Triple taper polished cemented stem in total hip arthroplasty: Rationale for the design, surgical technique, and 7 years of clinical experience

The relationship between stem subsidence and improvement in the radiolucency in polished tapered stems

“…Wroblewski et al reported that the same improvement in radiolucency as in our study was seen in 20% of the cases using a polished triple tapered stem [17], and they reported that the cancellous bone takes on a more dense appearance, indicating proximal load transfer from the implant to the bone. We also found that improvement in radiolucency was more frequently seen on the medial side of the canal.…”

“…In polished-surface tapered stems, stem subsidence into cement without cement destruction or loosening is often reported [1,5,7,18]. In addition, Wroblewski et al have described that the cementbone interface of the femur in a polished tapered stem showed progressive improvement, with the cancellous bone taking on a more dense appearance, indicating proximal load transfer, in 20% of cases [17]. Improvement in the radiolucency is considered to be a good sign in contrast to stem loosening, and elucidation of this mechanism may lead to improved long-term survival of polished stems.…”

Periprosthetic bone mineral density with a cementless triple tapered stem is dependent on daily activity

“…Further, the third taper is designed to improve the loading of the proximal femoral neck, therefore maintaining bone quality and avoiding stress shielding. This improvement can be expected in younger, more active patients with good-quality bone and function [9]. Therefore, in this study, we analysed the BMD changes around the cementless triple tapered stem in 50 patients and evaluated the correlation between BMD changes and various clinical factors including daily activity.…”

Favourable mid-term results of the VerSys CT polished cemented femoral stem for total hip arthroplasty

“…The HSS hip score improved from an average of 16.7 points (range 12-32) preoperatively to 37.8 points (range [28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40] postoperatively at an average follow-up of 6.13 years (range 4-8.5) (P<0.0001) ( Table 1). The clinical results at the last follow-up in the 64 living patients was excellent in 61 patients, and good in three.…”