CME Article: Review Article
Salvage of Failed Total Hip Arthroplasty With Proximal Femoral Replacement
Orthopedics, 2014;37(10):691–698
Abstract
Educational Objectives
As a result of reading this article, physicians should be able to:
| 1. | Identify the available types of reconstruction for failed total hip arthroplasty. | ||||
| 2. | Summarize the preoperative workup of patients with failed total hip arthroplasty and massive proximal femoral bone loss. | ||||
| 3. | Assess the surgical technique of proximal femoral replacement for failed total hip arthroplasty. | ||||
| 4. | Recognize treatment complications, patient outcomes, and survival of proximal femoral megaprostheses for revision of failed total hip arthroplasty. | ||||
Despite recent advances in device manufacturing and surgical techniques, the management of proximal femoral bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty remains challenging. Currently, failed total hip arthroplasty in elderly and less active patients, nonunion of the proximal femur with multiple failed attempts at osteosynthesis, resection arthroplasty, and massive proximal femoral bone loss can be salvaged with proximal femoral replacement using a megaprosthesis. The procedure is technically demanding and requires careful preoperative planning. Instability and aseptic loosening are the major complications, especially in younger and more active patients. The new generation of modular proximal femoral replacement megaprostheses and the increased experience obtained with these surgeries have reduced complication rates and improved outcomes. [Orthopedics. 2014; 37(10):691–698.]
- 1.Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89(4):780–785.
10.2106/JBJS.F.00222 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 2.Xenos JS, Hopkinson WJ, Callaghan JJ, Heekin RD, Savory CG. Osteolysis around an uncemented cobalt chrome total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995; 317:29–36. > Google Scholar
- 3.Boldt JG, Dilawari P, Agarwal S, Drabu KJ. Revision total hip arthroplasty using impaction bone grafting with cemented non-polished stems and charnley cups. J Arthroplasty. 2001; 16:943–952.
10.1054/arth.2001.25559 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 4.Donati D, Giacomini S, Gozzi E, Mercuri M. Proximal femur reconstruction by an allograft prosthesis composite. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002; 394:192–200.
10.1097/00003086-200201000-00023 > CrossrefGoogle Scholar - 5.Haentjens P, De Boeck H, Opdecam P. Proximal femoral replacement prosthesis for salvage of failed hip arthroplasty: complications in 2–11 year follow-up study in 19 elderly patients. Acta Orthop Scand. 1996; 67:37–42.
10.3109/17453679608995606 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 6.Malkani A, Settecerri JJ, Sim FH, Chao EY, Wallrichs SL. Long-term results of proximal femoral replacement for non-neoplastic disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995; 77:351–356. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 7.Sim FH, Chao EYS. Segmental prosthetic replacement of the hip and knee. In: , eds. Tumor Prostheses for Bone and Joint Reconstruction: The Design and Application. New York, NY: Thieme-Stratton; 1983:247–266. > Google Scholar
- 8.Johnsson R, Carlsson A, Kisch K, Moritz U, Zetterström R, Persson BM. Function following mega total hip arthroplasty compared with conventional total hip arthroplasty and healthy matched controls. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985; 192:159–167. > CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Parvizi J, Sim FH. Proximal femoral replacements with megaprostheses. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; 420:169–175.
10.1097/00003086-200403000-00023 > CrossrefGoogle Scholar - 10.Allan DG, Lavoie GJ, McDonald S, Oakeshott R, Gross AE. Proximal femoral allografts in revision hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991; 73:235–240. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 11.Moore AT, Bohlman HR. Metal hip joint: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1943; 25:688. > Google Scholar
- 12.Seddon H, Scales J. A polythene substitute for the upper two-thirds of the shaft of the femur. Lancet. 1949; ii:795–796.
10.1016/S0140-6736(49)91375-6 > CrossrefGoogle Scholar - 13.Sim FH, Chao EY. Hip salvage by proximal femoral replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1981; 63:1228–1239. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 14.Parvizi J, Tarity D, Slenker N, Trappler R, Hozack W, Sim F. Proximal femoral replacement in patients with non-neoplastic conditions. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89:1036–1043.
10.2106/JBJS.F.00241 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 15.Parvizi J, Bender B, Sim F. Revision total hip arthroplasty with femoral bone loss: proximal femoral replacement. In: , ed. Operative Techniques in Orthopaedic Surgery. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011:823–830. > Google Scholar
- 16.Parvizi J, Jacovides C, Antoci V, Ghanem E. Diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection: the utility of a simple yet unappreciated enzyme. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011; 93(24):2242–2248.
10.2106/JBJS.J.01413 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 17.Zehr RJ, Enneking WF, Scarborough MT. Allograft-prosthesis composite versus mega-prosthesis in proximal femoral reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1996; 322:207–223.
10.1097/00003086-199601000-00026 > CrossrefGoogle Scholar - 18.Greenwald AS, Narten NC, Wilde AH. Points in the technique of recementing in the revision of an implant arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1978; 60(1):107–110. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 19.Pianta TJ, Lieberman JR. Cement retention in revision total hip arthroplasty: filling the hole. Orthopedics. 2008; 31(9):909–910.
10.3928/01477447-20080901-26 > LinkGoogle Scholar - 20.Li PL, Ingle PJ, Dowell JK. Cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty: should it be done?J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996; 78(5):809–811. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 21.Lieberman JR. Cemented femoral revision: lest we forget. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(4 suppl 2):72–74.
10.1016/j.arth.2005.03.005 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 22.Gosheger G, Hillmann A, Lindner N, Soft tissue reconstruction of megaprostheses using a trevira tube. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001; (393):264–271.
10.1097/00003086-200112000-00030 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 23.Morrey BF. Results of reoperation for hip dislocation: the big picture. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004; 429:94–101.
10.1097/01.blo.0000150318.27723.8c > CrossrefGoogle Scholar - 24.Gross AE. Allograft prosthetic composite. In: , eds. The Hip. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2006:385–396. > Google Scholar
- 25.Klein GR, Parvizi J, Rapuri V, Proximal femoral replacement for the treatment of periprosthetic fractures. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87:(8):1777–1781.
10.2106/JBJS.D.02420 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 26.Parvizi J, Vegari D. Periprosthetic proximal femur fractures: current concepts. J Orthop Trauma. 2011; 25(6 suppl):77–81.
10.1097/BOT.0b013e31821b8c3b > CrossrefGoogle Scholar - 27.Harris WH. Is it advantageous to strengthen the cement-metal interface and use a collar for cemented femoral components of total hip replacements?Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1992; 285:67. > CrossrefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Wright TM, Li S. Biomaterials. In: , eds. Orthopaedic Basic Science: Biology and Biomechanics of the Musculoskeletal System. 2nd ed. Chicago, IL: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 2000:182–215. > Google Scholar
- 29.Barrack RL. Early failure of modern cemented stems. J Arthroplasty. 2000; 15(8):1036–1050.
10.1054/arth.2000.16498 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 30.Berry DJ. Cemented femoral stems: what matters most. J Arthroplasty. 2004; 19(4 suppl 1):83–84.
10.1016/j.arth.2004.04.003 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 31.Weinrauch PC, Bell C, Wilson L, Goss B, Lutton C, Crawford RW. Shear properties of bilaminar polymethylmethacrylate cement mantles in revision hip joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007; 22(3):394–403.
10.1016/j.arth.2006.04.010 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 32.Malkani AL, Settecerri JJ, Sim FH, Chao EY, Wallrichs SL. Massive prosthetic replacement for non-neoplastic disorders. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995; 77:351–356. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 33.Bickels J, Meller I, Henshaw RM, Malawer MM. Reconstruction of hip stability after proximal and total femur reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000; 375:218–230.
10.1097/00003086-200006000-00027 > CrossrefGoogle Scholar - 34.Mavrogenis AF, Ruggieri P, Mercuri M, Pa-pagelopoulos PJ. Megaprosthetic reconstruction for malignant bone tumors: complications and outcomes. J Long Term Eff Med Implants. 2008; 18(3):239–251.
10.1615/JLongTermEffMedImplants.v18.i3.40 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 35.Revision THA with femoral bone loss—proximal femoral replacement. OrthopaedicsOne: The Orthopaedic Knowledge Network. http://www.orthopaedicsone.com/x/GAQCAg. Accessed July 10, 2013. > Google Scholar
- 36.Shih S, Wang J, Hsu C. Proximal femoral megaprosthesis for failed total hip arthroplasty. Chang Gung Med J. 2007; 30(1):73–80. > MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 37.Hardes J, Budny T, Hauschild G, Proximal femur replacement in revision arthroplasty. Z Orthop Unfall. 2009; 147(6):694–699. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 38.Sewell MD, Hanna SA, Carrington RW, Modular proximal femoral replacement in salvage hip surgery for non-neoplastic conditions. Acta Orthop Belg. 2010; 76(4):493–502. > MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 39.Al-Taki MM, Masri BA, Duncan CP, Garbuz DS. Quality of life following proximal femoral replacement using a modular system in revision THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469(2):470–475.
10.1007/s11999-010-1522-2 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
