<- Back to digest

JOA - 2026-04-30 - Journal Article

Outcomes of Metaphyseal versus Diaphyseal Stems in Conversion Total Hip Arthroplasty after Intramedullary Nailing.

Rainey JP, Vallabhaneni N, Levene S, Blackburn BE, Gililland JM, Archibeck MJ

retrospective cohortLOE IIIn = 8090-day complication endpoint only.

Topics

arthroplastytrauma
PMID: 42069009DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2026.04.102View on PubMed ->

Key Takeaway

Metaphyseal cementless and standard cemented stems achieved equivalent 90-day complication rates compared to diaphyseal-engaging stems in conversion THA after intramedullary nailing, with zero periprosthetic fractures across all 80 patients.

Summary Depth

Choose how much analysis to show on this article page.

Summary

This study asked whether metaphyseal cementless or standard cemented stems provide acceptable early fixation in conversion THA after prior IMN compared to the conventional diaphyseal-engaging stem. Eighty patients were retrospectively reviewed across three stem groups; metaphyseal patients were significantly younger (56 vs. 72–77 years) with lower comorbidity burden (CCI 1.5 vs. 2.2–4.0). No significant differences in reoperation, PJI, dislocation, or periprosthetic fracture were detected at 90 days, including in a 15-patient at-risk subgroup with stem tips within 4 cm of an interlock hole.

Key Limitation

The 90-day follow-up is insufficient to assess aseptic loosening, stress-shielding, or late periprosthetic fracture, which are the primary failure modes distinguishing stem fixation strategies in this population.

Original Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Diaphyseal-engaging stems are conventionally used in conversion total hip arthroplasty (cTHA) after prior intramedullary nailing (IMN) to bypass screw holes and previously instrumented metadiaphyses. However, it remains unclear if cementless metaphyseal or standard cemented stems can also provide satisfactory fixation in this scenario. This study compared the early outcomes of cTHA using three femoral stem designs: metaphyseal cementless, diaphyseal cementless, and standard cemented.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 80 patients who underwent cTHA after prior IMN at a single academic center from 2014 to 2024 was conducted. Patients received either a metaphyseal press-fit stem, a standard-length cemented stem, or a diaphyseal-engaging stem. The 90-day complications were recorded, including any reoperation, periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), periprosthetic femoral fracture, or dislocation. An "at-risk" subgroup analysis of stem tips that were within four centimeters proximal of the interlock hole was also conducted. Patients who received metaphyseal stems were younger (56 versus 77 versus 72 years, P < 0.001) and had lower Charlson Comorbidity Index (1.5 versus 4.0 versus 2.2, P = 0.019) scores compared to those who received cemented stems or diaphyseal stems.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in 90-day complication rates observed among the three stem groups (P = 0.10). Notably, no postoperative periprosthetic fractures occurred in any group (P = 1.000). There were no differences in reoperation (P = 0.232), PJI (P = 1.00), or dislocation (P = 0.61) rates between the three groups. The "at-risk" subgroup analysis of 15 patients demonstrated no significant differences among the three groups for any complication and, notably, had no postoperative periprosthetic fractures.

CONCLUSION

Metaphyseal-engaging stems and standard cemented stems in cTHA after IMN demonstrated similar outcomes to diaphyseal stems and may be reasonable options in cTHA after IMN in select patients.