Neck-Preserving Femoral Stems
- 297 Downloads
Surgeons undertaking total hip arthroplasty (THA) routinely perform a distal femoral neck resection. It has been argued that retaining the femoral neck during THA can provide mechanical and biological advantages.
The objectives of this study were to review: (1) the current evidence on the advantages of femoral neck preservation during THA and (2) the clinical and radiological outcome of neck-preserving femoral stems.
A search of the English-language literature on neck-preserving THA and on the individual neck-preserving implants was performed using PubMed, Ovid SP and Science Direct.
Studies have indicated that neck preservation offers superior tri-planar implant stability and allows more accurate restoration of the hip geometry and biomechanics. The trend towards tissue sparing surgery has contributed to the development of bone-conserving short-stem implants that offer variable levels of neck preservation. Despite an initial learning curve, these implants have generated promising early clinical results, with low revision rates and high outcome scores. However, radiological evaluation of some neck-preserving implants has detected a characteristic pattern of proximal femoral bone loss with distal cortical hypertrophy. The long-term implications of this finding are not yet known.
Preserving the femoral neck during THA has biomechanical advantages. However, long-term outcome data are needed on neck-preserving femoral stems to evaluate on-going bone remodelling and assess implant performance and survival.
Keywordstotal hip arthroplasty neck preservation femoral stems
Each author (REF) certifies that he or she has or may receive payments or benefits from a commercial entity (Stryker) related to this work. One or more of the authors, or his institution has received payments or benefits from a commercial entity that could be perceived as a potential conflict of interest.
- 1.No Authors listed. National Joint Registry for England and Wales: 8th annual report 2011Google Scholar
- 3.Bichmann P, Horst F. First experiences with the Metha modular short stem prosthesis. South-German Orthopaedic Congress 2006; Baden-Baden; Presentation 233Google Scholar
- 16.Freeman MAR. Why resect the neck? J Bone Joint Surg Br 1986;68-B(3):346–349Google Scholar
- 17.Freeman MAR, Plante-Bordeneuve P. Early migration and late aseptic failure of proximal femoral prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1994;76-B:432–8Google Scholar
- 24.Langton DJ, Jameson SS, Joyce TJ, Hallab NJ, Natu S, Nargol AV. Early failure of metal-on-metal bearings in hip resurfacing and large-diameter total hip replacement: a consequence of excess wear. J Bone Joint Surg 2010;92(10):38-46Google Scholar
- 32.Nunn D, Freeman MAR, Tanner KE, Bonfield W. Torsional stability of the femoral component of hip arthroplasty. Response to an anteriorly applied load. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1989;71-B:452–5Google Scholar
- 48.Whiteside LA, McCarthy DS, White SE. Rotational stability of noncemented total hip femoral components. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 1996;25(4):276–80Google Scholar
- 49.Whiteside LA, White SE, McCarthy DS. Effect of neck resection on torsional stability of cementless total hip replacement. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ) 1995;24(10):766–70Google Scholar
- 50.Yasunaga Y, Yamasaki T, Matsuo T, Yoshida T, Oshima S, Hori J, Yamasaki K, Ochi M. Clinical and radiological results of 179 thrust plate hip prostheses: 5-14 years follow-up study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011; doi: 10.1007/s00402-011-1434-y