplasty: the economic burden in relation to the national tariff. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94:619–23. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.94B5.27073. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.94B5.27073. - DOI - PubMed
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources