|| Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid
Background: Numerous factors may give rise to the loss of femoral bone stock that can be encountered in revision hip arthroplasty. Proximal femoral replacement is an option for the treatment of severe proximal femoral bone loss. In this study, we sought to determine the outcome of reconstructive surgery with the use of a modular proximal femoral replacement (a so-called megaprosthesis) in patients with proximal femoral bone loss due to non-neoplastic conditions.Methods: A review of computerized databases from two institutions identified forty-eight patients with a mean age of 73.8 years who had undergone the placement of a modular megaprosthesis with or without bone-grafting. The indication for proximal femoral replacement was a periprosthetic fracture in twenty patients, reimplantation because of a deep infection in thirteen, a failed arthroplasty in thirteen, nonunion of an intertrochanteric fracture in one, and radiation-induced osteonecrosis with a subtrochanteric fracture in one. Three patients died before the minimum two-year follow-up interval had elapsed, and two additional patients were lost to follow-up. The mean duration of follow-up for the remaining study group of forty-three patients was 36.5 months.Results: At the time of follow-up, there was a significant improvement in function as measured with the Harris hip score (p < 0.05). The proximal femoral replacement achieved an excellent or good functional outcome in twenty-two of the forty-three hips. The functional outcome was found to be fair in ten hips and poor in the remaining eleven. Ten patients required a reoperation or revision because of at least one complication. With revision used as the end point, the survivorship of the implant was 87% at one year and 73% at five years.Conclusions: Patients with severely compromised bone stock in whom the use of a conventional prosthesis is precluded because of an inability to achieve adequate fixation may be candidates for proximal femoral replacement. Our short-term results suggest that this is a viable salvage procedure for these patients.Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.