Modular-neck femoral implants are used to enable more variability in femoral neck version, offset and length. It has been reported that these implants carry a higher rate of revision. The aim of this review was to assess the overall and cause-specific revision rate of titanium-titanium alloy modular-neck implants in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA).
Methods:
A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines and utilising multiple databases. All results were screened for eligibility. Studies published from 2000 onwards, using a current-generation, titanium-titanium, modular-neck implant were included. Overall and cause-specific revision rates were analysed, comparing to fixed-neck prostheses where applicable.
Results:
920 studies were screened. After applying exclusion criteria, 23 were assessed in full and 14 included. These consisted of 12 case series and 2 joint registry analyses. 21,841 patients underwent a modular-neck implant with a weighted mean follow-up of 5.7 years, mean age of 62.4 years, and average body mass index (BMI) of 28.4kg/m2. The overall revision rate was 3.95% and 2.98% for modular and fixed-neck prostheses, respectively. For studies with >5 years follow-up the mean revision rate was 3.08%. There was no difference in cause-specific revision rates by implant design. Mean improvement in Harris Hip Score was 41.9.
Conclusions:
At medium-term, revision rates for titanium-titanium primary modular-neck THA are acceptable. These prostheses are a sensible management option in patients with considerable anatomical hip deformity not amenable to correction with standard fixed-neck implants. Patients of male gender, high BMI and requiring prostheses with a larger neck, offset or head are at higher risk of implant failure.
FergusonRJPalmerAJTaylorA, et al. Hip replacement. Lancet2018; 392: 1662–1671.
2.
EvansJTEvansJTWalkerRW, et al. How long does a hip replacement last? A systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and national registry reports with more than 15 years of follow-up. Lancet2019; 393: 647–654.
3.
HelmCSGreenwaldAS.The rationale and performance of modularity in total hip arthroplasty. Orthopedics2005; 28(Suppl.): s1113–s1115.
4.
KimSMLimSJMoonYW, et al. Cementless modular total hip arthroplasty in patients younger than fifty with femoral head osteonecrosis: minimum fifteen-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty2013; 28: 504–509.
5.
OmlorGWUllrichHKrahmerK, et al. A stature-specific concept for uncemented, primary total hip arthroplasty. Acta Orthop2010; 81: 126–133.
6.
TrainaFDe ClericoMBiondiF, et al. Sex differences in hip morphology: is stem modularity effective for total hip replacement?J Bone Joint Surg Am2009; 91(Suppl. 6):121–128.
7.
AsayamaIChamnongkichSSimpsonKJ, et al. Reconstructed hip joint position and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2005; 20: 414–420.
8.
GillIPWebbJSloanK, et al. Corrosion at the neck-stem junction as a cause of metal ion release and pseudotumour formation. J Bone Joint Surg Br2012; 94: 895–900.
9.
ChanaREspositoCCampbellPA, et al. Mixing and matching causing taper wear: corrosion associated with pseudotumour formation. J Bone Joint Surg Br2012; 94: 281–286.
10.
HsuARGrossCELevineBR.Pseudotumor from modular neck corrosion after ceramic-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ)2012; 41: 422–426.
11.
U.S. Food & Drug Administration. Class 2 Device recall Rejuvenate Modular Stems. FDA Recall number Z-2090-2012. 2012.
12.
GruppTMWeikTBloemerW, et al. Modular titanium alloy neck adapter failures in hip replacement–failure mode analysis and influence of implant material. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2010; 11: 3.
13.
MolloyDOMunirSJackCM, et al. Fretting and corrosion in modular-neck total hip arthroplasty femoral stems. J Bone Joint Surg Am2014; 96: 488–493.
14.
MencièreMLAmouyelTTaviauxJ, et al. Fracture of the cobalt-chromium modular femoral neck component in total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res2014; 100: 565–568.
15.
CooperHJUrbanRMWixsonRL, et al. Adverse local tissue reaction arising from corrosion at the femoral neck-body junction in a dual-taper stem with a cobalt-chromium modular neck. J Bone Joint Surg Am2013; 95: 865–872.
16.
GoftonWBeaulePE.Serum metal ions with a titanium modular neck total hip replacement system. J Arthroplasty2015; 30: 1781–1786.
17.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statementAnn Intern Med2009; 151: 264–269.
18.
DunbarMJ.The proximal modular neck in THA: a bridge too far: affirms. Orthopedics. 2010; 33: 640.
19.
WrightGSporerSUrbanR, et al. Fracture of a modular femoral neck after total hip arthroplasty: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am2010; 92: 1518–1521.
20.
SotereanosNGSauberTJTupisTT.Modular femoral neck fracture after primary total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2013; 28: 196.e7–e9.
21.
GravesSEde SteigerRDavidsonD, et al. The use of femoral stems with exchangeable necks in primary total hip arthroplasty increases the rate of revision. Bone Joint J2017; 99-B: 766–773.
22.
GoftonWTIllicalEMFeibelRJ, et al. A single-center experience with a titanium modular neck total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2017; 32: 2450–2456.
23.
DuweliusPJBurkhartBCarnahanC, et al. Modular versus nonmodular neck femoral implants in primary total hip arthroplasty: Which is better?Clin Orthop Relat Res2014; 472: 1240–1245.
24.
DuweliusPJHartzbandMABurkhartR, et al. Clinical results of a modular neck hip system: hitting the “bull’s-eye” more accurately. Am J Orthop2010; 39(Suppl.): 2–6.
25.
TrainaFDe FineMTassinariE, et al. Modular neck prostheses in DDH patients: 11-year results. J Orthop Sci2011; 16: 14–20.
26.
BenazzoFRossiSMCecconiD, et al. Mid-term results of an uncemented femoral stem with modular neck options. Hip Int2010; 20: 427–433.
27.
ColasSAllalouAPoichotteA, et al. Exchangeable femoral neck (dual-modular) THA prostheses have poorer survivorship than other designs: a nationwide cohort of 324,108 patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res2017; 475: 2046–2059.
28.
ToniAGiardinaFGuerraG, et al. 3rd generation alumina-on-alumina in modular hip prosthesis: 13 to 18 years follow-up results. Hip Int2017; 27: 8–13.
29.
CarothersJTArchibeckMJTripuraneniKR.Modular versus nonmodular femoral necks for primary total hip arthroplasty. Am J Orthop2015; 44: 411–414.
30.
PourAEBordenRMurayamaT, et al. High risk of failure with bimodular femoral components in THA. Clin Orthop Relat Res2016; 474: 146–153.
31.
OllivierMParratteSGallandA, et al. Titanium-titanium modular neck for primary THA. Result of a prospective series of 170 cemented THA with a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res2015; 101: 137–142.
32.
OllivierMParratteSGallandA, et al. Are titanium-on-titanium TiAl6V4 modular necks safe in total hip arthroplasty for non-overweight patients? Results of a prospective series at a minimum follow-up of 7 years. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol2015; 25: 1147–1152.
33.
SilvertonCDJacobsJJDevittJW, et al. Midterm results of a femoral stem with a modular neck design: clinical outcomes and metal ion analysis. J Arthroplasty2014; 29: 1768–1773.
34.
GerhardtDMJMBisselingPde VisserE, et al. Modular necks in primary hip arthroplasty without anatomical deformity: no clear benefit on restoration of hip geometry and dislocation rate. An exploratory study. J Arthroplasty2014; 29: 1553–1558.
35.
MeftahMHaleemAMBurnMB, et al. Early corrosion-related failure of the Rejuvenate modular total hip replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am2014; 96: 481–487.
36.
BernsteinDTMeftahMParanilamJ, et al. Eighty-six percent failure rate of a modular-neck femoral stem design at 3 to 5 years: lessons learned. J Bone Joint Surg Am2016; 98: e49.
37.
SakaiTOhzonoKNishiiT, et al. A modular femoral neck and head system works well in cementless total hip replacement for patients with developmental dysplasia of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg Br2010; 92: 770–776.
38.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ, et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Med2009; 6(7): e1000097.
39.
HarrisWH.Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am1969; 51: 737–755.
40.
HaysRDSherbourneCDMazelRM. The RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0. Health Econ1993; 2(3): 217–227.
41.
PatelPDPottsAFroimsonMI.The dislocating hip arthroplasty. Prevention and treatment. J Arthroplasty2007; 22(Suppl.): 86–90.
42.
BrooksPJ.Dislocation following total hip replacement: causes and cures. Bone Joint J2013; 95-B(Suppl. A): 67–69.
43.
AtwoodSAPattenEWBozicKJ, et al. Corrosion-induced fracture of a double-modular hip prosthesis: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am2010; 92: 1522–1525.
44.
EllmanMBLevineBR.Fracture of the modular femoral neck component in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2013; 28: 196.e1–5.
45.
SkendzelJGBlahaJDUrquhartAG.Total hip arthroplasty modular neck failure. J Arthroplasty2011; 26: 338.e1–4.
46.
WilsonDADunbarMJAmiraultJD, et al. Early failure of a modular femoral neck total hip arthroplasty component: a case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am2010; 92: 1514–1517.
47.
FokterSKMoličnikAKavalarR, et al. Why do some titanium-alloy total hip arthroplasty modular necks fail?J Mech Behav Biomed Mater2017; 69: 107–114.
48.
VicecontiMRuggeriOToniA, et al. Design-related fretting wear in modular neck hip prosthesis. J Biomed Mater Res1996; 30: 181–186.
49.
WernerSDBonoJVNandiS, et al. Adverse tissue reactions in modular exchangeable neck implants: a report of two cases. J Arthroplasty2013; 28: 543.e13–15.
50.
KouzelisAGeorgiouCSMegasP.Dissociation of modular total hip arthroplasty at the neck-stem interface without dislocation. J Orthop Traumatol2012; 13: 221–224.
51.
SporerSMDellaValleCJacobsJ, et al. A case of disassociation of a modular femoral neck trunion after total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty2006; 21: 918–921.
52.
HailerNP.Orthopedic registry research - limitations and future perspectives. Acta Orthop2015; 86: 1–2.
