The impact of retaining the femoral stem in revision total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and meta-regression

Introduction The management of well-fixed femoral stems in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA) remains a subject of debate, with concerns over potential complications arising from stem retention. This study aimed to investigate the re-revision rates due to aseptic loosening of the stem, overall re-revision rates, dislocation rates, and factors influencing these outcomes in rTHA with a retained well-fixed femoral stem. Materials and methods A systematic search was conducted across several databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL to identify pertinent publications from their inception through 2023. We specifically focused on studies that reported outcomes of rTHA with retained well-fixed femoral stems. The study designs incorporated in our research encompassed both cohort studies and case series studies. Thirty-five studies involving isolated acetabular revision and retaining the stem were included, representing a total of 3497 patients. Data extraction was tailored to the study questions. Meta-analyses, meta-regression, and subgroup analyses were conducted to evaluate the outcomes and their relationship with various factors. Pooled results, meta-regression, and subgroup analyses were performed using random-effects models. To assess and reduce bias, we employed Egger's test and the trim and fill method. Results The meta-analysis included 3497 patients with a mean follow-up of 9.28 years. The 10-year risk of re-revision after retaining femoral stem using highly cross-linked polyethylene was 1.7% (95% CI 1.1%–2.3%; I 2 : 60%) for stem aseptic loosening and 8.8% (95% CI 6.2%–11.4%; I 2 : 78%) overall re-revision. Dislocation risk was 5.7% (95% CI 4.1–7.0%; I 2 : 61%). Ceramic heads showed lower stem failure risk than metal heads in long-term follow-ups ( P < 0.001). The posterolateral approach in revision surgery resulted in better long-term outcomes compared to the direct lateral approach ( P < 0.001). Follow-up duration, timeline of study, Harris Hip Score, type of stem fixation, femoral head material, BMI, age, stem age, and surgical approach were evaluated as influential factors on these outcomes. Conclusion The re-revision rate due to aseptic loosening of the retained stem during rTHA was found to be significantly low, supporting the idea of retaining well-fixed stems during rTHA. The overall re-revision and dislocation rates also presented comparable or better outcomes to prior studies. A range of factors, including the use of highly cross-linked polyethylene and ceramic femoral heads, was found to influence these outcomes. Level of evidence IV. PROSPERO registration number CRD42022351157.