Femoral Head-Preserving Porous Tantalum Implantation for Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty, Radiographic Progression, and Modes of Failure.
- 1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Medicover Hospital, Aleja Rzeczypospolitej 5, 02-972 Warsaw, Poland.
- 2Medical Rehabilitation Center, Sobieskiego 47D, 05-120 Legionowo, Poland.
Abstract
Background: Porous tantalum implantation is a head-preserving alternative to core decompression in osteonecrosis of the femoral head. Reporting has declined in North America and Europe while continuing elsewhere; outcomes are discordant. Prior syntheses are dated and treated the two endpoints as interchangeable. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched to September 2025. Eligible studies reported head-preserving implantation in ≥5 hips followed ≥12 months, retrieval analyses excepted. The two endpoints were co-primary and pooled separately by random-effects Freeman-Tukey models with Hartung-Knapp adjustment. Results: Twenty-two records (946 hips) contributed. Pooled conversion was 20.3% (95% CI 13.5-27.9; I2 = 78.8%; prediction interval 0.3-54.9). Eighteen records (729 hips) reported radiographic progression, pooled at 26.8% (95% CI 16.7-38.2), exceeding conversion within the cohort in twelve of sixteen records with matched denominators (p = 0.003). Surgical technique was the only moderator associated with either outcome: rod alone versus an adjunctive procedure gave 27.2% versus 13.9% for conversion (p = 0.028) and 37.4% versus 18.4% for progression (p = 0.041), surviving adjustment for region but not removal of the one internally controlled cohort or alternative classification of three records. Region, stage, implant generation and follow-up showed no association. It persisted within a single staging system. Retrieval analyses showed minimal ingrowth into necrotic bone. Conclusions: Roughly one hip in five proceeds to arthroplasty, and radiographic deterioration is more frequent. Dispersion may relate to whether a substrate for repair was supplied, not to geography or device, but that association is fragile and is offered as a hypothesis.
Related
- Total Hip Arthroplasty for Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head Following Allogeneic Haematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation, with Graft-Versus-Host Disease as a Candidate Effect Modifier: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
- Radiographic view strongly influences detection of humeral component migration after stemless shoulder arthroplasty
- Image-based robotic-assisted patellofemoral arthroplasty for isolated patellofemoral osteoarthritis: Short-term survivorship, clinical and radiographic outcomes
- Comparison of Fluoroscopy Use Between Two Radiographic Overlay Techniques for Limb Length and Femoral Offset Assessment During Direct Anterior Approach Total Hip Arthroplasty
- Agreement and Systematic Differences Between Intraoperative ROSA Hip-Knee-Ankle Measurements and Standing Radiographic Alignment After Robotic-Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Agreement Study
BibTeX
@article{pobozy2026femoral,
title = {{Femoral Head-Preserving Porous Tantalum Implantation for Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty, Radiographic Progression, and Modes of Failure.}},
author = {Tomasz Poboży and Wojciech Konarski},
journal = {Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.3390/medsci14060640},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42930559},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Femoral Head-Preserving Porous Tantalum Implantation for Osteonecrosis of the Femoral Head: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Conversion to Total Hip Arthroplasty, Radiographic Progression, and Modes of Failure.
AU - Tomasz Poboży
AU - Wojciech Konarski
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/05
JO - Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland)
DO - 10.3390/medsci14060640
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42930559
AB - Background: Porous tantalum implantation is a head-preserving alternative to core decompression in osteonecrosis of the femoral head. Reporting has declined in North America and Europe while continuing elsewhere; outcomes are discordant. Prior syntheses are dated and treated the two endpoints as interchangeable. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched to September 2025. Eligible studies reported head-preserving implantation in ≥5 hips followed ≥12 months, retrieval analyses excepted. The two endpoints were co-primary and pooled separately by random-effects Freeman-Tukey models with Hartung-Knapp adjustment. Results: Twenty-two records (946 hips) contributed. Pooled conversion was 20.3% (95% CI 13.5-27.9; I2 = 78.8%; prediction interval 0.3-54.9). Eighteen records (729 hips) reported radiographic progression, pooled at 26.8% (95% CI 16.7-38.2), exceeding conversion within the cohort in twelve of sixteen records with matched denominators (p = 0.003). Surgical technique was the only moderator associated with either outcome: rod alone versus an adjunctive procedure gave 27.2% versus 13.9% for conversion (p = 0.028) and 37.4% versus 18.4% for progression (p = 0.041), surviving adjustment for region but not removal of the one internally controlled cohort or alternative classification of three records. Region, stage, implant generation and follow-up showed no association. It persisted within a single staging system. Retrieval analyses showed minimal ingrowth into necrotic bone. Conclusions: Roughly one hip in five proceeds to arthroplasty, and radiographic deterioration is more frequent. Dispersion may relate to whether a substrate for repair was supplied, not to geography or device, but that association is fragile and is offered as a hypothesis.
SN - 2076-3271
ER -