The varus cemented femoral stem in total hip arthroplasty: Predictors, implications and The Femoral Access Ratio

Equivalent revision rates and patient reported outcomes with routine use of a short (125mm) cemented stem for total hip arthroplasty compared to a standard length (150mm) cemented stem. A two surgeon series of 1335 patients

BACKGROUND

Routine total hip arthroplasty (THA) using a short cemented stem as compared with a standard length cemented stem may have benefits in terms of stress distribution, bone preservation, stem subsidence and ease of revision surgery. Two senior arthroplasty surgeons transitioned their routine femoral implant from a standard 150 mm Exeter V40 cemented stem to a short 125 mm Exeter V40 cemented stem for all patients over the course of several years. We analysed revision rates, adjusted survival, and PROMS scores for patients who received a standard stem and a short stem in routine THA.

METHODS

All THAs performed by the two surgeons between January 2011 and December 2021 were included. All procedures were performed using either a 150 mm or 125 mm Exeter V40 stem. Demographic data, acetabular implant type, and outcome data including implant survival, reason for revision, and post-operative Oxford Hip Scores were obtained from the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR), and detailed survival analyses were performed. Primary outcome was revision for any reason. Reason for revision, including femoral or acetabular failure, and time to revision were also recorded.

RESULTS

1335 THAs were included. 516 using the 150 mm stem and 819 using the 125 mm stem. There were 4055.5 and 3227.8 component years analysed in the standard stem and short stem groups respectively due to a longer mean follow up in the 150 mm group. Patient reported outcomes were comparable across all groups. Revision rates were comparable between the standard 150 mm stem (0.44 revisions/100 component years) and the short 125 mm stem (0.56 revisions/100 component years) with no statistically significant difference found (p = 0.240).

CONCLUSION

Routine use of a short 125 mm stem had no statistically significant impact on revision rate or PROMS scores when compared to a standard 150 mm stem. There may be benefits to routine use of a short cemented femoral implant.

The compared study about femoral stem malalignment with or without the special curved rasp during DAA total hip arthroplasty

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether the application of a curved rasp on the femoral side is effective in reducing the incidence of stem malalignment in total hip replacement with direct anterior approach (DAA-THA), followed by the analysis of the independent risk factors affecting stem malalignment.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis was carried out covering 160 patients undergoing DAA-THA from January 2019 to December 2021, with Tri-Lock (BPS, Depuy) stem applied in all 113 patients were screened according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. The data of gender, age, body mass index, preoperative diagnoses, Dorr classification, FAR ratio, pelvic morphology ratio, WOMAC scores, were analyzed to explore the independent factors influencing the malalignment of the femoral prosthesis implantation. Then data of patients were divided into group A and group B according to whether the curved rasp was taken during the operation. The chi-square test was performed to compare the incidence of femoral stem malalignment between the two groups.

RESULTS

There revealed two independent risk factors: BMI and FAR ratio that affected femoral stem malalignment. The increased BMI was associated with a higher probability of femoral stem malalignment (P<0.05), the probability of malalignment of femoral stem in FAR ratio<1 was 1.15 times higher than that in FAR>1(OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.03-1.28, P<0.05). Further grouping analysis showed that the incidence of femoral stem malalignment in patients with intraoperative application of curved rasp was 27%, while in patients without curved rasp, the incidence of femoral stem malalignment increased significantly to 48.7%(P<0.05). The placement angle of prosthesis in group A was significantly better than that in group B, especially mild femoral stem malalignment (0%) and severe femoral stem malalignment (2.70%), and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). There found no significant difference in age, gander, intraoperative complications and last follow-up assessment of WOMAC scores between the two groups of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In DAA-THA, BMI and FAR ratio act as the independent risk factors for femoral stem malalignment. Intraoperative use of a curved rasp significantly reduces the incidence of malalignment of the femoral stem.

Femoral Stem Cementation in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

➢

Femoral stem cementation has undergone considerable investigation since bone cement was first used in arthroplasty, leading to the evolution of modern femoral stem cementation techniques.

➢

Although there is a worldwide trend toward the use of cementless components, cemented femoral stems have shown superiority in some studies and have clear indications in specific populations.

➢

There is a large evidence base regarding cement properties, preparation, and application techniques that underlie current beliefs and practice, but considerable controversy still exists.

➢

Although the cementing process adds technical complexity to total hip arthroplasty, growing evidence supports its use in certain cohorts. As such, it is critical that orthopaedic surgeons and investigators have a thorough understanding of the fundamentals and evidence underlying modern cementation techniques.