Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 17, 2025

Individualized Stem-positioning in Calcar-guided Short-stem Total Hip Arthroplasty
Published on: February 27, 2018
One-stage bilateral versus unilateral short-stem total hip arthroplasty: A matched-pair analysis of 216 hips
Yama Afghanyar1, Alexander Klug2, Philipp Rehbein1
1Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, St. Josefs Hospital Wiesbaden, Beethovenstr. 20, 65189, Wiesbaden, Germany.
Background:
One-stage, bilateral, short-stem total hip arthroplasty (1B-ssTHA) represents an alternative to staged, unilateral, short-stem total hip arthroplasty (U-ssTHA); however, the safety and reliability of 1B-ssTHA remain unknown. The objective of the present study was to compare the functional outcomes, complications, and mortality rates between 1B-ssTHA and U-ssTHA at mid-term.
Methods:
A retrospective, matched-pair study was performed, including 216 short stems implanted in 162 patients. Among the study population, 54 patients were treated with 1B-ssTHA. Patients were matched by gender, age, body mass index (BMI), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification. A total of 46 full matches could be accomplished. The mean follow-up time for the 1B-ssTHA group was 61.7 months (standard deviation [SD] 6.2 months), compared with was 63.4 months (SD 8.0 months) for the U-ssTHA group. Mortality, complication, and revision rates were documented. For clinical examinations, the visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to evaluate satisfaction, rest pain, and load pain, and the Harris Hip Score (HHS) was determined.
Results:
No surgery-related deaths were observed. At mid-term, none of the 1B-ssTHA patients required stem revision. The rate of complications for both groups was low. The mean drop in haemoglobin measured in the 1B-ssTHA group was 4.42 mg/dl, compared with 3.18 mg/dl in the U-ssTHA group. The mean HHS in the 1B-ssTHA group was 98.3 points (SD 2.80), whereas, in the U-ssTHA group, the mean HHS was 97.9 points (SD 3.44) (p = 0.478). Satisfaction rates were significantly higher in the 1B-ssTHA group (p = 0.04) than in the U-ssTHA group, whereas no significant differences were found for pain at rest and pain at load (p = 0.56 and p = 0.26, respectively).
Conclusion:
Our findings indicate that 1B-ssTHA is an effective and beneficial procedure for a select population. Mortality, complications, implant survival, and clinical outcomes were comparable to those for a matched group with unilateral osteoarthritis treated with U-ssTHA. However, an increase in blood loss must be acknowledged for the 1B-ssTHA procedure.
More Related Videos
09:51The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve
Published on: September 7, 2022
07:33In Vitro Application of a Wireless Sensor in Flexion-Extension Gap Balance of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty
Published on: May 5, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Sign Test for Matched Pairs
To conduct the sign test, we first calculate the differences in...
Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks Test for Matched Pairs