Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Reconsidering Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Functional Status Measures for Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: From Process Compliance to Meaningful Outcome Assessment.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2026
Same author

The American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons Position Statement on OrthoBiologics for Advanced Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2026
Same author

Alarmingly High Rates of Complications and Refracture Among Patients with Early Periprosthetic Femoral Fracture Within 30 Days After THA.

The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume·2026
Same author

The John Charnley Award: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Dual Mobility and Single Bearings for Patients at High Risk of Dislocation Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2026
Same author

Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty at the Ambulatory Surgery Center: A Single Institutional Experience.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2026
Same author

Trends in Reimbursement for One- versus Two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection.

The Journal of arthroplasty·2026

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 5, 2026

The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report
07:45

The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report

Published on: August 4, 2022

4.0K

Is There a Benefit to Modularity in 'Simpler' Femoral Revisions?

James I Huddleston1,2, Matthew W Tetreault3, Michael Yu4

  • 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University Medical School, Stanford, CA, USA. jhuddleston@stanford.edu.

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research
|August 7, 2015
PubMed
Summary

Modular femoral stems showed lower rerevision rates but higher intraoperative fractures compared to monoblock stems in hip revision surgery. Further research is needed to determine superiority, with modularity potentially best avoided in simpler cases.

More Related Videos

Orthopedic Robot-Assisted Femoral Neck System in the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fracture
05:42

Orthopedic Robot-Assisted Femoral Neck System in the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fracture

Published on: March 3, 2023

3.5K
The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve
09:51

The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve

Published on: September 7, 2022

3.8K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 5, 2026

The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report
07:45

The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report

Published on: August 4, 2022

4.0K
Orthopedic Robot-Assisted Femoral Neck System in the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fracture
05:42

Orthopedic Robot-Assisted Femoral Neck System in the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fracture

Published on: March 3, 2023

3.5K
The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve
09:51

The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve

Published on: September 7, 2022

3.8K

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic Surgery
  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Arthroplasty Research

Background:

  • Modular revision femoral components offer intraoperative adjustability for improved outcomes in hip arthroplasty.
  • However, their cost-effectiveness and distinct advantages over monoblock stems remain under investigation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare survivorship and complication rates of modular versus monoblock femoral components in Paprosky Type I to IIIA femoral defects.
  • Key complications assessed include intraoperative fracture, dislocation, and failure of osseointegration.

Main Methods:

  • A comparative study of 416 total hip arthroplasties (THAs) between 2004-2010, with 343 THAs (150 modular, 193 monoblock) meeting minimum 2-year follow-up.
  • Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis for aseptic revision was performed.
  • Complication rates (dislocation, intraoperative fracture, osseointegration failure) were compared between the two groups.

Main Results:

  • Rerevision rates were significantly lower in the modular group (7%) compared to the monoblock group (14%).
  • Modular stems demonstrated higher 9-year aseptic survivorship (91%) versus monoblock stems (86%).
  • Intraoperative fractures were more frequent with modular stems (11% vs. 5%), with no significant differences in dislocation or osseointegration failure.

Conclusions:

  • While modular stems had fewer rerevisions, they were associated with increased intraoperative fractures.
  • The study lacked power to assess modularity-specific concerns like corrosion or fatigue.
  • Further large-scale studies are required; modularity may be best reserved for complex cases.