Skip to main content


Log in

Age-related osseointegration of a short hip stem: a clinical and radiological 24 months follow-up

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



The purpose of this study was to examine potential differences between patients under and over 60 years who underwent a total short hip stem arthroplasty in a 24-month follow-up in a clinical setting.


Sixty seven patients were included in this prospective study and divided in two groups. In the younger cohort 39 patients ≤ 59 years and in the older cohort 28 patients ≥ 60 years were included. Clinical and radiological examinations of the patients took place preoperatively, postoperatively and after 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. The Harris Hip Score (HHS) was raised as clinical examination. Changes of bone mass density (BMD), stress shielding, reactive lines, spot welds and sclerosing were examined as radiological analysis.


The HHS improved from 53.6 ± 8.2 preoperative to 93.2 ± 9.6 in the younger cohort and for the older cohort from 57.6 ± 14.8 to 94.1 ± 7.6 after 24 months. BMD growth was detectable in regions of interest (ROI) 3 and 6 for both groups. Different results between the cohorts could only be detected in ROIs 4 and 5. The older cohort showed a loss of BMD of 5.95% in ROI 4 and 3.17% in ROI 5 after 24 months, whereas the younger cohort showed no loss of BMD in both ROIs.


No significant differences or any influences of osseointegration and clinical outcome of the short hip stem for both groups were detectable. Lower losses (ROIs 1 and 2) and higher growths (ROIs 3, 4, 5) were discovered in younger patients and the HHS improved in both groups. Reasons for this result could be age, sex or the level of activity of the patients, but in both groups the short hip stem shows comparable results in clinical as well as in radiological examination. We conclude that the short hip stem seems to be an adequate treatment also for older patients.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Lewinski G von, Floerkemeier T (2015) 10-year experience with short stem total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics 38(3 Suppl):S51–S56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. National Center for Health Statistics NCHS Data Brief, Number 186, February 2015

  3. Thorey F, Hoefer C, Abdi-Tabari N et al (2013) Clinical results of the metha short hip stem: a perspective for younger patients? Orthop Rev (Pavia) 5(4):e34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Kim Y-H, Park J-W, Kim J-S (2016) Metaphyseal Engaging Short and Ultra-Short Anatomic Cementless Stems in Young and Active Patients. J Arthroplasty 31(1):180–185.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bottai V, Dell’Osso G, Celli F et al (2015) Total hip replacement in osteoarthritis: the role of bone metabolism and its complications. Clin Cases Miner Bone Metab 12(3):247–250.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Warming L, Hassager C, Christiansen C (2002) Changes in bone mineral density with age in men and women: a longitudinal study. Osteoporos Int 13(2):105–112.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Jones G, Nguyen T, Sambrook P et al (1994) Progressive loss of bone in the femoral neck in elderly people: longitudinal findings from the Dubbo osteoporosis epidemiology study. BMJ 309(6956):691–695

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Schnurr C, Loucif A, Patzer T et al (2018) Short stem survival after osteonecrosis of the femoral head. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 138(4):573–579.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Mancuso CA, Sculco TP, Salvati EA (2003) Patients with poor preoperative functional status have high expectations of total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 18(7):872–878

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wohlrab D, Hagel A, Hein W (2004) Vorteile der minimalinvasiven Implantation von Hüfttotalendoprothesen in der frühen postoperativen Rehabilitationsphase (Advantages of minimal invasive total hip replacement in the early phase of rehabilitation). Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 142(6):685–690.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kurtz SM, Ong KL, Schmier J et al (2009) Primary and revision arthroplasty surgery caseloads in the United States from 1990 to 2004. J Arthroplasty 24(2):195–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bovonratwet P, Malpani R, Ottesen TD et al (2018) Aseptic revision total hip arthroplasty in the elderly: Quantifying the risks for patients over 80 years old. Bone Joint J 100-B(2): 143–151.

  13. Jahnke A, Engl S, Altmeyer C et al (2014) Changes of periprosthetic bone density after a cementless short hip stem: a clinical and radiological analysis. Int Orthop 38(10):2045–2050.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Frndak PA, Mallory TH, Lombardi AV (1993) Translateral surgical approach to the hip. The abductor muscle “split”. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research(295): 135–141

  15. Bauer R, Kerschbaumer F, Poisel S et al (1979) The Transgluteal Approach to the Hip Joint. Arch Orthop Traumat Surg 95(1–2):47–49.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Thomas A, Gruen GM, McNeice, Harlan C, Amstutz (1979) Modes of Failure of Cemented STem-type Femoral Components. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research(141): 17–27

  17. Zimmer EA, Zimmer-Brossy M (1979) Hüftgelenk: axial nach Lauenstein. In: Zimmer EA, Zimmer-Brossy M (eds) Röntgen-Fehleinstellungen: Erkennen und Vermeiden. Springer, Berlin, pp 135–137

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  18. Engh CA, Massin P, Suthers KE (1990) Roentgenographic assessment of the biologic fixation of porous-surfaced femoral components. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research(257): 107–128

  19. Wittenberg RH, Steffen R, Windhagen H et al (2013) Five-year results of a cementless short-hip-stem prosthesis. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 5(1):e4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chammaï Y, Brax M (2015) Medium-term comparison of results in obese patients and non-obese hip prostheses with Metha® short stem. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 25(3):503–508.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Söderman P, Malchau H (2001) Is the Harris hip score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research(384): 189–197

  22. Acklin YP, Jenni R, Bereiter H et al (2016) Prospective clinical and radiostereometric analysis of the Fitmore short-stem total hip arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136(2):277–284.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Kutzner KP, Freitag T, Donner S et al (2017) Outcome of extensive varus and valgus stem alignment in short-stem THA: clinical and radiological analysis using EBRA-FCA. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 137(3):431–439.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Martini F, Schmidt B, Sell S (1997) Wertigkeit und Reproduzierbarkeit osteodensitometrischer DEXA-Messungen nach Hüfttotalendoprothesenimplantation (Validity and reproducibility of osteodensitometric DEXA-measurements following total hip endoprosthesis). Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb 135(1):35–39.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Panisello JJ, Herrero L, Herrera A et al (2006) Bone remodelling after total hip arthroplasty using an uncemented anatomic femoral stem: a three-year prospective study using bone densitometry. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 14(1):32–37.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Brodner W, Bitzan P, Lomoschitz F et al (2004) Changes in bone mineral density in the proximal femur after cementless total hip arthroplasty. A five-year longitudinal study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 86(1):20–26

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Korovessis P, Droutsas P, Piperos G et al (1997) Course of bone mineral content changes around cementless Zweymueller total hip arthroplasty. A 4-year follow-up study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 116(1–2):60–65

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Sköldenberg OG, Bodén HSG, Salemyr MOF et al (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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jones CA, Voaklander DC, Johnston DW et al (2001) The effect of age on pain, function, and quality of life after total hip and knee arthroplasty. Arch Intern Med 161(3):454–460

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Santaguida PL, Hawker GA, Hudak PL et al (2008) Patient characteristics affecting the prognosis of total hip and knee joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Can J Surg 51(6):428–436

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Fang M, Noiseux N, Linson E et al (2015) The Effect of Advancing Age on Total Joint Replacement Outcomes. Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil 6(3):173–179.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Freitag T, Hein M-A, Wernerus D et al (2016) Bone remodelling after femoral short stem implantation in total hip arthroplasty: 1-year results from a randomized DEXA study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 136(1):125–130.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Lerch M, Haar-Tran A von der, Windhagen H et al (2012) Bone remodelling around the Metha short stem in total hip arthroplasty: a prospective dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry study. Int Orthop 36(3):533–538.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Albanese CV, Santori FS, Pavan L et al (2009) Periprosthetic DXA after total hip arthroplasty with short vs. ultra-short custom-made femoral stems: 37 patients followed for 3 years. Acta Orthop 80(3):291–297.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Gademan MGJ, Hofstede SN, Vliet Vlieland TPM et al (2016) Indication criteria for total hip or knee arthroplasty in osteoarthritis: a state-of-the-science overview. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 17.

  36. Kobayashi S (2011) Whether bone quality matters or not in durability of total hip arthroplasty? Bone quality matters in durability of total hip arthroplasty. Clin Calcium 21(5):746–750

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernd Alexander Ishaque.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Boller, S., Jahnke, A., Augustin, L. et al. Age-related osseointegration of a short hip stem: a clinical and radiological 24 months follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 139, 405–410 (2019).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: