Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Biomechanical comparison of three cemented stem removal techniques in revision hip surgery

  • Hip Arthroplasty
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

There are various techniques available to remove a cemented femoral component and distal cement in the case of septic or aseptic loosening, periprosthetic or component fracture. The present study describes the mechanical effects of three techniques: the transfemoral approach (TFA), the distal fenestration technique (DF) and the retrograde stem removal technique (RSR). An experiment on cadaveric femora was performed to establish if there are any differences in the resistance to fracture in and between the various groups.

Methods

Twenty-two paired femora were recovered from human cadavers and were frozen. These were later subdivided into three groups to provide similar specimens in each group (TFA, DF, RSR). The femora were tested using an Instron 8874 biaxial testing system. The torque required to fracture was measured. Intra- and intergroup statistical analysis was performed.

Results

In the TFA group, the force required till fracture was significantly less than in controls. (p = 0.018). Similar results were found in the DF group (p = 0.048). There was no difference in the RSR group (p = 1). Intergroup analysis showed the following: Femora in the TFA group required significantly less force to fracture than specimens in the DF group (p = 0.018) or the RSR group (p = 0.0055). Femora in the DF group required significantly less force to fracture than specimens in the RSR (p = 0.037).

Conclusions

The TFA technique decreases the mechanical resistance of human cadaveric femora very significantly against rotational forces. The DF technique in the same setup also significantly decreases the resistance of bone, whilst no significant change is seen with the RSR technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Arif M, Sivananthan S, Choon DS (2004) Revision of total hip arthroplasty using an anterior cortical window, extensive strut allografts, and an impaction graft: follow-up study. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 12(1):25–30

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Berry DJ (1999) Epidemiology: hip and knee. Orthop Clin North Am 30:183–190

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Caillouette JT, Gorab RS, Klapper RC et al (1991) Revision arthroplasty facilitated by ultrasonic tool cement removal. Part II: histological analysis of endosteal bone after cement removal. Orthop Rev 20:435–440

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Dennis DA, Dingman CA, Meglan DA et al (1987) Femoral cement removal in revision total hip arthroplasty. A biomechanical analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 220:142–147

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Engh CA, McAuley JP, Engh C (1999) Surgical approaches for revision total hip replacement surgery: the anterior trochanteric slide and the extended conventional osteotomy. Instr Course Lect 48:3–8

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Farfalli GL, Buttaro MA, Piccaluga F (2007) Femoral fractures in revision hip surgeries with impacted bone allograft. Clin Orthop Relat Res 462:130–136

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ferguson GM (1988) Femoral cement removal in revision total hip arthroplasty: a biomechanical analysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 234:307–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gardiner R, Hozack WJ, Nelson C et al (1993) Revision total hip arthroplasty using ultrasonically driven tools. A clinical evaluation. J Arthroplasty 8:517–521

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Jingushi S, Noguchi Y, Shuto T et al (2000) A device for removal of femoral distal cement plug during hip revision arthroplasty: a high-powered drill equipped with a centralizer. J Arthroplasty 15:231–233

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Khanna G, Bourgeault CA, Kyle RF (2007) Biomechanical comparison of extended trochanteric osteotomy and slot osteotomy for femoral component revision in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 22(5):599–602

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Klein AH, Rubash HE (1993) Femoral windows in revision total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 291:164–170

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Mardones R, Gonzalez C, Cabanela ME et al (2005) Extended femoral osteotomy for revision of hip arthroplasty: results and complications. J Arthroplasty 20(1):79–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. May TC, Krause WR, Preslar AJ et al (1990) Use of high-energy shock waves for bone cement removal. J Arthroplasty 5:19–27

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Moreland JR, Marder R, Anspach WE Jr (1986) The window technique for the removal of broken femoral stems in total hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 212:245–249

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Nelson CL, Weber MJ (1981) Technique of windowing the femoral shaft for removal of bone cement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 154:336–337

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Peters PC Jr, Head WC, Emerson RH Jr (1993) An extended trochanteric osteotomy for revision total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 75(1):158–159

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Piatek S, Westphal T, Holmenschlager F et al (2007) Retrograde cement removal in periprosthetic fractures following hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 127(7):581–585

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Porsch M, Schmidt J (2001) Cement removal with an endoscopically controlled ballistically driven chiselling system. A new device for cement removal and preliminary clinical results. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 121:274–277

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sarvilinna R, Huhtala HS, Sovelius RT et al (2004) Factors predisposing to periprosthetic fracture after hip arthroplasty: a case (n = 31)-control study. Acta Orthop Scand 75:16–20

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Savvidis E, Löer F (1989) Surgical technique for femur shaft fenestration in revisional surgery following total hip replacements—a comparative experimental study. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 127:228–236

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Schmidt J, Nordmann K (1994) Removal of bone cement from the femoral canal using an acoustic emission-controlled milling device. Med Biol Eng Comput 32:258–260

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sedlin ED (1965) A Rheologic Model for Cortical Bone. A Study of the Physical Properties of Human Femoral Samples. Acta Orthop. Scandinavica, Supplementum 83

  23. Shepherd BD, Turnbull A (1989) The fate of femoral windows in revision joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 71(5):716–718

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sherk HH, Lane G, Rhodes A et al. (1995) Carbon dioxide laser removal of polymethylmethacrylate. Clin Orthop 67–71

  25. Stranne SK, Callaghan JJ, Fyda TM et al (1992) The eVect of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy on the prosthesis interface in cementless arthroplasty. Evaluation in a rabbit model. J Arthroplasty 7:173–179

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Sydney SV, Mallory TH (1990) Controlled perforation. A safe method of cement removal from the femoral canal. Clin Orthop Relat Res 253:168–172

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Szendrői M, Tóth K, Kiss J, Antal I, Skaliczki G (2010) Removal of the femoral component of hip endoprosthesis in a retrograde genocephalic way Hip International (Accepted for publication)

  28. Toth K, Sisak K, Nagy J, Mano S, Csernatonyi Z retrograde stem removal in revision hip surgery—removing a loose or broken femoral component with a retrograde nail. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg (Accepted for publication 24-01-2010)

  29. Wagner H (1989) A revision prosthesis for the hip joint. Orthopade 18:438–453

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Wagner M, Wagner H (1999) The transfemoral approach for revision of total hip replacement. Orthop Traumatol 7:260–276

    Google Scholar 

  31. Younger TI, Bradford MS, Magnus RE et al (1995) Extended proximal femoral osteotomy. A new technique for femoral revision arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 10(3):329–338

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The preparation of the manuscript was not supported by outside funding or grant(s). None of the researchers or an affiliated institute have received (or agreed to receive) from a commercial entity something of value related in any way to this manuscript or research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary

    Kálmán Tóth, Krisztián Sisák & Károly Wellinger

  2. Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

    Zoltán Csernátony

  3. Laboratory of Biomechanics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary

    Sándor Manó & Zoltán Csernátony

  4. Department of Physiology, Faculty of Medicine, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary

    Gyöngyi Horváth

  5. Department of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary

    Miklós Szendrői

Authors
  1. Kálmán Tóth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Krisztián Sisák
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Károly Wellinger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sándor Manó
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gyöngyi Horváth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Miklós Szendrői
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Zoltán Csernátony
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kálmán Tóth.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tóth, K., Sisák, K., Wellinger, K. et al. Biomechanical comparison of three cemented stem removal techniques in revision hip surgery. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131, 1007–1012 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-010-1247-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-010-1247-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation