Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The learning curve following adoption of a novel short-stem prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty: implications on short-term patient outcomes

  • Original Article • HIP - ARTHROPLASTY
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Short-stem (SS) hip prostheses for total hip arthroplasty (THA) have gained popularity as surgeons strive to reproduce physiological stress distributions at the proximal femur. Additionally, as THA indications continue to target younger populations, preservation of femoral bone stock for potential revision surgeries is particularly appealing. However, little is known regarding the short-term complications of each variety of short stem during the learning curve period. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the short-term complications among the THA recipients with the use of a novel SS hip prosthesis.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients undergoing primary THA utilizing an Echo Bi-Metric Microplasty hip stem. Patient demographics, surgical factors, complications and quality outcomes were collected utilizing our institution’s data warehouse and verified by chart review.

Results

In total, 182 SSs were implanted in 168 patients undergoing primary THA. Of these, 5 (2.9%) patients sustained a periprosthetic fracture. Two fractures occurred during the index hospital admission, and 3 occurred in the post-discharge period. Subset analysis demonstrated that 4 (80%) fractures had occurred during the initial learning curve period, within the first 30 surgical cases with a SS.

Conclusion

Short-stem hip prostheses are a safe alternative for THA. The results of the present study demonstrate a fracture incidence of 2.9% among patients. However, surgeons should remain cautious when utilizing new implant system and expect a learning curve. In this study, 80% of periprosthetic fractures following SS THA occurred within the first 30 cases for experienced arthroplasty-trained surgeons.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Inacio MCS, Graves SE, Pratt NL, Roughead EE, Nemes S (2017) Increase in total joint arthroplasty projected from 2014 to 2046 in Australia: a conservative local model with international implications. Clin Orthop Relat Res 475(8):2130–2137

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Stulberg SD, Patel RM (2013) The short stem: promises and pitfalls. Bone Joint J 95B(11 Suppl A):57–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Arnholdt J, Gilbert F, Blank M et al (2017) The Mayo conservative hip: complication analysis and management of the first 41 cases performed at a University level 1 department. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 18(1):250

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Sanders TL, Kremers HM, Schleck CD, Larson DR, Berry DJ (2017) Subsequent total joint arthroplasty after primary total knee or hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 99:396–401

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Maradit Kremers H, Larson DR, Crowson CS et al (2015) Prevalence of total hip and knee replacement in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97(17):1386–1397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M (2007) Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89(4):780–785

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kurtz SM, Ong KL, Lau E, Bozic KJ (2014) Impact of the economic downturn on total joint replacement demand in the United States: updated projections to 2021. J Bone Jt Surg Am 96(8):624–630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bieger R, Ignatius A, Decking R, Claes L, Reichel H, Dürselen L (2012) Primary stability and strain distribution of cementless hip stems as a function of implant design. Clin Biomech 27(2):158–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Arno S, Fetto J, Nguyen NQ et al (2012) Evaluation of femoral strains with cementless proximal-fill femoral implants of varied stem length. Clin Biomech 27(7):680–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kim YH, Kim JS, Cho SH (2001) Strain distribution in the proximal human femur. An in vitro comparison in the intact femur and after insertion of reference and experimental femoral stems. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(2):295–301

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kim YH, Oh JH (2012) A comparison of a conventional versus a short, anatomical metaphyseal-fitting cementless femoral stem in the treatment of patients with a fracture of the femoral neck. Bone Joint J 94-B(6):774–781

    Google Scholar 

  12. Østbyhaug PO, Klaksvik J, Romundstad P, Aamodt A (2009) An in vitro study of the strain distribution in human femora with anatomical and customised femoral stems. J Bone Joint Surg 91(5):676–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim YH, Park JW, Kim JS, Kang JS (2014) Long-term results and bone remodeling after THA with a short, metaphyseal-fitting anatomic cementless stem. Clin Orthop Relat Res 472(3):943–950

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Patel RM, Lo WM, Cayo MA, Dolan MM, Stulberg SD (2013) Stable, dependable fixation of short-stem femoral implants at 5 years. Orthopedics 36:e301–e307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Salemyr M, Muren O, Ahl T et al (2015) Lower periprosthetic bone loss and good fixation of an ultra-short stem compared to a conventional stem in uncemented total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 86:659–666

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. von Lewinski G, Floerkemeier T (2015) 10-Year experience with short stem total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics 38(3):S51–S56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wittenberg RH, Steffen R, Windhagen H, Bücking P, Wilcke A (2013) Five-year results of a cementless short-hip-stem prosthesis. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 5(1):4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Braun A, Sabah A (2009) Two-year results of a modular short hip stem prosthesis—a prospective study. Z Orthop Unfall 147(6):700–706

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Wacha H, Domsel G, Herrmann E (2018) Long-term follow-up of 1217 consecutive short-stem total hip arthroplasty (THA): a retrospective single-center experience. Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg 44(3):1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Lim SJ, Ko KR, Park CW, Moon YW, Park YS (2015) Robot-Assisted primary cementless total hip arthroplasty with a short femoral stem: a prospective randomized short-term outcome study. Comput Aided Surg 20(1):41–46

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Zimmer Biomet WI. Echo® Hip System|Zimmer Biomet. https://www.zimmerbiomet.com/medical-professionals/hip/product/echo-hip-system.html

  22. Khemka A, Mograby O, Lord SJ, Doyle Z, Al MM (2018) Total hip arthroplasty by the direct anterior approach using a neck-preserving stem: safety, efficacy and learning curve. Indian J Orthop 52(2):124–132

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Watts CD, Abdel MP, Lewallen DG, Berry DJ, Hanssen AD (2015) Increased risk of periprosthetic femur fractures associated with a unique cementless stem design. Clin Orthop Relat Res 473(6):2045–2053

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Abdel MP, Della Valle CJ (2017) Complications after primary total hip arthroplasty : a comprehensive clinical guide. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Mollan RA, Watters PH, Steele R, McClelland CJ (1984) Failure of the femoral component in the Howse total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 190:142–147

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gill TJ, Sledge JB, Orler R, Ganz R (1999) Lateral insufficiency fractures of the femur caused by osteopenia and varus angulation: a complication of total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 14(8):982–987

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Khalily C, Lester DK (2002) Results of a tapered cementless femoral stem implanted in varus. J Arthroplasty 17(4):463–466

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Loppini M, Grappiolo G (2018) Uncemented short stems in primary total hip arthroplasty: the state of the art. EFORT open Rev 3(5):149–159

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Cella D, Yount S, Rothrock N et al (2007) The patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS): progress of an NIH roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Med Care 45(5 Suppl 1):S3–S11

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Lombardi AV, Berend KR, Adams JB (2009) A short stem solution: through small portals. Orthopedics 32(9):663–666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Healey P, Samanta J (2008) When does the ‘learning curve’ of innovative interventions become questionable practice? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 36(3):253–257

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Morgenstern L (2005) Warning! dangerous curve ahead: the learning curve. Surg Innov 12(1):101–103

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Health C for D and R. 510(k) Clearances. https://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/productsandmedicalprocedures/deviceapprovalsandclearances/510kclearances/. Accessed 13 Aug 2018

  34. Hines JZ, Lurie P, Yu E, Wolfe S (2010) Left to their own devices: breakdowns in United States medical device premarket review. PLoS Med 7(7):e1000280

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. NYU Langone Health, Hospital for Joint Diseases, NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital, 301 East 17th Street, New York, NY, 10003, USA

    Jorge A. Padilla, James E. Feng, Ran Schwarzkopf, James Slover & Scott Marwin

  2. Albany Medical College, Albany Medical Center, Albany, NY, USA

    Afshin A. Anoushiravani

Authors
  1. Jorge A. Padilla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Afshin A. Anoushiravani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. James E. Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ran Schwarzkopf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. James Slover
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Scott Marwin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

R.S., J.S., and M.S. conceived the study design. J.P., A.A., and J.F. investigated the learning curve associated with adopting a novel prosthetic design. J.P., A.A., and J.F. carried out the experiment, performed the analytic calculations and wrote the manuscript under the supervision of R.S., J.S., and M.S. All authors provided critical feedback and helped revise the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ran Schwarzkopf.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Jorge A. Padilla MD, Afshin A. Anoushiravani MD, and James E. Feng MD declare no conflicts of interest. Ran Schwarzkopf MD is a paid consultant for Smith & Nephew and Intellijoint; owns stocks in Intellijoint and Gauss Surgical; is a board members/committee for AAOS and AAHKS. James Slover MD has received research support from Biomet and is a board member/committee of AAHKS. Scott Marwin MD is a paid consultant for Zimmer and Integer Consulting.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed were in accordance with ethical standards. This study analyzed de-identified data and thus was exempted from human-subjects review by our Institutional Review Board (IRB).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Padilla, J.A., Anoushiravani, A.A., Feng, J.E. et al. The learning curve following adoption of a novel short-stem prosthesis in total hip arthroplasty: implications on short-term patient outcomes. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 29, 819–825 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-018-2355-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-018-2355-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation