Comparative Analysis of the Reconstruction of Individual Hip Anatomy Using 3 Different Cementless Stem Designs in Patients With Primary Hip Osteoarthritis.

Background: We questioned whether there was a radiographic difference in hip geometry reconstruction and implant fixation between 3 different cementless stem design concepts in patients with primary end-stage hip osteoarthritis.

Methods: We retrospectively evaluated the preoperative and postoperative radiographs by 2 independent and blinded reviewers in a series of 264 consecutive patients who had received either a straight double-tapered stem with 3 offset options (group A), a straight double-tapered stem with 2 shape options and modular necks (group B), and a bone-preserving curved tapered stem with 4 offset options (group C). The following parameters were assessed: acetabular, femoral and hip offset (HO), center of rotation height, leg length difference (LLD), and the endosteal fit of stem in the proximal femur (canal fill index).