Perspectives on metaphyseal conservative stems

Total hip replacement is showing, during the last decades, a progressive evolution toward principles of reduced bone and soft tissue aggression. These principles have become the basis of a new philosophy, tissue sparing surgery. Regarding hip implants, new conservative components have been proposed and developed as an alternative to conventional stems. Technical and biomechanical characteristics of metaphyseal bone-stock-preserving stems are analyzed on the basis of the available literature and our personal experience. Mayo, Nanos and Metha stems represent, under certain aspects, a design evolution starting from shared concepts: reduced femoral violation, non-anatomic geometry, proximal calcar loading and lateral alignment. However, consistent differences are level of neck preservation, cross-sectional geometry and surface finishing. The Mayo component is the most time-tested component and, in our hands, it showed an excellent survivorship at the mid-term follow-up, with an extremely reduced incidence of aseptic loosening (partially reduced by the association with last generation acetabular couplings). For 160 implants followed for a mean of 4.7 years, survivorship was 97.5% with 4 failed implants: one fracture with unstable stem, 1 septic loosening and 2 aseptic mobilizations. DEXA analysis, performed on 15 cases, showed a good calcar loading and stimulation, but there was significant lateral load transfer to R3–R4 zones, giving to the distal part of the stem a function not simply limited to alignment. Metaphyseal conservative stems demonstrated a wide applicability with an essential surgical technique. Moreover, they offer the options of a “conservative revision” with a conventional primary component in case of failure and a “conservative revision” for failed resurfacing implants.

[1]  R Passariello,et al.  Bone remodelling in THA: A comparative DXA scan study between conventional implants and a new stemless femoral component. A preliminary report. , 2006, Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy.

[2]  W. Harris,et al.  The contribution of the nonporous distal stem to the stability of proximally porous-coated canine femoral components. , 1993, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[3]  Todd V Swanson,et al.  The tapered press fit total hip arthroplasty: a European alternative. , 2005, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[4]  B. Morrey,et al.  A conservative femoral replacement for total hip arthroplasty. A prospective study. , 2000, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[5]  R. Bloebaum,et al.  An assessment of the biological fixation of a retrieved Mayo femoral component. , 2003, The Iowa orthopaedic journal.

[6]  A Roth,et al.  [Periprosthetic bone loss after total hip endoprosthesis. Dependence on the type of prosthesis and preoperative bone configuration]. , 2005, Der Orthopade.

[7]  A. Roth,et al.  Verlauf der periprothetischen Knochendichte nach Hüfttotalendoprothesenimplantation , 2005, Der Orthopäde.

[8]  L. Whiteside,et al.  Effect of neck resection on torsional stability of cementless total hip replacement. , 1995, American journal of orthopedics.

[9]  R. Berger The technique of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty using the two-incision approach. , 2004, Instructional course lectures.

[10]  A. Keller,et al.  Tissue-sparing surgery: 25 years’ experience with femoral neck preserving hip arthroplasty , 2006, Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology.

[11]  B. Morrey,et al.  A conservative femoral replacement for total hip arthroplasty: A PROSPECTIVE STUDY , 2000 .

[12]  P. M. Calderale,et al.  Biodynamic total hip prosthesis. , 1987, Italian journal of orthopaedics and traumatology.

[13]  K. Bertin,et al.  Anterolateral mini-incision hip replacement surgery: a modified Watson-Jones approach. , 2004, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[14]  B F Morrey,et al.  Short-stemmed uncemented femoral component for primary hip arthroplasty. , 1989, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[15]  M. Freeman,et al.  Femoral neck retention in hip arthroplasty. A cadaver study of mechanical effects. , 1988, Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica.