Cet article a été publié dans un numéro de la revue, cliquez ici pour y accéder
The modular concept has been recommended in femoral revision surgery with extensive bone loss, but entails mechanical complications: disassembly and fracture. The present retrospective study assessed the Mark I Extrême™ modular prosthesis at a minimum 5 years’ follow-up.
A cementless modular femoral stem facilitates revision in case of extensive bone loss, providing satisfactory results without risk of junction failure.
Materials and methods
Thirty-three prostheses presenting aseptic loosening, including 3 with periprosthetic fracture, in 23 female and 9 male patients, with a mean age of 65 years (range, 49–83 years), were reviewed at a mean 6.3 years’ follow-up (range, 5–9 years). Bone loss was assessed on the SOFCOT (17/33 grade 3 or 4) and Paprosky classifications (19/33 grade III or IV). One patient died; another was lost to follow-up, leaving 31 hips for analysis. Clinical assessment comprised Postel Merle d’Aubigné (PMA) and Harris Hip scores (HHS); radiological assessment used the Engh score and corticomedullary index (CMI).
There were 15 complications requiring surgery: 9 (27%) unrelated to the implant (1 hematoma, 2 infections, 2 dislocations, 1 femoral non-union, 3 asymptomatic trochanteric non unions) and 6 (18%) implant-related (four 3-level fractures and 2 epiphyseal-metaphyseal disassemblies, requiring 3 total exchanges and 3 proximal component replacements). PMA and HHS scores showed significant improvement, PMA rising from 10.4 (6–18) to 14.4 (11–18) and HHS from 50 (19–88) to 80.9 (52–100). Bone regrowth was “certain” on the Engh classification in 11 cases (44%). There was no diaphyseal component subsidence, even in case of fracture or dissociation. CMI at the 3 junctions between the 4 quarters of the stem showed no significant change: 32.9 and 32.7, 41.2 and 38.7, and 41.6 and 39.9 respectively. Six-year survivorship was 81% (95% CI: 68–94%).
In other series for the same type of implant, the rates of fracture (always metaphyseal-diaphyseal) were much lower: 0.8–3.8%. This stem ensures diaphyseal fixation in case of extensive bone loss, but incurs excessive risk of disassembly and fracture.
Level of evidence
Level IV, retrospective study.Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.
Keywords : Femoral loosening, Revision total hip arthroplasty, Interlocking femoral stem, Modular femoral stem, Femoral stem subsidence