Randomised clinical trial assessing migration of uncemented primary total hip replacement stems, with and without autologous impaction bone grafting
- 150 Downloads
Uncemented stems in primary total hip replacement (THR) are concerning in the elderly due to ectatic femoral canals and cortical thinning resulting in higher incidence of fracture and subsidence in this population. To obviate this concern, the authors developed a technique using autologous impaction bone grafting to achieve a better fitting femoral stem. The aim of this randomised clinical trial was to assess the efficacy of the technique.
From 2013 to 2015, a total of 98 consecutive participants (100 primary THR procedures) were inducted into a single-institution, single-blinded, randomised clinical trial assessing, with radiostereometric analysis (RSA), the efficacy of autologous impaction bone grafting in uncemented primary THR compared with traditional uncemented primary THR technique. The primary outcome measure was femoral component migration using RSA. Secondary outcomes were post-operative proximal femoral bone density (using DEXA), hip function and quality of life using Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Short Form-12 Health Survey (SF-12), hip pain and patient satisfaction.
There was no difference in femoral component stability (p > 0.5) or calcar resorption between the Graft and No Graft Groups at two years. There was also no difference in OHS, SF-12, pain or satisfaction between the Graft and No Graft Groups at two years (p > 0.39).
Autologous impaction bone grafting in uncemented primary THR has shown its short-term post-operative outcomes to be equivalent to standard uncemented technique, whilst offering a better fit in patients who are between femoral stem sizes.
Australian clinical trial registration number
KeywordsUncemented total hip arthroplasty Cementless total hip arthroplasty THR Autologous impaction bone grafting Radiostereometric analysis Dual X-ray absorptiometry
DEXA imaging: SKG Radiology Hollywood Hospital, Perth, WA, Australia.
Data collection: Hollywood Private Hospital Physiotherapy Department, Perth, WA, Australia.
Statistical analysis: V.K. Bowden, PhD, School of Psychological Science, the University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Perth, WA, Australia.
TK prepared research proposal. RJKK and DF performed surgery. ON collected and analysed RSA data. SKG Radiology and MR collected DEXA data. Hollywood Private Hospital Physiotherapy Department and SH collected patient reported outcome measure data. VKB performed statistical analysis. MR, RJKK, DF and SH prepared the manuscript.
This work was supported by the Hollywood Private Hospital Research Fund, Perth, Australia (grant number: RF074).
Compliance with ethical standards
Approval for the study was obtained from the Hospital Research Ethics Committee, with its conduct in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.
Conflict of interest
Prof. Khan reports personal fees from Global Orthopaedic Technology, personal fees from Zimmer Biomet, grants from AMPLITUDE, and Smith & Nephew, outside the submitted work.
- 1.Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (2017) Hip, knee & shoulder arthroplasty: 2017 annual report. Australian Orthopaedic Association, Adelaide, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
- 2.American Joint Replacement Registry (2017) Annual report. AJRR, Rosemont, IllinoisGoogle Scholar
- 3.National Joint Registry (2017) National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man: 14th annual report NJR, Hertfordshire, EnglandGoogle Scholar
- 4.Kärrholm J, Lindahl H, Malchau H, Mohaddes M, Rogmark C, Rolfson O (2016) The Swedish hip arthroplasty register annual report 2015. Institute of Clinical Sciences, Section for Anesthesiology, Biomaterials and Orthopaedics, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, SwedenGoogle Scholar
- 5.Garino JP, Beredjiklian PK (2007) Core knowledge in orthopedics: adult reconstruction and arthroplasty. Mosby, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- 10.Aldinger PR, Sabo D, Pritsch M, Thomsen M, Mau H, Ewerbeck V, Breusch SJ (2003) Pattern of periprosthetic bone remodeling around stable uncemented tapered hip stems: a prospective 84-month follow-up study and a median 156-month cross-sectional study with DXA. Calcif Tissue Int 73(2):115–121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00223-002-2036-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Skoldenberg OG, Boden HS, Salemyr MO, Ahl TE, Adolphson PY (2006) Periprosthetic proximal bone loss after uncemented hip arthroplasty is related to stem size: DXA measurements in 138 patients followed for 2-7 years. Acta Orthop 77(3):386–392. https://doi.org/10.1080/17453670610046307 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Schewelov T, Ahlborg H, Sanzen L, Besjakov J, Carlsson A (2012) Fixation of the fully hydroxyapatite-coated Corail stem implanted due to femoral neck fracture: 38 patients followed for 2 years with RSA and DEXA. Acta Orthop 83(2):153–158. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453674.2011.641107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Simon J-P, Fowler JL, Gie GA, Ling RS, Timperley AJ (1991) Impaction cancellous grafting of the femur in cemented total hip revision arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg [Br];73-B(Suppl 1)Google Scholar
- 18.Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG (2010) CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ (Clin Res ed) 340:c869. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c869 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Engh CA (1994) Porous-coated fixation forever. Orthopedics 17(9):775–776Google Scholar
- 26.Ilyas J, Khan RJK, Fick DP, Haebich S, Rutherford M, Nivbrant NO (2018) Operative technique: autologous impaction bone grafting with uncemented Corail stem in primary total hip arthroplasty. Techniques in Orthopaedics Published online ahead of print. https://doi.org/10.1097/bto.0000000000000302
- 28.Rohrl SM, Li MG, Pedersen E, Ullmark G, Nivbrant B (2006) Migration pattern of a short femoral neck preserving stem. Clin Orthop Relat Res 448:73–78. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000224000.87517.4c CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 30.Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC (1979) “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–27Google Scholar
- 32.Ware JE, Kosinski M, Keller SD (1995) How to score the SF-12 physical and mental summary scales. The health institute, New England Medical Center, Boston, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
- 35.Sudhahar TA, Morapudi S, Branes K (2009) Evaluation Of subsidence between collarless and collared corail femoral cement less total hip replacement. J Orthopaedics 6(2)e3Google Scholar
- 36.Skoldenberg OG, Salemyr MO, Boden HS, Lundberg A, Ahl TE, Adolphson PY (2011) A new uncemented hydroxyapatite-coated femoral component for the treatment of femoral neck fractures: two-year radiostereometric and bone densitometric evaluation in 50 hips. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93(5):665–677. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.93b5.25374 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Miladi M, Villain B, Mebtouche N, Begue T, Auregan JC (2018) Interest of short implants in hip arthroplasty for osteonecrosis of the femoral head: comparative study “uncemented short” vs “cemented conventional” femoral stems. Int Orthop. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-3981-0
- 44.Mee WD, Ilyas J, Khan RJK, Fick DP, Nivbrant NO, Haebich SJ (2018) Prospective clinical trial assessing a short femoral stem prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty. Int J Sci Res 7(5):18–21Google Scholar