Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Meta-analysis compares femoral stem designs in total hip arthroplasty, showing varied revision and complication risks.

Meta-analysis compares femoral stem designs in total hip arthroplasty, showing varied revision and c…
Photo by Navy Medicine / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Consider stem design trade-offs in THA: lower revision with non-anatomic stems but higher infection risks for some.

This systematic review and meta-analysis included 18 studies from 2015 to 2025, analyzing 51,375 femoral stems in patients undergoing primary total hip arthroplasty. It compared four stem designs—anatomic, single-taper, single-wedge, and taper wedge—using anatomic stems as the reference for relative risks. The primary outcome was revision risk, with secondary outcomes including periprosthetic joint infection risk, aseptic loosening rate, instability risk, and periprosthetic fracture incidence.

Main results showed anatomic stems had the highest revision rate at 3.9% (95% CI 3.6 to 4.2), with relative risks of 0.38 for single-taper, 0.31 for single-wedge, and 0.52 for taper wedge compared to anatomic (all P=0.0001). For periprosthetic joint infection, anatomic stems had a risk of 0.22% (95% CI 0.15 to 0.31), with higher risks for single-taper (RR 2.12, 95% CI 1.5-2.98, P=0.0002) and taper wedge (RR 2.52, 95% CI 1.27-5.01, P=0.004). Aseptic loosening was lower for single wedge (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.56-0.92, P=0.014) compared to anatomic's 0.65% (95% CI 0.52 to 0.79). Instability risk was 0.44% for anatomic, with lower risks for single-taper (RR 0.7, 95% CI 0.51-0.94, P=0.025) and single-wedge (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.09-0.25, P=0.0001). Periprosthetic fracture incidence was 1.4% for anatomic, with lower risks for single-taper (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.87, P=0.001) and single-wedge (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.16-0.27, P=0.0001).

Safety and tolerability data were not reported. Key limitations include not reported details on study design, follow-up, and potential biases, with funding and conflicts also not reported. Practice relevance is not specified, but this evidence is observational, so causation is not established, and relative risks are only for comparisons to anatomic stems, with no absolute rates reported for non-anatomic stems except the revision rate for anatomic.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedApr 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: Primary THA may be performed with femoral stems that differ in shape and geometry. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the revision and complication risks of the following stem designs: (1) anatomic; (2) single-wedge; (3) single-taper; and (4) taper wedge. METHODS: A comprehensive search of four electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL Plus, EMBASE, and SCOPUS) was performed for all articles pertaining to this topic from January 2015 to January 2025. A total of 18 studies were selected for inclusion. There were: (1) 12,969 anatomic; (2) 17,115 single-taper; (3) 19,326 single-wedge; and (4) 1,965 taper wedge stems. RESULTS: The revision rate was highest within the anatomic stem cohort (3.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6 to 4.2), with lower rates being found in single-taper (relative risk [RR], 0.38; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.43; P = 0.0001), single-wedge (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.35; P = 0.0001), and taper wedged stems (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.4 to 0.68; P = 0.0001). Periprosthetic joint infection risk was 0.22% (95% CI, 0.15 to 0.31) within anatomic stems and was higher in single-taper (RR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.5 to 2.98; P = 0.0002) and taper wedge cohorts (RR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.27 to 5.01; P = 0.004). Aseptic loosening rate with anatomic stems was 0.65% (95% CI, 0.52 to 0.79), and the single wedge was lower (RR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.92; P = 0.014). The risk of instability in anatomic stems was 0.44% (95% CI, 0.33 to 0.56) with a much lower rate in single-taper (RR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.94; P = 0.025) and single-wedge stems (RR, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.09 to 0.25; P = 0.0001). Periprosthetic fracture incidence in anatomic stems was 1.4% (95% CI, 1.2 to 1.6). The rates were much lower in single-taper (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.87; P = 0.001) and single-wedge cohorts (RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.27; P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Anatomic stems had a higher risk of revision, instability, and fracture. The risk of periprosthetic joint infection was highest in taper wedge stems. Future research should focus on comparative studies that further investigate any potential increased risk of certain complications following primary THA based on various construct designs. Revision risk was highest in the anatomic stem cohort.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.