Femoral stem subsidence in cementless total hip arthroplasty: a retrospective single-centre study
- 334 Downloads
Purpose and hypothesis
Subsidence is a known reason for early failure of total hip arthroplasty (THA). In particular, cementless THA might be vulnerable to migration. The present study analysed femoral stem subsidence after primary cementless THA. Prosthetic and anatomical risk factors for early femoral stem subsidence were evaluated.
Two hundred thirty-one consecutive patients who underwent primary cementless THA in a single centre were retrospectively analysed. Post-operative results were evaluated in consideration of prosthetic and anatomical properties in correlation with subsidence on standing pelvic anteroposterior radiographs. Stem type and design, demographic data, BMI, canal flare index (CFI) and canal fill ratio (CFR) were evaluated.
The subsidence rate was significantly higher in collarless femoral stems [3.1 mm (SD 2.8 mm) vs. 1.9 mm (SD 1.5 mm); p = 0.013] while the anatomical type of the proximal femur as described by the canal flare index did not influenced subsidence (p = 0.050). Also, the canal fill ratio showed no significant correlation with subsidence at any level.
In the present study, stem subsidence was significantly higher in the collarless group compared to collared stems. No anatomical parameter (CFI and CFR) could be identified as risk factor for subsidence. Neither age nor BMI influenced subsidence in this cohort. Still, subgroup analysis indicated a sex-dependent role of BMI. Prospective studies of large cohorts should address the problem of subsidence in the future.
Level of evidence
Retrospective therapeutic study, Level IV.
KeywordsHip arthroplasty Stem subsidence Aseptic loosening Cementless THA
We thank Dr. N. Venkatesh Kumar for measurements and data acquisition.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- 8.Noble PC, Alexander JW, Lindahl LJ et al (1988) The anatomic basis of femoral component design. Clin Orthop Relat Res 235:148–165Google Scholar
- 11.Jameson SS, Baker PN, Mason J et al (2013) Independent predictors of failure up to 7.5 years after 35 386 single-brand cementless total hip replacements: a retrospective cohort study using National Joint Registry data. Bone Joint J 95-B(6):747–757. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B6.31378 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Kelley SS, Fitzgerald RH Jr, Rand JA, Ilstrup DM (1993) A prospective randomized study of a collar versus a collarless femoral prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res (294):114–122Google Scholar
- 15.Ishii S, Homma Y, Baba T et al (2016) Does the canal fill ratio and femoral morphology of Asian females influence early radiographic outcomes of total hip arthroplasty with an uncemented proximally coated, tapered-wedge stem? J Arthroplast 31(7):1524–1528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.01.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Engh CA, O'Connor D, Jasty M, McGovern TF et al (1992) Quantification of implant micromotion, strain shielding, and bone resorption with porous-coated anatomic medullary locking femoral prostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 285:13–29Google Scholar
- 26.Pilliar RM, Lee JM, Maniatopoulos C (1986) Observations on the effect of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surfaced implants. Clin Orthop Relat Res 208:108–113Google Scholar