HSS Journal ®

, Volume 8, Issue 3, pp 295–303 | Cite as

Neck-Preserving Femoral Stems

Current Topics Concerning Joint Preservation and Minimally Invasive Surgery of the Hip

Abstract

Background

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.

Purposes

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.

Methods

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.

Results

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.

Conclusions

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.

Keywords

total hip arthroplasty neck preservation femoral stems 

References

  1. 1.
    No Authors listed. National Joint Registry for England and Wales: 8th annual report 2011Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Albanese CV, Santori FS, Pavan L, Learmonth ID, Passariello R. Periprosthetic DXA after total hip arthroplasty with short vs. ultra-short custom-made femoral stems. Acta Orthop 2009;80:291–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bichmann P, Horst F. First experiences with the Metha modular short stem prosthesis. South-German Orthopaedic Congress 2006; Baden-Baden; Presentation 233Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Biggi F, Franchin F, Lovato R, Pipino F. DEXA evaluation of total hip arthroplasty with neck-preserving technique: 4 year follow-up. J Orthopaed Traumatol 2004;5:156–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braud P, Freeman MAR. The effect of retention of the femoral neck and of cement upon the stability of a proximal femoral prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 1990;5 Suppl:S5–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Briem D, Schneider M, Bogner N, Botha N, Gebauer M, Gehrke T, Schwantes B. Mid-term results of 155 patients treated with a collum femoris preserving (CFP) short stem prosthesis. International Orthopaedics 2011;35:655–660PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bolland BJ, Culliford DJ, Langton DJ, Millington JP, Arden NK, Latham JM. High failure rates with a large-diameter hybrid metal-on-metal total hip replaeement: clinical, radiological and retrieval analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93(5):608–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Buergi ML, Stoffel KK, Jacob HAC, Bereiter HH. Radiological findings and clinical results of 102 thrust-plate femoral hip prostheses. a follow-up of 2 to 8 years. J Arthroplasty 2005;20(1):108–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carlson L, Albrektsson, Freeman MAR. Femoral neck retention in hip arthroplasty. A cadaver study of mechanical effects. Acta Orthop Scand 1988;59(1):6–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cristofolini L, Juszczyk M, Taddei F, Field RE, Rushton N, Viceconti M. Assessment of femoral neck fracture risk for a novel proximal epiphyseal hip prosthesis. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 2011;26(6):585–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Donnelly WJ, Kobayashi A, Freeman MA, Chin TW, Yeo H, West M Scott G. Radiological and survival comparison of four methods of fixation of a proximal femoral stem. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 1997;79-B:351–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Duffy GP, Berry DJ, Rowland C, Cabanela ME. Primary uncemented total hip arthroplasty in patients <40 years old: 10–14-year results using first-generation proximally porous-coated implants. J Arthroplasty 2001;16(8 Suppl 1):140–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Falez F, Casella F, Panegrossi G, Favetti F, Barresi C. Perspectives on metaphyseal conservative stems. J Orthopaed Traumatol 2008;9:49–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fink B, Siegmuller C, Schneider T, Conrad S, Schmielau G, Ruther W. Short- and medium-term results of the thrust plate prosthesis in patients with polyarthritis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2000;120:294–298PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fink B, Wessel S, Deuretzbacher G, Protzen M, Ruther W. Midterm results of “thrust plate” prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 2007;22(5):703–710PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Freeman MAR. Why resect the neck? J Bone Joint Surg Br 1986;68-B(3):346–349Google Scholar
  17. 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
  18. 18.
    Gill IR, Gill K, Jayasekera N, Miller J. Medium term results of the collum femoris preserving hydroxyapatite coated total hip replacement. Hip Int 2008;18(2):75–80PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC. Modes of failure of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop 1979;141:17–27PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huggler AH, Jacob HA, Bereiter H, Haferkorn M, Ryf C, Schenk R. Long-term results with the uncemented thrust plate prosthesis (TPP). Acta Orthop Belg 1993;59(Suppl1):215–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Journeaux SF, Morgan DAF, Donnelly WJ. The medium-term results of a cemented Freeman femoral neck-retaining prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2000;82-B:188–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Karatosun V, Unver B, Gunal I. Hip arthroplasty with the thrust plate prosthesis in patients of 65 years of age or older: 67 patients followed 2-–7 years. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2008;128:377–381PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Karatosun V, Unver B, Gultekin A, Gunal I. A biomechanical comparison of the thrust plate prosthesis and a stemmed prosthesis. Hip Int 2011;21(5):565–70PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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
  25. 25.
    Lerch M, von der Harr-Tan A, Windhagen H, Behrens BA, Wefstaedt P, Stukenborg-Colsman CM. Bone remodelling around the Metha short stem in total hip arthroplasty: a prospective dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry study. Int Orthop 2012;36(3):533–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mannan K, Freeman MA, Scott G. The Freeman femoral component with hydroxyapatite coating and retention of the neck: an update with a minimum follow-up of 17 years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2010;92(4):480–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Martelli S, Taddei F, Schileo E, Cristofolini L, Rushton N, Viceconti M. Biomechanical robustness of a new proximal epiphyseal hip replacement to patient variability and surgical uncertainties: a FE study. Med Eng Phys 2012;34(2):161–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    McMinn DJ, Pradhan C, Ziaee H, Daniel J. Is mid-head resection a durable conservative option in the presence of poor femoral bone quality and distorted anatomy? Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011;469(6):1589–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Molfetta L, Capozzi M, Caldo D. Medium term follow up of the biodynamic neck sparing prosthesis. Hip Int 2011;21(1):76–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Moore AT. Metal hip joint: a new self-locking vitallium prosthesis. S Med J 1952;45(11):1015–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nowak M, Nowak TE, Schmidt R, Forst R, Kress AM, Mueller LA. Prospective study of a cementless total hip arthroplasty with a collum femoris preserving stem and a trabeculae orientated pressfit cup: minimum 6-year follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011;131:549–55PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 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
  33. 33.
    Olsen M, Lewis PM, Waddell JP, Schemitsch EH. A biomechanical investigation of implant alignment and femoral neck notching with the Birmingham mid-Head Resection. J Arthroplasty 2010;25(6):112–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Olsen M, Sellan M, Zdero R, Waddell JP, Schemitsch EH. A biomechanical comparison of epiphyseal versus metaphyseal fixed bone-conserving hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011;93(2):122–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Pipino F. CFP prosthetic stem in mini-invasive total hip arthroplasty. J Orthopaed Traumatol 2004;4:165–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pipino F, Calderale PM. Biodynamic total hip prosthesis. Ital J Orthop Traumatol 1987;13(3):289–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pipino F, Molfetta L. Femoral neck preservation in total hip replacement. Ital J Orthop Traumatol. 1993;19(1):5–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Pipino F, Keller A. Tissue-sparing surgery: 25 years’ experience with femoral neck preserving hip arthroplasty. J Orthopaed Traumatol 2006;7:36–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pipino F, Molfetta L, Grandizio M. Preservation of the femoral neck in hip arthroplasty: results of a 13- to 17-year follow-up. J Orthopaed Traumatol 2000;1(1):31–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rahman L, Muirhead-Allwood SK. The Birmingham mid-head resection arthroplasty—a minimum two year clinical and radiological follow-up: an independent single surgeon series. Hip Int 2011;21(3):356–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Raj D, Jaiswal PK, Sharma BL, Fergusson CM. Long term results of the Corin C-Fit uncemented total hip arthroplasty in young patients. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2008;128(12):1391–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rohrl SM, Li MG, Pedersen E, Ullmark G, Nivbrant B. Migration pattern of a short femoral neck preserving stem. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006;448:73–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Skinner JA, Kroon PO, Todo S, Scott G. A femoral component with proximal HA coating. An analysis of survival and fixation at up to ten years. J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 2003;85-B:366–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Steens W, Rosenbaum D, Goetze C, Gosheger G, van den Daele R, Steinbeck J. Clinical and functional outcome of the Thrust Plate Prosthesis: short- and medium-term results. Clinical Biomechanics 2003;18:647–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Sugiyama H, Whiteside LA, Kaiser AD. Examination of rotational fixation of the femoral component in total hip arthroplasty. A mechanical study of micromovement and acoustic emission. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989;249:122–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Synder M, Drobniewski M, Pruszczynski B, Sibinski M. Initial experience with short Metha stem implantation. Ortop Traumatol Rehabil 2009;11(4):317–23PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Thompson FR. Two and a half years’ experience with a vitallium intramedullary hip prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1954;36-A(3):489–502PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 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. 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. 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

Copyright information

© Hospital for Special Surgery 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Queen’s HospitalRomfordUK
  2. 2.The South West London Elective Orthopaedic CentreEpsomUK

Personalised recommendations