Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 28, 2025
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
Extended trochanteric osteotomy in revision hip arthroplasty: a case series study and systematic literature review
11st Floor, Orthopaedic department, UCLH, 250 Euston Road, London, NW1 2PG, England. DrKAHamad@gmail.com.
Background:
Extended trochanteric osteotomy (ETO) in revision hip arthroplasty provides direct access to the femoral medullary canal and facilitates removal of implants and re-implantation. This study looks at objective outcomes of ETO from a systematic review of the literature and a case series of revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) cases with ETOs from the authors' local institution.
Methods:
(1) The National Institutes of Health (NIH) national library of medicine was searched for studies related to ETO and the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) technique were followed. (2) Case series of 23 revision THAs with ETOs from University College London Hospital (UCLH) were retrospectively analyzed with a minimum of 2-year follow-up for radiological outcomes.
Results:
(1) The main revision THAs diagnoses were aseptic loosening (880/1,386; 63.4%), prosthetic joint infection (PJI) (301/1,386; 21.7%) and periprosthetic THA fractures (78/1,386; 5.6%). Other diagnoses, including non-specified reasons for THA revision in the chosen studies, accounted for 9.2% (127/1,386). The total mean was a union rate of 95.2%, an infection eradication rate of 91.6%, a femoral stem subsidence rate of 16.6%, with the rate of subsidence more than 5 mm being 10.7%. ETO proximal migration was reported in 7.8% of ETOs; however, it rarely required re-attachment (0.9%). Intraoperative fracture during revision THA with ETO was reported to be at a rate of 5%; while postoperative femoral fracture rate was at 7.8%. (2) All 24 cases had radiographic union at 3 to 6 months and there was no reported femoral stem subsidence.
Conclusion:
The overall outcome of this literature review provides moderate-quality evidence indicating that ETO provides safe outcome for revision THAs in single and 2-stage revision surgeries with low ETO non-union, femoral stem subsidence, greater trochanter (GT) proximal migration and fracture rates in the different diagnoses groups of revision THA at over 2-year follow up. In the case series group, there was radiographic union of all ETOs with no reported femoral stem subsidence or periprosthetic fractures.
