Early failure of an uncemented femoral stem,as compared to two other stems with similar design,following primary total hip arthroplasty performed with direct anterior approach
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online March, 2022
Early failure of an uncemented femoral stem,as compared to two other stems with similar design,following primary total hip arthroplasty performed with direct anterior approach
An increased risk of early femoral component loosening has been reported using the direct anterior approach (DAA) compared with other common surgical approaches. However, long-term data are scarce. The purpose of this study is: (1) to determine the incidence of early femoral loosening in a high volume, single surgeon’s practice utilising the DAA approach; and (2) to examine the effect of stem design and type of coating on aseptic loosening in the early and mid-term postoperative period.
Methods:
A retrospective review of 1650 consecutive patients (1800 hips) who underwent total hip arthroplasty (THA) using the DAA between August 2011 and December 2017 was conducted at our institution. 3 types of uncemented femoral stems (Quadra-S, Avenir, TwinSys), with similar design, but different coating, were implanted. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiologically at 4 weeks, 3 months, 1 year, and annually thereafter.
Results:
After a mean follow-up of 46.4 months, the total incidence of revision for aseptic loosening was 0.44% (n = 8). All loose stems were Quadra-S, failing to achieve osseointegration, for an overall incidence of 0.96% (p = 0.002). None of the other stems were loose. Radiolucent lines around the proximal stem portion were visible in 75 Quadra-S stems (4.1%) on radiographs taken at 1 year postoperatively and continued to deteriorate at the latest follow-up.
Conclusions:
In this specific cohort of patients, the increased rate of femoral stem aseptic loosening was implant-related and was attributed only to a specific type of femoral stem (Quadra-S). No relation to other factors was proven suggesting that the surface characteristics of this femoral stem and the lack of bioactive coating are responsible for the observed early femoral failures. These findings should be confirmed by additional registry work and larger population sample sizes are needed to evaluate the prosthesis performance after implantation through the DAA.
MattaJMShahrdarCFergusonT. Single-incision anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty on an orthopaedic table. Clin Orthop Relat Res2005; 441: 115–124.
2.
MoskalJTCappsSGScanelliJA. Anterior muscle sparing approach for total hip arthroplasty. World J Orthop2013; 4: 12–18.
3.
MartusiewiczADelagrammaticasDHaroldRE, et al. Anterior versus posterior approach total hip arthroplasty: patient-reported and functional outcomes in the early postoperative period. Hip Int2020; 30: 695–702.
4.
YooJIChaYHKimKJ, et al. Gait analysis after total hip arthroplasty using direct anterior approach versus anterolateral approach: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2019; 20: 63.
5.
SharmaRAbdullaIFairgrieve-ParkL, et al. Surgical approaches in total hip arthroplasty cost per case analysis: a retrospective, matched, micro-costing analysis in a socialised healthcare system. Hip Int2020; 30: 391–397.
6.
de SteigerRNLorimerMSolomonM. What is the learning curve for the anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty?Clin Orthop Relat Res2015; 473: 3860–3866.
7.
SpaansAJvan den HoutJAAMBolderSBT. High complication rate in the early experience of minimally invasive total hip arthroplasty by the direct anterior approach. Acta Orthop2012; 83: 342–346.
8.
AggarwalVKElbulukADundonJ, et al. Surgical approach significantly affects the complication rates associated with total hip arthroplasty. Bone Joint J2019; 101–B: 646–651.
9.
KhanujaHSVakilJJGoddardMS, et al. Cementless femoral fixation in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2011; 93: 500–509.
10.
RahmSTondelliTSteinmetzS, et al. Uncemented Total hip arthroplasty through the direct anterior approach: analysis of a consecutive series of 275 hips with a minimum follow-up of 10 years. J Arthroplasty2019; 34: 1132–1138.
11.
CidambiKRBarnettSLMallettePR, et al. Impact of femoral stem design on failure after anterior approach total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 800–804.
12.
MeneghiniRMElstonASChenAF, et al. Direct anterior approach: risk factor for early femoral failure of cementless total hip arthroplasty: a multicenter study. J Bone Joint Surg Am2017; 99: 99–105.
13.
PanichkulPParksNLHoH, et al. New approach and stem increased femoral revision rate in total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics2016; 39: e86–e92.
14.
WhiteCACarsenSRasuliK, et al. High incidence of migration with poor initial fixation of the Accolade stem. Clin Orthop Relat Res2012; 470: 410–417.
15.
EtoSHwangKHuddlestonJI, et al. The direct anterior approach is associated with early revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2017; 32: 1001–1005.
16.
MasonisJThompsonCOdumS. Safe and accurate: learning the direct anterior total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics2008; 31(Suppl. 2): 1417-1426.
17.
AbeHSakaiTTakaoM, et al. Difference in stem alignment between the direct anterior approach and the posterolateral approach in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2015; 30: 1761–1766.
18.
BartonCKimPR. Complications of the direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am2009; 40: 371–375.
19.
JanssenLWijnandsKAPJanssenD, et al. Do stem design and surgical approach influence early aseptic loosening in cementless THA?Clin Orthop Relat Res2018; 476: 1212–1220.
20.
MohanRYiPHHansenEN. Evaluating online information regarding the direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2015; 30: 803–807.
21.
FreeMDOwenDHAgiusPA, et al. Direct anterior approach total hip arthroplasty: an adjunct to an enhanced recovery pathway: outcomes and learning curve effects in surgeons transitioning from other surgical approaches. J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 3490–3495.
22.
AngerameMRFehringTKMasonisJL, et al. Early failure of primary total hip arthroplasty: is surgical approach a risk factor?J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 1780–1785.
23.
CooperHJJacobAPRodriguezJA. Distal fixation of proximally coated tapered stems may predispose to a failure of osteointegration. J Arthroplasty2011; 26: 78–83.
24.
IshiiSHommaYBabaT, et al. Does the canal fill ratio and femoral morphology of Asian females influence early radiographic outcomes of total hip arthroplasty with an uncemented proximally coated, tapered-wedge stem?J Arthroplasty2016; 31: 1524–1528.
25.
DavisAMWoodAMKeenanAC, et al. Does body mass index affect clinical outcome post-operatively and at five years after primary unilateral total hip replacement performed for osteoarthritis? A multivariate analysis of prospective data. J Bone Joint Surg Br2011; 93: 1178–1182.
26.
ElectricwalaAJNarkbunnamRHuddlestonJIIII, et al. Obesity is associated with early total hip revision for aseptic loosening. J Arthroplasty2016; 31: 217–220.
27.
CharneyMPaxtonEWStradiottoR, et al. A comparison of risk of dislocation and cause-specific revision between direct anterior and posterior approach following elective cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2020; 35: 1651–1657.
28.
ZijlstraWPDe HartogBVan SteenbergenLN, et al. Effect of femoral head size and surgical approach on risk of revision for dislocation after total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Scand2017; 88: 395–401.
29.
MjaalandKESvenningsenSFenstadAM, et al. Implant survival after minimally invasive anterior or anterolateral vs. conventional posterior or direct lateral approach: an analysis of 21,860 total hip arthroplasties from the Norwegian arthroplasty register (2008 to 2013). J Bone Joint Surg Am2017; 99: 840–847.
30.
KuijpersMFLHanninkGVehmeijerSBW, et al. The risk of revision after total hip arthroplasty in young patients depends on surgical approach, femoral head size and bearing type; an analysis of 19,682 operations in the Dutch arthroplasty register. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2019; 20: 385.
31.
GromovKPedersenABOvergaardS, et al. Do rerevision rates differ after first-time revision of primary THA with a cemented and cementless femoral component?Clin Orthop Relat Res2015; 473: 3391–3398.
32.
Cassar-GheitiAJMcColganRKellyM, et al. Current concepts and outcomes in cemented femoral stem design and cementation techniques: the argument for a new classification system. EFORT Open Rev2020; 5: 241–252.
EnghCAMassinPSuthersKE. Roentgenographic assessment of the biologic fixation of porous-surfaced femoral components. Clin Orthop Relat Res1990; 257: 107–128.
35.
SchmitzPGueorguievBZdericI, et al. Primary stability in total hip replacement: a biomechanical investigation. Medicine (Baltimore)2017; 96: e8278.
36.
BottnerFZawadskyMSuEP, et al. Implant migration after early weightbearing in cementless hip replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res2005; 436: 132–137.
37.
PilliarRMLeeJMManiatopoulosC. Observations on the effect of movement on bone ingrowth into porous-surfaced implants. Clin Orthop Relat Res1986; 208: 108–113.
38.
LeeGCMarconiD. Complications following direct anterior hip procedures: costs to both patients and surgeons. J Arthroplasty2015; 30: 98–101.
39.
BarnettSLPetersDJHamiltonWG, et al. Is the anterior approach safe? Early complication rate associated with 5090 consecutive primary total hip arthroplasty procedures performed using the anterior approach. J Arthroplasty2016; 31: 2291–2294.
40.
ChristensenKSWickerDIWightCM, et al. Prevalence of postoperative periprosthetic femur fractures between two different femoral component designs used in direct anterior total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2019; 34: 3074–3079.
41.
FleischmanANTarabichiMMagnerZ, et al. Mechanical complications following total hip arthroplasty based on surgical approach: a large, single-institution cohort study. J Arthroplasty2019; 34: 1255–1260.
42.
De GeestTFennemaPLenaertsG, et al. Adverse effects associated 316 with the direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: a Bayesian meta-analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2015; 135: 1183–1192.
43.
HartfordJMKnowlesSB. Risk factors for perioperative femoral fractures: cementless femoral implants and the direct anterior approach using a fracture table. J Arthroplasty2016; 31: 2013–2018.
44.
DietrichMKabelitzMDoraC, et al. Perioperative fractures in cementless total hip arthroplasty using the direct anterior minimally invasive approach: reduced risk with short stems. J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 548–554.
45.
TamakiTJonishiKMiuraY, et al. Cementless tapered-wedge stem length affects the risk of periprosthetic femoral fractures in direct anterior total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2018; 33: 805–809.
