Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bone regeneration in the proximal femur following implantation of modular revision stems with distal fixation

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

Abstract

Introduction

A quantitative analysis of the response of proximal femur bone to implantation of revision stems with distal fixation and of the factors that affect that response has not previously been published.

Materials and methods

A prospective study of 138 stem revision operations involving replacement with cementless, modular, titanium revision stems with distal fixation (Revitan, Zimmer GmbH, Winterthur, Switzerland) was designed to assess Barnett and Nordin scores at the proximal femur obtained immediately after surgery and at a 3-year follow-up examination in order to analyze bone regeneration in the proximal femur and associated response-modifying factors.

Results

In general, a bone formation with increase of the Barnett and Nordin score was observed. However, stress shielding occurred in cases of osteoporosis or more severe bone defects. A statistical analysis of possible factors that might affect the bone response revealed that the degree of bone regeneration was directly related to the Barnett and Nordin score obtained immediately post-surgery and the severity of the bone defect and only indirectly to the length of the stem, which is determined by the type of bone defect, and to the necessity of interlocking screws.

Conclusion

Distally fixed titanium revision stems do not result in stress shielding per se. Proximal bone response depends mostly on the condition of the bone before and immediately after the operation and not, as stated in many reports, on surgical procedures such as method of approach or the thickness of the prosthesis.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aribindi R, Barba M, Solomon MI, Arp P, Paprosky W (1998) Orthop Clin North Am 29:319–329

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Barden B, Fitzek JG, Huttegger C, Löer F (2001) Supportive strut grafts for diaphyseal bone defects in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 387:148–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Barnett E, Nordin BE (1960) The radiological diagnosis of osteoporosis: a new approach. Clin Radiol 11:166–174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Blackley HRL, Davis AM, Hutchison CR et al (2001) Proximal femoral allografts for reconstruction of bone stock in revision arthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Jt Surg Am 83:346–354

    Google Scholar 

  5. Böhm P, Bischel O (2001) Femoral revision with the Wagner SL revision stem. J Bone Jt Surg 83-A:1023–1031

    Google Scholar 

  6. Böhm P, Bischel O (2001) The uncemented diaphysal fixation of femoral revision stems in case of large bone defects—analysis of twelve years experience with the Wagner SL revision stem. Z Orthop 139:229–239

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Böhm P, Bischel O (2004) The use of tapered stems for femoral revision surgery. Clin Orthop Rel Res 420:148–159

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Del Alamo JG, Garcia-Cimbrelo E, Castellanos V, Gil-Garay E (2007) Radiographic bone regeneration and clinical outcome with the Wagner SL revision stem. A 5-year to 12-year follow-up study. J Arthroplast 22:515–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Della Valle CJ, Paprosky WG (2004) The femur in revision total hip arthroplasty evaluation and classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res 420:55–62

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Fink B, Hahn M, Fuerst M, Thybaut L, Delling G (2005) Principle of fixation of the cementless modular revision stem Revitan. Unfallchirurg 108:1029–1037

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Fink B, Grossmann A (2007) Modified transfemoral approach to revision arthroplasty with uncemented modular revision stems. Oper Orthop Traumatol 19:32–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fink B, Grossmann A, Schubring S, Schulz MS, Fuerst M (2007) A modified transfemoral approach using modular cementless revision stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res 462:105–114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fink B, Grossman A, Schubring S, Schulz MS, Fuerst M (2009) Short-term results of hip revisions with a curved cementless modular stem in association with the surgical approach. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 129:65–73

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fink B, Grossmann A, Fuerst M, Schäfer P, Frommelt L (2009) Two-stage cementless revision of infected hip endoprostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:1848–1858

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fink B, Grossmann A, Fuerst M (2009) Distal interlocking screws with a modular revision stem for revision total hip arthroplasty in severe bone defects. J Arthroplast (Epub ahead of print)

  16. Graham NM, Stockley I (2004) The use of structural proximal femoral allografts in complex revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Br 86:337–343

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Head WC, Emerson RH Jr, Cuellar AD (1993) Cortical strut allografts for femoral reconstructions in revision hip arthroplasty. Sem Arthroplast 4:9–15

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Head WC, Malininin TI, Emerson RH Jr, Mallory TH (2000) Restoration of bone stock in revision surgery of the femur. Int Orthop 24:9–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kolstad K, Adalberth G, Mallmin H, Milbrink J, Sahlstedt B (1996) The Wagner revision stem for severe osteolysis. 31 hips followed for 1.5–5 years. Acta Orthop Scand 67:541–544

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. McInnis DP, Horne G, Dvane PA (2006) Femoral revision with a fluted, tapered, modular stem: seventy patients followed for a mean of 3.9 years. J Arthroplast 21:372–380

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Moreland JR, Bernstein ML (1995) Femoral revision hip arthroplasty with uncemented, porous-coated stems. Clin Orthop Relat Res 31:141–150

    Google Scholar 

  22. Moreland JR, Morano MA (2001) Cementless femoral revision arthroplasty of the hip. Minimum 5 years follow-up. Clin Orthop Relat Res 393:194–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Nunn D, Freeman MA, Hil PF, Evans SJ (1989) The measurement of migration of the acetabular component of hip prostheses. J Bone Jt Surg Br 71-B:629–631

    Google Scholar 

  24. Paprosky WG, Greidanus NV, Antoniou J (1999) Minimum 10-year results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 369:230–242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Schuh A, Werber S, Holzwarth U, Zeiler G (2004) Cementless modular hip revision arthroplasty using the MRP Titan Revision Stem: outcome of 79 hips after an average of 4 years’ follow-up. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 124:306–309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Wagner H (1987) Replacement prosthesis for the hip joint after severe bone loss. Orthopäde 16:295–300

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Wagner H, Wagner M (1993) Femoral revision prosthesis. Z Orthop 131:574–577

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Wagner H (1997) Hip prosthesis revision with the non-cemented femoral revision stem–10 year experience. Med Orth Tech 117:138–148

    Google Scholar 

  30. Wehrli U (1991) Wagner revision of prosthesis stem. Z Unfallchir Versicherungsmed 84:216–224

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinic of Joint Replacement, General and Rheumatic Orthopaedics, Orthopaedic Clinic Markgröningen gGmbH, Kurt-Lindemann-Weg 10, 71706, Markgröningen, Germany

    Bernd Fink, Alexandra Grossmann & Martin S. Schulz

Authors
  1. Bernd Fink
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexandra Grossmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martin S. Schulz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernd Fink.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fink, B., Grossmann, A. & Schulz, M.S. Bone regeneration in the proximal femur following implantation of modular revision stems with distal fixation. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131, 465–470 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-010-1149-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-010-1149-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation