Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary and main features of the included studies

From: Does size matter? Outcomes following revision total hip arthroplasty with long or primary stems: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author

Year

Study Level, Design

Number of patients/hips

Mean age (years)

rTHA stem size (long/short)

Paprosky femoral defect

Fixation of revised stem

Indication for revision

Mean follow-up (years)

Stem survival (long/short), %

Cameron [20]

2002

II, PC

211/320

68.5

211/109

I-IIIB

320 Cementless

29 GT non-union

18 malposition

16 PPFx

15 other

6 LLD

4 RD

2 stem fracture

7

75/88

Howie et al., [21]

2007

II, PC

211/219

72

137/82

I-IIIB

219 Cementless

163 AL

26 PPFx

7 RD

3 pain

3 stem fracture

6

94/91

(P = 0.45)

Li et al., [22]

2016

I, RCT

65/65

65.7

33/32

I-IIIB

65 Cementless

41 AL

12 subsidence

12 PPFx

5

92/86

(P > 0.05)

Petrie et al., [23]

2017

II, RC

99/102

67

32/70

I-IIIB

85 cemented

17 cementless

102 PJI

5.5

 > 90/ > 90

(P > 0.05)

Tetreault et al., [24]

2014

IV, RC

277/277

63

133/144

I-IIIA

277 Cementless

54 PJI

48 AL

8 RD

6 PPFx

2 stem fracture

5 other

4

N/R

Toni et al., [25]

1994

IV, RC

79/79

N/R

6/73

I-IIIB

25 cemented

54 cementless

79 AL

3

N/R

Tsai et al., [26]

2022

III, RC

96/96

61.6

72/24

I-II

24 cemented

72 cementless

96 AL

7

94/92

(P = 0.69)

Weiss et al., [27]

2011

IV, RC

1885/1885

74

1073/812

I-IIIB

1073 cemented

812 cementless

1139 AL

438 PPFx

19 PJI

27 RD

3.8

97/95

Willems et al., [28]

2022

II, PC

59/59

65.5

30/29

II

59 cementless

26 AL

21 PJI

6 malposition

3 wear

2 RD

3.5

87/97

  1. AL aseptic loosening, GT greater trochanter, LLD leg length discrepancy, N/R not reported, PC prospective cohort, PJI prosthetic joint infection, PPFx peri-prosthetic fracture, RC retrospective cohort, RCT randomised controlled trial, RD recurrent dislocation, rTHA revision total hip arthroplasty