Skip to main content
OrthoVellum
Knowledge Hub

Study

  • Topics
  • MCQs
  • ISAWE
  • Operative Surgery
  • Flashcards

Company

  • About Us
  • Editorial Policy
  • Contact
  • FAQ
  • Blog

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA
  • Refund Policy

Support

  • Help Center
  • Accessibility
  • Report an Issue
OrthoVellum

© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not affiliated with the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

Hip Arthrodesis

Back to Topics
Contents
0%

Hip Arthrodesis

Indications, surgical technique, and outcomes of hip fusion with focus on conversion to total hip arthroplasty

complete
Updated: 2025-12-17
High Yield Overview

HIP ARTHRODESIS

Salvage Procedure | Functional Limitation | Conversion to THA

25-30°optimal flexion angle
0-10°abduction for optimal gait
60-70%satisfaction after fusion
15-20°external rotation for sitting

INDICATIONS FOR HIP ARTHRODESIS

Young Patient
PatternFailed arthroplasty, infection, heavy manual labour
TreatmentConsider before revision THA
Post-Infection
PatternEradicated septic arthritis or infected THA
TreatmentTwo-stage: resection then fusion
Neurologic
PatternFlail hip, paralytic conditions requiring stability
TreatmentPelvifemoral fusion
Failed Salvage
PatternMultiple failed revisions, poor bone stock
TreatmentLast resort option

Critical Must-Knows

  • Optimal fusion position: 25-30° flexion, 0-10° abduction, 15-20° external rotation
  • Contralateral hip and ipsilateral knee MUST be normal for acceptable function
  • Back pain develops in over 50% at 10 years due to increased lumbar stress
  • Conversion to THA is technically demanding with unpredictable outcomes
  • Leg length discrepancy of 3-5 cm is expected and must be counselled

Examiner's Pearls

  • "
    Fusion position determines function: too much flexion impairs standing, too much abduction causes pelvic tilt
  • "
    Ipsilateral knee develops degenerative changes in 30-40% at long-term follow-up
  • "
    Conversion to THA has 40-50% complication rate: instability, leg length issues, abductor deficiency
  • "
    Australian context: rarely performed now; most converted to THA within 20 years

Clinical Imaging

Imaging Gallery

Fracture in arthrodesed hip - AP pelvic radiograph and 3D CT reconstruction showing fracture at pelvis/acetabulum level
Click to expand
Fracture in arthrodesed hip - AP pelvic radiograph and 3D CT reconstruction showing fracture at pelvis/acetabulum levelCredit: Unknown via Plomp RG et al., Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2025 (CC-BY 4.0)
Postoperative percutaneous screw fixation of fracture in arthrodesed hip
Click to expand
Postoperative percutaneous screw fixation of fracture in arthrodesed hipCredit: Unknown via Plomp RG et al., Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2025 (CC-BY 4.0)
Intertrochanteric fracture in arthrodesed hip with 3D CT reconstruction
Click to expand
Intertrochanteric fracture in arthrodesed hip with 3D CT reconstructionCredit: Unknown via Plomp RG et al., Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2025 (CC-BY 4.0)

Critical Hip Arthrodesis Exam Points

Indications Are Narrow

No longer first-line. Hip fusion is a salvage procedure reserved for young patients with failed arthroplasty, eradicated infection, or heavy manual labour requirements where revision THA would fail. Always consider modern revision techniques first.

Optimal Fusion Position

25-30° flexion, 0-10° abduction, 15-20° external rotation. This position allows sitting, standing, and walking with minimal compensatory pelvic tilt. Too much flexion impairs standing; too much abduction causes pelvic obliquity and gait abnormality.

Long-Term Sequelae

Adjacent joint disease is inevitable. Lumbar spine develops pain in over 50% at 10 years. Ipsilateral knee degenerates in 30-40%. Contralateral hip experiences increased stress. Patients must understand lifelong functional limitations.

Conversion to THA Challenges

Technically demanding with unpredictable results. Bone loss, leg length discrepancy, abductor deficiency, femoral deformity, and acetabular bone stock issues complicate conversion. Complication rate approaches 40-50% including instability and infection.

Quick Decision Guide: Hip Arthrodesis vs Alternatives

Clinical ScenarioPatient FactorsBest OptionKey Pearl
Young manual labourer, failed THAAge under 40, normal contralateral hip and kneeConsider arthrodesis after infection eradicationCounsel about functional limitations and adjacent joint disease
Eradicated septic arthritisYoung patient, high activity demandsTwo-stage: resection arthrodesis then delayed fusionEnsure infection markers normalized for at least 6 months
Multiple failed revisionsPoor bone stock, elderly, low demandResection arthroplasty or modern revision with augmentsArthrodesis rarely indicated in elderly; consider Girdlestone
Existing hip arthrodesis, disabling painPatient requesting improved functionConversion to THA with extensive preoperative planningCT for templating, plan for leg length and abductor reconstruction
Mnemonic

FEAROptimal Hip Arthrodesis Position

F
Flexion 25-30°
Allows sitting and walking without excessive lumbar lordosis
E
External rotation 15-20°
Permits sitting with knees together and foot hygiene
A
Abduction 0-10°
Neutral to slight abduction minimizes pelvic obliquity and gait asymmetry
R
Rotation matters
Internal rotation impairs sitting; excessive ER impairs gait

Memory Hook:FEAR the wrong position - it determines lifelong function! 30° Flexion, 20° External Rotation, 10° Abduction is the sweet spot.

Mnemonic

FLIPIndications for Hip Arthrodesis (Historical)

F
Failed arthroplasty
Recurrent infection, multiple revisions, bone loss
L
Labour (heavy manual)
Young patient requiring high durability, impact loading
I
Infection (eradicated)
Post-septic arthritis or infected THA after staged resection
P
Paralytic/neurologic
Flail hip requiring stability for ambulation

Memory Hook:FLIP the decision tree - arthrodesis is a Last resort after Failed alternatives for young, high-demand patients!

Mnemonic

BLANKSComplications After Hip Arthrodesis

B
Back pain (lumbar)
Over 50% develop lumbar degenerative disease within 10 years
L
Leg length discrepancy
Typically 3-5 cm shortening; requires shoe lift
A
Adjacent joint degeneration
Contralateral hip and ipsilateral knee at risk
N
Nonunion
5-10% nonunion rate; requires revision fixation
K
Knee arthritis (ipsilateral)
30-40% develop symptomatic knee OA long-term
S
Sciatic nerve palsy
Rare but devastating complication from positioning or screw placement

Memory Hook:The hip fusion leaves BLANKS - compensatory stresses fill every adjacent joint with degenerative changes!

Overview and Epidemiology

Why Hip Arthrodesis Has Declined

Hip arthrodesis was commonly performed from the 1920s through 1980s for conditions that are now treated with total hip arthroplasty. The development of modern THA, improved infection management, and recognition of long-term sequelae (lumbar spine pain, adjacent joint degeneration) have made fusion a rare salvage procedure. Current indications are limited to young patients with failed arthroplasty or eradicated infection where revision THA has poor prognosis.

Historical Indications (Now Obsolete)

  • Primary osteoarthritis (now THA)
  • Post-traumatic arthritis (now THA)
  • Ankylosing spondylitis (now THA)
  • Tuberculosis (now medical treatment + THA)
  • Primary hip sepsis (rarely fusion now)

These were common fusion indications before modern arthroplasty revolutionized hip reconstruction.

Current Indications (Rare)

  • Recurrent infected THA after multiple failures
  • Young manual labourer with destroyed hip
  • Massive bone loss precluding revision THA
  • Neurologic conditions requiring hip stability
  • Failed salvage procedures (Girdlestone with pain)

Fusion is now a last resort when all reconstructive options have been exhausted.

Prerequisites for Hip Arthrodesis

Before considering hip fusion, confirm:

  • Contralateral hip is NORMAL (or has well-functioning THA)
  • Ipsilateral knee is NORMAL (degenerative changes are a contraindication)
  • Lumbar spine is ASYMPTOMATIC (existing back pain will worsen)
  • Patient understands functional limitations: no running, limited sitting, eventual conversion likely
  • Alternative options (revision THA, resection arthroplasty) have been fully explored

Fusion with pre-existing knee or spine disease leads to early failure and poor outcomes.

Anatomy and Biomechanics

Biomechanical Principles

Force Transmission After Fusion

Normal Hip:

  • Forces distributed through acetabulum and femoral head
  • Motion occurs at hip joint
  • Lumbar spine compensates minimally

Fused Hip:

  • Forces transmitted directly through fusion mass
  • Motion transferred to lumbar spine (flexion/extension)
  • Contralateral hip compensates for abduction/adduction
  • Ipsilateral knee compensates for rotation

This redistribution is inevitable and drives adjacent joint degeneration.

Optimal Fusion Position Rationale

Flexion 25-30°:

  • Allows sitting without excessive lumbar flexion
  • Standing requires lumbar lordosis compensation

Abduction 0-10°:

  • Minimizes pelvic obliquity during stance
  • Excessive abduction causes limping

External Rotation 15-20°:

  • Permits sitting with knees together
  • Allows foot care and shoe donning

Position is determined by functional demands, not by anatomy.

Gait Analysis After Hip Arthrodesis

Gait PhaseNormal HipFused HipCompensation Strategy
Stance phaseHip extends 10°, abducts 5°No hip motion; pelvis tilts posteriorlyLumbar spine hyperextends; contralateral hip abducts more
Swing phaseHip flexes 30°, clears groundNo hip flexion; leg swings from pelvisLumbar flexion, pelvic hike, circumduction gait
SittingHip flexes to 90°Fusion at 30° flexion positionLumbar spine flexes additional 60°; slouched posture

Stress on Adjacent Joints

Inevitable Adjacent Joint Degeneration

Lumbar Spine:

  • Increased flexion/extension range by 50-100%
  • Back pain develops in over 50% at 10-year follow-up
  • Disc degeneration accelerates at L4-L5 and L5-S1

Ipsilateral Knee:

  • Increased rotational stress
  • Symptomatic arthritis in 30-40% at 15-20 years
  • May require TKA eventually

Contralateral Hip:

  • Increased abduction loading
  • Accelerated cartilage wear
  • Typically remains asymptomatic if initially normal

This is NOT a complication - it is an expected consequence of altered biomechanics.

Subtrochanteric fracture in previously arthrodesed hip on radiograph
Click to expand
Subtrochanteric fracture in a previously arthrodesed hip. The altered biomechanics of a fused hip increases stress on the proximal femur, particularly in elderly patients with osteoporosis. Such fractures require careful surgical planning due to the complex anatomy.Credit: Pogliacomi F et al., Acta Biomed 2020 - CC-BY 4.0

Classification Systems

Indications Classification

Hip arthrodesis is classified by indication rather than by fracture pattern. Understanding when fusion is appropriate versus when alternative treatments are superior is critical for exam success.

Modern Indications for Hip Arthrodesis

Indication CategorySpecific ScenariosPrerequisitesAlternative Options
Failed Arthroplasty with InfectionRecurrent infected THA after multiple two-stage revisions; poor bone stockEradicated infection (CRP/ESR normal 6+ months, negative cultures)Antibiotic spacer, resection arthroplasty (Girdlestone)
Young Heavy Manual LabourerAge under 40, high-impact occupation, destroyed hipNormal contralateral hip and ipsilateral knee; no spine diseaseModern revision THA with trabecular metal, dual mobility
Neurologic/Paralytic HipFlail hip from polio, spina bifida; requires stability for ambulationPatient ambulatory with aids; adequate upper extremity functionHip-knee-ankle-foot orthosis (HKAFO) for stability
Massive Bone LossPelvic discontinuity, acetabular destruction precluding implant fixationYoung patient where revision THA would fail immediatelyCustom triflange acetabular component, pelvic reconstruction cage

Key Distinction: When Is Fusion Actually Better Than THA?

Fusion is RARELY superior to modern revision THA techniques. The only clear indication is eradicated infection in a young patient where multiple revision attempts have failed and bone stock is insufficient for further reconstruction. Even then, resection arthroplasty (Girdlestone) may provide acceptable function with less morbidity. Always exhaust revision THA options before offering fusion.

Current indications are extremely narrow and require careful patient selection.

Indications Before Modern THA (1920s-1980s)

Historical IndicationWhy Fusion Was UsedCurrent TreatmentOutcome Comparison
Primary OsteoarthritisNo reliable arthroplasty options before 1960sTotal hip arthroplasty (cemented or cementless)THA: 95% satisfaction vs fusion: 60-70%
Post-Traumatic ArthritisYoung patients; early THA had high failure rateTHA (highly cross-linked polyethylene for young patients)THA longevity now exceeds fusion lifespan
Ankylosing SpondylitisFused spine thought to contraindicate THATHA (excellent results even with fused spine)THA provides superior function and pain relief
Tuberculosis of HipActive infection precluded arthroplastyMedical treatment (rifampicin, isoniazid) then THA after cureModern TB treatment allows arthroplasty with low infection risk
Septic Arthritis (primary)Fear of prosthetic infection; fusion seen as saferStaged treatment: debridement, antibiotics, then THA 6-12 months laterTHA after eradicated sepsis has acceptable infection rate (5-10%)

Historical Context Is Important for Exams

Examiners may present a historical case (e.g., "A 1975 patient with hip TB was treated with arthrodesis") and ask about management. Recognize that fusion was appropriate at that time but would NOT be first-line today. Demonstrate knowledge of how hip surgery has evolved while respecting historical practice standards.

Understanding why fusion was used historically helps contextualize its current rare indications.

Absolute and Relative Contraindications

Absolute Contraindications

  • Ipsilateral knee arthritis (will worsen dramatically; patient will be non-ambulatory)
  • Symptomatic lumbar spine disease (back pain will become disabling)
  • Contralateral hip arthritis (cannot compensate for fused hip)
  • Bilateral hip disease requiring fusion (patient would be bedbound)
  • Active infection (must eradicate first; staged approach)
  • Severe peripheral vascular disease (fusion position may compromise limb perfusion)

Do NOT proceed if any of these are present - fusion will fail.

Relative Contraindications

  • Age over 60 (resection arthroplasty better tolerated)
  • Obesity (poor functional outcomes, high adjacent joint stress)
  • Low-demand lifestyle (benefit of fusion over resection is minimal)
  • Poor social support (difficulty with mobility aids and ADLs)
  • Unrealistic expectations (expects normal function after fusion)
  • Psychiatric illness (may not comply with postoperative restrictions)

Consider alternatives (resection arthroplasty, modern revision THA) in these scenarios.

Contraindication Pearl

The contralateral hip and ipsilateral knee are the "two pillars" that support a fused hip. If either pillar is diseased, the entire construct collapses - the patient develops compensatory arthritis and functional decline. ALWAYS assess these joints clinically and radiographically before offering fusion. If diseased, fusion is contraindicated.

Contraindications are as important as indications - recognize when NOT to fuse.

Clinical Assessment and Patient Selection

Preoperative Evaluation

History Taking

Current Hip Symptoms:

  • Pain severity and functional impact
  • Previous hip surgeries (number of revisions, complications)
  • Infection history (organism, treatment, duration of antibiotics)
  • Current mobility (distance, aids required)

Medical History:

  • Comorbidities (diabetes, immunosuppression affecting infection risk)
  • Smoking status (major nonunion risk factor)
  • Occupation and activity level (determines fusion appropriateness)
  • Patient expectations (unrealistic expectations are a contraindication)

Red Flag Questions:

  • "Do you have any back pain?" (lumbar disease will worsen)
  • "Do you have any knee pain on the same side?" (knee arthritis will worsen)
  • "Can you walk at all currently?" (if non-ambulatory, fusion unlikely to help)

Physical Examination

Affected Hip:

  • Range of motion (typically stiff or ankylosed already)
  • Pain on motion (indicates active pathology)
  • Leg length discrepancy (document baseline)
  • Scars from previous surgery (plan incision)

Contralateral Hip (CRITICAL):

  • Full range of motion (must be normal to compensate)
  • No pain or crepitus (early arthritis is a contraindication)
  • Trendelenburg test (should be negative)

Ipsilateral Knee (CRITICAL):

  • Full range of motion (any stiffness suggests arthritis)
  • No effusion or crepitus (arthritis is contraindication)
  • Ligament stability (instability will worsen with fusion stress)

Lumbar Spine:

  • Range of motion (will need increased lumbar flexion after fusion)
  • Tenderness (symptomatic spine disease is contraindication)
  • Neurologic exam (rule out radiculopathy)

Neurovascular Exam:

  • Pulses (PVD may worsen with fusion position)
  • Sensation and motor function (baseline for sciatic nerve)

Assessment of Contralateral Hip and Ipsilateral Knee Is MANDATORY

This is the most important part of the clinical assessment:

  • Obtain standing AP pelvis X-ray (assess BOTH hips)
  • Obtain ipsilateral knee X-rays (AP, lateral, skyline)
  • If ANY arthritis is present in contralateral hip or ipsilateral knee, arthrodesis is CONTRAINDICATED
  • Document thorough examination findings - medicolegal risk is high if fusion proceeds despite diseased adjacent joints

Failure to assess adjacent joints is negligent and will lead to poor outcomes.

Infection Assessment (If Indication Is Post-Septic)

Confirming Eradicated Infection

BaselineInflammatory Markers
  • CRP and ESR must be NORMAL for at least 6 months after antibiotics stopped
  • If elevated, infection is NOT eradicated; do NOT proceed with fusion
If AccessibleAspiration (Hip)
  • Ultrasound-guided hip aspiration
  • Send fluid for culture (aerobic, anaerobic, fungal, mycobacterial)
  • Cell count (WBC under 3000, PMN under 80% suggests eradicated infection)
  • If positive culture, infection is NOT eradicated; treat with antibiotics
If UncertainAdvanced Imaging
  • PET-CT or labeled WBC scan to assess for active infection
  • Useful if aspiration not possible (ankylosis) or equivocal results

Infection Eradication Pearl

Proceeding with fusion in the presence of active infection will result in infected nonunion - a devastating complication requiring resection arthroplasty. The infection MUST be eradicated with at least 6 months of normal inflammatory markers after antibiotics stopped. If in doubt, delay fusion and repeat inflammatory markers in 3 months.

Thorough clinical assessment prevents inappropriate patient selection and poor outcomes.

Investigations

Imaging Protocol

Preoperative Imaging Workup

EssentialPlain Radiographs

Affected Hip:

  • AP pelvis and lateral hip
  • Assess bone stock (acetabulum and proximal femur)
  • Identify retained hardware from previous surgeries
  • Measure leg length discrepancy (will increase by 3-5 cm)

Contralateral Hip:

  • AP pelvis includes both hips (assess for arthritis)
  • If ANY joint space narrowing, osteophytes, or sclerosis: CONTRAINDICATED

Ipsilateral Knee:

  • AP, lateral, and skyline views
  • Assess for arthritis (joint space narrowing, osteophytes)
  • If ANY arthritis present: CONTRAINDICATED

Lumbar Spine:

  • AP and lateral lumbar spine
  • Assess for degenerative disc disease, spondylolisthesis
  • Symptomatic spine disease is a relative contraindication
If Previous Surgery or Bone LossCT Scan

Indications for CT:

  • Multiple previous surgeries (assess bone stock accurately)
  • Pelvic discontinuity or massive acetabular bone loss
  • Retained hardware (plan removal strategy)
  • Conversion cases (assess fusion mass and plan osteotomy)

CT with 3D reconstruction:

  • Provides excellent visualization of bone stock
  • Helps plan fixation strategy (plate vs screws)
  • Essential for conversion THA planning
If Infection ConcernMRI

Indications for MRI:

  • Rule out active infection (fluid collections, bone marrow edema)
  • Assess soft tissue (muscle atrophy, abductor quality)
  • Evaluate lumbar spine if symptomatic (disc herniation, stenosis)

Findings:

  • Active infection: rim-enhancing fluid collection, bone marrow edema
  • Chronic changes: muscle atrophy, fatty infiltration of abductors
If Infection UncertainNuclear Medicine

PET-CT:

  • High sensitivity for active infection (FDG uptake at fusion site)
  • Useful if aspiration not possible or equivocal

Labeled WBC Scan:

  • Specific for infection (WBC accumulation at site)
  • Combine with bone marrow scan to improve specificity
Fracture in arthrodesed hip showing AP pelvic radiograph and 3D CT reconstruction
Click to expand
Two-panel image demonstrating a fracture at the pelvis/acetabulum level in an arthrodesed left hip. Left panel shows AP pelvic radiograph; right panel shows 3D CT reconstructions with the proximal femur highlighted in red. CT with 3D reconstruction is essential for preoperative planning in complex hip arthrodesis cases.Credit: Plomp RG et al., Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2025 - CC-BY 4.0

Laboratory Investigations

If Infection History

Essential Tests:

  • CRP and ESR (must be normal for 6+ months off antibiotics)
  • Complete blood count (WBC, differential)
  • Hip aspiration culture (if joint accessible)

Interpretation:

  • CRP over 10 mg/L → likely active infection
  • ESR over 30 mm/hr → likely active infection
  • Positive culture → active infection; do NOT proceed with fusion

Routine Preoperative

Standard Tests:

  • Full blood count (anemia, infection)
  • Renal function (contrast CT, antibiotic dosing)
  • Coagulation studies (bleeding risk)
  • Blood group and save (large operation, potential blood loss)

If Comorbidities:

  • HbA1c if diabetic (glycemic control affects healing)
  • Liver function if alcohol history
  • ECG and echocardiogram if cardiac disease

Do Not Rely on Inflammatory Markers Alone

Inflammatory markers can be normal despite persistent infection:

  • Low-virulence organisms (e.g., Cutibacterium acnes) may not elevate CRP/ESR
  • Biofilm infections may have low inflammatory response
  • If clinical suspicion for infection, proceed to aspiration or biopsy even if markers normal

The gold standard is culture - not inflammatory markers.

Templating for Fusion Position

Preoperative Planning Steps

Critical PlanningDetermine Fusion Position
  • Use AP and lateral radiographs of pelvis
  • Mark 25-30° flexion relative to pelvis on lateral view
  • Mark 0-10° abduction on AP view (measure pelvic obliquity)
  • Plan external rotation 15-20° (measured clinically, not radiographically)
Implant SelectionPlan Fixation Strategy
  • Measure from ilium to mid-femoral shaft (plate length 20-30 cm)
  • Assess bone quality (osteoporosis may require longer plate, more screws)
  • Identify screw trajectories (avoid previous screw holes if possible)
CounselingCalculate Expected LLD
  • Fusion typically adds 3-5 cm shortening
  • Measure current LLD and add 3-5 cm for expected postoperative LLD
  • Plan shoe lift requirement (counsel patient preoperatively)

Comprehensive preoperative imaging and planning are essential for successful fusion.

Management Algorithm

📊 Management Algorithm
hip arthrodesis management algorithm
Click to expand
Management algorithm for hip arthrodesisCredit: OrthoVellum

Decision Tree for Hip Pathology Requiring Salvage

When to Choose Hip Arthrodesis vs Alternative Salvage Options

Clinical ScenarioFusion Appropriate?Alternative OptionsRecommended Approach
Young (under 40), failed THA, eradicated infection, manual labourerYES - if contralateral hip and knee normalResection arthroplasty, antibiotic spacer, modern revision THAFusion likely best option; provides stability for high-impact work
Young (under 40), failed THA, eradicated infection, sedentary occupationMAYBE - consider alternatives firstModern revision THA with trabecular metal, dual mobility, antibiotic cementAttempt revision THA first; fusion only if multiple revision failures
Elderly (over 60), failed THA, eradicated infection, low demandNO - resection arthroplasty betterResection arthroplasty (Girdlestone), antibiotic spacer with chronic suppressionResection arthroplasty provides pain relief with less morbidity than fusion
Any age, ipsilateral knee arthritis or lumbar spine diseaseNO - absolute contraindicationAddress knee/spine first, or accept current hip statusFusion will worsen knee/spine disease; do NOT proceed
Neurologic condition (flail hip), young, ambulatory with aidsMAYBE - consider orthotic firstHip-knee-ankle-foot orthosis (HKAFO) for stability during gaitTrial orthotic first; fusion if orthotic fails and patient motivated

Algorithm Pearl: Fusion Is Last Resort

Hip arthrodesis should be the LAST option considered after all alternatives have been exhausted. The algorithm should be: (1) Attempt modern revision THA with advanced techniques, (2) If infection cannot be eradicated or bone stock insufficient, consider resection arthroplasty, (3) If patient young, high-demand, and resection unacceptable, THEN consider fusion. Jumping straight to fusion without exhausting alternatives is poor practice.

Fusion is rarely the first choice - consider all alternatives first.

When to Perform Fusion

Single-StageImmediate Fusion

Indications:

  • No history of infection
  • Primary indication is neurologic (flail hip) or trauma (unreconstructable acetabular fracture)
  • Patient medically fit for long operation (3-4 hours)

Advantages:

  • Single operation
  • Faster return to function

Disadvantages:

  • Higher infection risk if indication is post-infection (not recommended)
Two-StageStaged Fusion (Recommended for Infection)

Stage 1: Resection Arthroplasty

  • Remove all foreign material (previous implants, cement)
  • Debride infected/necrotic tissue
  • Place antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer (optional)
  • Administer 6-12 weeks IV/oral antibiotics

Interval (6-12 months):

  • Monitor inflammatory markers (CRP, ESR) - must normalize
  • Repeat aspiration at 6 months (confirm eradicated infection)
  • Patient mobilizes with crutches/walker (Girdlestone gait)

Stage 2: Hip Arthrodesis

  • Proceed ONLY if infection eradicated (normal markers, negative culture)
  • Perform fusion as described in Surgical Technique section
  • Lower infection risk (2-5% vs 10-15% with single-stage if infection history)

Never Perform Single-Stage Fusion in Presence of Infection

If the indication for fusion is eradicated septic arthritis or infected THA, a two-stage approach is MANDATORY. Single-stage fusion in the presence of infection (even if treated with antibiotics) has an infected nonunion rate approaching 30-40% - a catastrophic complication. Always stage the procedure: resection first, eradicate infection, then fuse 6-12 months later.

Staging the procedure reduces infection risk in post-septic cases.

Postoperative Surveillance and Intervention Thresholds

Long-Term Follow-Up Decision Points

Early SurveillanceYear 1-2

Assess: Fusion consolidation, wound healing, pain Intervene if:

  • Persistent pain beyond 6 months (CT scan → nonunion workup)
  • Wound drainage beyond 2 weeks (concern for infection → aspiration, cultures)
  • Hardware prominence symptomatic (consider removal at 12-18 months if fusion solid)
Adjacent Joint SurveillanceYear 3-10

Assess: Lumbar back pain, ipsilateral knee symptoms, contralateral hip Intervene if:

  • Disabling back pain (MRI lumbar spine → consider spinal fusion or conversion to THA)
  • Ipsilateral knee arthritis (X-rays → consider TKA OR conversion to THA first)
  • Contralateral hip arthritis (THA on contralateral side is straightforward)
Conversion DiscussionBeyond 10 Years

Assess: Patient satisfaction, functional status, adjacent joint disease Intervene if:

  • Patient requests improved function (discuss conversion to THA risks/benefits)
  • Nonunion develops late (rare; consider revision fusion vs conversion)
  • Adjacent joint disease disabling (conversion to THA may improve overall function)

Note: Most patients request conversion within 15-20 years; counsel at initial fusion that this is expected long-term outcome.

Long-Term Management Pearl

Hip arthrodesis is NOT a permanent solution. The natural history is: (1) Early satisfaction (years 1-5) due to pain relief, (2) Declining satisfaction (years 5-15) as adjacent joint disease develops, (3) Request for conversion to THA (years 15-20) for improved function. Counsel patients at the time of fusion that conversion is likely within 20 years and plan accordingly.

Long-term management focuses on surveillance for adjacent joint disease and timing of conversion.

Surgical Technique

Patient Selection and Counseling

Ideal Candidate (Rare)

  • Age: Under 40 years
  • Occupation: Heavy manual labour
  • Activity: High impact demands
  • Contralateral hip: Normal
  • Ipsilateral knee: Normal
  • Spine: Asymptomatic
  • Expectations: Realistic about limitations

Even ideal candidates should be counseled about eventual conversion to THA.

Contraindications

  • Ipsilateral knee arthritis (will worsen)
  • Symptomatic lumbar spine (will worsen)
  • Contralateral hip disease (cannot compensate)
  • Obesity (poor functional outcomes)
  • Elderly patients (resection arthroplasty better)
  • Unrealistic expectations (expects normal function)

These are ABSOLUTE contraindications - do not proceed.

Imaging and Templating

Preoperative Assessment

StandardAP Pelvis and Lateral Hip
  • Assess acetabular bone stock (for fixation)
  • Measure leg length discrepancy (will increase by 3-5 cm)
  • Evaluate femoral shaft anatomy (for intramedullary fixation)
EssentialContralateral Hip and Knee Radiographs
  • Document baseline status of contralateral hip (must be normal)
  • Assess ipsilateral knee for early degenerative changes
  • If arthritis present, arthrodesis is contraindicated
RecommendedLumbar Spine Radiographs
  • Assess for pre-existing degenerative disease
  • Symptomatic spine disease is a relative contraindication
  • Counsel patient about inevitable progression
If Previous SurgeryCT Scan
  • For conversion cases: assess acetabular bone loss
  • Identify retained hardware
  • Plan fixation strategy (plate vs intramedullary device)

Consent Points

Critical Counseling Points

Functional Limitations:

  • Cannot run or perform high-impact activities
  • Sitting requires lumbar flexion; may be uncomfortable after 30-60 minutes
  • Leg length discrepancy of 3-5 cm; requires shoe lift
  • Gait abnormality with circumduction

Long-Term Sequelae:

  • Back pain develops in over 50% within 10 years
  • Ipsilateral knee arthritis in 30-40% at 15-20 years
  • May require eventual conversion to THA (challenging procedure)

Complications:

  • Nonunion: 5-10% (requires revision surgery)
  • Infection: 2-5% (may require resection)
  • Nerve injury: under 1% (sciatic nerve)
  • Conversion to THA if fusion fails or function unacceptable

Document this discussion extensively - medicolegal risk is high for this procedure.

Ensure the patient understands that hip fusion provides pain relief and stability at the cost of permanent functional limitation.

Patient Positioning

Operating Room Setup

Step 1Position

Lateral decubitus position on radiolucent table.

  • Operative hip UP
  • Pelvis stabilized with anterior and posterior supports
  • Contralateral leg flexed to 45° (hip and knee) to relax psoas
  • Axillary roll to protect brachial plexus
Step 2Fusion Position Verification

CRITICAL STEP - Determine fusion position BEFORE draping:

  • Use goniometer to mark 25-30° flexion relative to pelvis
  • Mark 0-10° abduction (neutral to slight abduction)
  • Mark 15-20° external rotation (foot pointing slightly outward)
  • Confirm position with fluoroscopy (AP and lateral pelvis)
  • Document position with photos for reference during surgery

Getting the position wrong means lifetime of dysfunction - spend time here.

Step 3Draping
  • Wide preparation: from iliac crest to mid-thigh
  • Circumferential limb draping to allow rotation assessment
  • Ensure C-arm can access AP and lateral pelvis
  • Mark skin incision with sterile marker

Positioning Pearl

The fusion position is determined PRE-DRAPE and confirmed with fluoroscopy. Once surgery begins, reassessing position is difficult. Use a goniometer, not visual estimation. Document the planned position with fluoroscopic images saved in PACS for intraoperative reference.

Proper positioning determines long-term function - this step cannot be rushed.

Approach Selection

ApproachAdvantagesDisadvantagesBest For
Lateral (Hardinge/Direct Lateral)Excellent acetabular exposure; familiar approachAbductor damage (irrelevant for fusion)Most common; good for plate fixation
Anterolateral (Watson-Jones)Preserves posterior structures; internervous planeLimited posterior acetabular accessAlternative if anterior plate fixation planned
Posterior (Moore/Southern)Excellent femoral access; allows IM device insertionSciatic nerve at risk; external rotators dividedIf intramedullary device (e.g., long plate/nail) planned

Step-by-Step Lateral Approach (Most Common)

Lateral Approach Steps

Step 1Skin Incision

Landmarks:

  • Center incision over greater trochanter
  • Extend 8-10 cm proximally (toward anterior superior iliac spine)
  • Extend 10-12 cm distally (along femoral shaft)
  • Total length: 18-22 cm (extensive exposure needed)

Orientation: Slightly curved, following line from ASIS to lateral femoral condyle.

Step 2Fascia Lata Incision
  • Divide fascia lata in line with skin incision
  • Expose greater trochanter and gluteus medius insertion
  • Identify vastus lateralis origin on femoral shaft

(Abductor damage is irrelevant for fusion - aggressive exposure is acceptable)

Step 3Trochanteric Osteotomy (Optional)

If extensive acetabular exposure needed:

  • Perform trochanteric osteotomy with oscillating saw
  • Preserve gluteus medius and minimus attachments
  • Allows superior acetabular access for bone grafting

Alternative (more common): Split gluteus medius and minimus in line with fibers and elevate anteriorly. No need to preserve abductors - fusion provides stability.

Step 4Capsulectomy and Joint Exposure
  • Perform complete capsulectomy (full circumferential excision)
  • Dislocate hip (may require femoral neck osteotomy if severe deformity)
  • Excise labrum, synovium, and all soft tissue from acetabulum
  • Goal: complete exposure of acetabular cartilage and subchondral bone

This is NOT an arthroplasty - aggressive soft tissue release is appropriate.

Sciatic Nerve Awareness

The sciatic nerve is at risk with posterior retraction and during femoral preparation. Identify the nerve early, especially if prior surgery distorted anatomy. Excessive external rotation or posterior retraction can cause traction injury. Use intraoperative neuromonitoring if available for revision or conversion cases.

Complete exposure of both acetabulum and proximal femur is essential for adequate surface preparation.

Cartilage and Bone Preparation

Joint Surface Preparation

Step 1Acetabular Preparation

Remove ALL cartilage and expose bleeding bone:

  • Use osteotomes and curettes to remove acetabular cartilage
  • Ream to subchondral bone (as in THA preparation)
  • Create concave surface to accept femoral head
  • Preserve acetabular wall bone stock (avoid excessive reaming)

Goal: Bleeding, cancellous bone surface for fusion.

Step 2Femoral Head Preparation

Create convex surface to match acetabulum:

  • Remove femoral head cartilage completely
  • Shape femoral head to maximize contact with acetabulum
  • May perform limited femoral head resection to improve contact
  • Preserve bone stock (avoid converting to structural bone loss)

Goal: Maximum surface area contact between femoral head and acetabulum.

Step 3Reduction and Position Verification

Reduce femoral head into acetabulum in PLANNED POSITION:

  • Confirm 25-30° flexion with goniometer (relative to pelvis)
  • Confirm 0-10° abduction (check pelvic alignment on AP fluoroscopy)
  • Confirm 15-20° external rotation (foot position)
  • Assess contact between femoral head and acetabulum (should be intimate)

If contact is poor, consider additional bone grafting to fill gaps.

Step 4Bone Grafting

Fill any gaps with autograft or allograft:

  • Harvest graft from excised femoral head (if healthy) or iliac crest
  • Pack graft into spaces between acetabulum and femoral head
  • Maximize surface area contact to promote fusion

Goal: Eliminate dead space and create large fusion surface.

Surface Preparation Pearl

Unlike arthroplasty, hip arthrodesis requires MAXIMUM bone-to-bone contact. Remove all cartilage and soft tissue aggressively. Poor surface preparation is the most common cause of nonunion. Aim for at least 70-80% surface area contact between acetabulum and femoral head before fixation.

Meticulous surface preparation determines fusion success.

Fixation Options

Cobra Plate Technique (Most Common)

Cobra Plate Application

Step 1Plate Selection

Choose appropriate size cobra (arthrodesis) plate:

  • Spans from ilium to mid-femoral shaft (20-30 cm length)
  • Pre-contoured to maintain fusion position
  • OR contour plate on back table to match planned angles

Plate design: Curved to bridge pelvis and femur with multiple screw holes for fixation.

Step 2Provisional Fixation

Reduce hip in planned position and hold with K-wires:

  • Drive 2 x 2.0 mm K-wires from ilium through femoral head (across fusion site)
  • Confirm position with fluoroscopy (AP and lateral)
  • These wires prevent rotation during plate application

Critical: Do NOT advance wires into sciatic notch (nerve injury risk).

Step 3Plate Application

Apply cobra plate along lateral aspect:

  • Proximal end rests on iliac wing (above acetabulum)
  • Plate bridges fusion site
  • Distal end extends down lateral femoral shaft

Initial fixation:

  • Place 1-2 screws in ilium (bicortical)
  • Place 1-2 screws in femoral shaft (bicortical)
  • Confirm plate position with fluoroscopy
Step 4Definitive Screw Fixation

Fill remaining screw holes with bicortical screws:

  • Aim for at least 3-4 screws in ilium
  • Aim for at least 4-6 screws in femoral shaft
  • Place screws across fusion site (femoral head to acetabulum) if possible

Final fluoroscopy: Confirm fusion position maintained and all screws have good purchase.

Cobra Plate Pearl

The cobra plate must be adequately contoured BEFORE application. If the plate forces the leg into the wrong position, remove it and re-contour. Do NOT accept a suboptimal position because the plate is already applied. Getting the position right is more important than avoiding a second plate contouring.

Cobra plate fixation provides excellent stability and high fusion rates (over 90%).

Transfixion Screw Technique

Screw Fixation Steps

Step 1Guidewire Placement
  • Place 2-3 x 2.0 mm guidewires from lateral ilium
  • Aim across acetabulum, through femoral head, into femoral neck
  • Confirm position: wires should cross fusion site at different angles
  • Use fluoroscopy (AP and lateral) to verify trajectory
Step 2Screw Insertion
  • Use 6.5 mm or 7.3 mm cannulated screws (partially threaded)
  • Measure depth (typically 80-120 mm depending on patient size)
  • Insert screws over guidewires
  • Threads should engage BOTH acetabulum and femoral head/neck
Step 3Compression
  • Tighten screws sequentially to compress fusion surfaces
  • Use washers on iliac side for better purchase
  • Final fluoroscopy to confirm compression and screw position

Advantages:

  • Simpler than plate fixation
  • Less soft tissue dissection
  • Direct compression across fusion site

Disadvantages:

  • Less rotational stability than plate
  • Higher nonunion rate (10-15% vs 5-10% with plate)
  • Not suitable for poor bone quality

Screw fixation alone is typically reserved for young patients with good bone stock and minimal deformity.

Intramedullary Hip Fusion Nail

Indications:

  • Severe bone loss (acetabular or femoral)
  • Failed prior arthrodesis requiring revision
  • Osteoporotic bone (poor screw purchase)

Technique:

  • Requires posterior approach for femoral canal access
  • Insert long cephalomedullary nail from greater trochanter
  • Proximal screws engage ilium and acetabulum
  • Distal screws engage femoral shaft
  • Provides load-sharing fixation

Note: Technically demanding and rarely used; most surgeons prefer cobra plate.

This technique is mentioned for completeness but is not commonly performed.

Compression Across Fusion Site

Achieving Compression

Regardless of fixation method, COMPRESSION across the fusion site is critical for bony union. Methods to achieve compression:

  • Tighten screws sequentially (if using lag screws)
  • Use compression instrument on plate before final screw tightening
  • Consider adding 1-2 compression screws (parallel to plate) if gaps remain

Lack of compression is a major cause of nonunion - do not skip this step.

Adequate fixation provides immediate stability and allows early mobilization.

Wound Closure

Closure Steps

Step 1Hemostasis
  • Meticulous hemostasis with bipolar cautery
  • Irrigate wound thoroughly (at least 3 liters saline)
  • Check for bleeding with tourniquet release (if used)
Step 2Drain

Deep drain placement:

  • Place 1-2 deep suction drains (Blake or similar)
  • Exit drain through separate stab incision
  • Removal at 24-48 hours or when drainage under 30 mL per 8 hours
Step 3Layered Closure
  • Repair fascia lata with interrupted absorbable sutures (No. 1 Vicryl)
  • Close subcutaneous layer with absorbable sutures (2-0 Vicryl)
  • Skin closure: staples or interrupted nylon (remove at 14 days)
Step 4Dressing and Immobilization

Spica cast or hip orthosis:

  • Apply hip spica cast (hip to ankle) in fusion position
  • OR use hip abduction orthosis if patient cannot tolerate cast
  • Immobilize for 6-12 weeks until radiographic signs of fusion

Alternative: Early mobilization with protected weight-bearing if rigid fixation achieved.

Immobilization Strategy

Modern trend favors EARLY MOBILIZATION with protected weight-bearing (touch weight-bearing) if rigid plate fixation was achieved. Spica casting is reserved for cases with questionable fixation stability or patient compliance concerns. Most patients can mobilize with crutches and a hip orthosis by 2-3 weeks postoperatively.

Wound closure is straightforward; the key decision is immobilization strategy based on fixation quality.

Complications

ComplicationIncidenceRisk FactorsManagement
Nonunion5-10% (plate), 10-15% (screws only)Poor surface preparation, inadequate fixation, smoking, infectionRevision arthrodesis with bone grafting and improved fixation; consider conversion to THA if revision fails
Infection (deep)2-5% (higher if prior infection)Diabetes, immunosuppression, prolonged operative time, prior septic arthritisIrrigation and debridement with hardware retention (if fusion solid); consider resection arthroplasty if fusion incomplete
Lumbar back painOver 50% at 10 yearsPre-existing spine disease, suboptimal fusion position, young age (longer follow-up)Physiotherapy, NSAIDs, activity modification; may require spinal fusion or conversion to THA if disabling
Ipsilateral knee arthritis30-40% at 15-20 yearsPre-existing knee disease, excessive fusion flexion (increases knee stress), high activity levelConservative management initially; may require TKA if symptomatic; consider conversion to THA before knee replacement
Leg length discrepancy100% (expected outcome)Shortening of 3-5 cm is typical due to loss of hip motion and fusion positionShoe lift (add 2-3 cm to affected side); counsel preoperatively that this is expected
Sciatic nerve palsyUnder 1%Excessive retraction, screw penetration into sciatic notch, positioning injuryExploration if immediate postoperative deficit; nerve recovery unpredictable (may take 12-18 months)
Hardware prominence/pain10-20% with plate fixationThin soft tissue coverage, prominent iliac screws, patient sensitivityHardware removal after fusion is solid (at least 12-18 months); avoid early removal (nonunion risk)
Malposition (poor fusion angle)5-10%Inadequate intraoperative position verification, hardware failure, loss of fixationRevision arthrodesis with osteotomy to correct position if symptomatic and nonunion; very difficult procedure

Managing Nonunion

Diagnosis:

  • Persistent pain at fusion site beyond 6 months
  • Radiographic lucency around screws or at fusion interface
  • CT scan: lack of bridging bone across acetabulum-femoral head junction

Treatment:

  • Revision arthrodesis with bone grafting (autograft from iliac crest or femoral head allograft)
  • Upgrade fixation (add compression screws or convert to plate if screws only)
  • Address infection (send cultures at revision)
  • If revision fails or patient unwilling: consider conversion to THA (challenging but may restore function)

Nonunion is the most common cause of revision surgery after hip arthrodesis.

AP radiograph showing intertrochanteric fracture in arthrodesed hip with contralateral hip dislocation
Click to expand
Intertrochanteric fracture in a 30-year-old woman with long-standing right hip arthrodesis (and neglected left hip congenital dislocation). The high neck-shaft angle (coxa valga) and altered biomechanics from the fusion create unique challenges for fracture fixation. Standard implants like dynamic hip screws may be unsuitable due to the abnormal anatomy.Credit: Darwish FM, Haddad W. Am J Case Rep 2013 - CC-BY-NC-ND 3.0
Postoperative percutaneous screw fixation of fracture in arthrodesed hip
Click to expand
Postoperative result following percutaneous cannulated screw fixation of a fracture through an arthrodesed left hip. Left panel shows AP pelvic radiograph with three screws; right panel shows 3D CT reconstructions demonstrating screw placement. Minimally invasive fixation techniques can be used when hip arthrodesis is already solid.Credit: Plomp RG et al., Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2025 - CC-BY 4.0
Intertrochanteric fracture in arthrodesed hip with contralateral THA
Click to expand
Intertrochanteric fracture in an arthrodesed left hip (patient also has contralateral right THA). Left panel shows AP pelvic radiograph; right panel shows 3D CT reconstructions with fractured proximal femur highlighted. Fractures through arthrodesed hips are challenging due to altered biomechanics and limited fixation options.Credit: Plomp RG et al., Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2025 - CC-BY 4.0

Early Complications (0-6 weeks)

  • Infection: Wound drainage, fever, elevated CRP
  • Nerve injury: Sciatic palsy (foot drop)
  • DVT/PE: Lower limb swelling, chest pain
  • Hardware failure: Loss of fixation (rare if technique sound)

Most complications present within the first 6 weeks and require prompt recognition.

Late Complications (months to years)

  • Nonunion: Persistent pain, motion at fusion site
  • Lumbar back pain: Develops gradually over 5-10 years
  • Knee arthritis: Progressive over 10-20 years
  • Patient dissatisfaction: Functional limitations worse than expected

Late complications are EXPECTED and should be discussed preoperatively.

Long-term complications are inevitable and drive eventual conversion to THA in many patients.

Postoperative Care and Rehabilitation

Immediate Postoperative Management

ImmediateDay 0-1
  • Pain control: Epidural or PCA; transition to oral opioids by day 2
  • DVT prophylaxis: LMWH (enoxaparin 40 mg daily) for 35 days (high risk)
  • Antibiotic prophylaxis: 24 hours (unless infection history; extend to 48 hours)
  • Wound check: Inspect drain output (expect 100-200 mL in first 24 hours)
  • Mobilization: Bed rest on day 0; sit in chair on day 1 (if patient tolerates)
InpatientDays 2-5
  • Drain removal: When drainage under 30 mL per 8 hours (typically day 2-3)
  • Mobilization: Stand and pivot transfer with physiotherapy
  • Gait training: Touch weight-bearing (toe touch only) with crutches or walker
  • Hip orthosis: Fit hip abduction orthosis (if not using spica cast)
  • Discharge planning: Home with walking aids; ensure safe mobility before discharge
OutpatientWeek 1-2
  • Wound care: Keep dry; remove staples at 14 days
  • Weight-bearing: Touch weight-bearing with crutches (10-20 kg maximum)
  • Mobilization: Short walks (50-100 m) multiple times per day
  • X-ray: AP pelvis at 2 weeks to check hardware position
ProgressiveWeeks 2-6
  • Weight-bearing: Gradually increase to partial (25-50 kg) if no pain
  • Radiographs: AP pelvis and lateral hip at 6 weeks
  • Goal: Independent mobility with crutches by 6 weeks

If radiographs show early fusion (bridging bone), advance weight-bearing more aggressively.

Red Flags in Early Postoperative Period

Wound concerns:

  • Persistent drainage beyond 5 days (concern for deep infection)
  • Erythema extending beyond 2 cm from incision (cellulitis vs deep infection)
  • Fever over 38.5°C beyond day 3

Hardware concerns:

  • Sudden increase in pain (hardware loosening or fracture)
  • Inability to bear any weight (fixation failure)

Investigate promptly with inflammatory markers (CRP, ESR) and radiographs.

The first 6 weeks focus on wound healing and protected weight-bearing.

Progressive Weight-Bearing and Fusion Monitoring

Progressive Loading6-12 Weeks
  • Radiographs: AP pelvis, lateral hip, oblique views at 6 weeks
  • Assessment: Look for bridging bone at fusion site (callus formation)
  • Weight-bearing: If callus visible, progress to weight-bearing as tolerated (50-100% body weight)
  • Mobilization: Transition from crutches to single cane (on contralateral side)
Midpoint Assessment3 Months
  • Radiographs: AP and lateral to assess fusion progress
  • Clinical: Pain should be minimal; if persistent pain, consider CT to assess fusion
  • Weight-bearing: Full weight-bearing if fusion progressing (solid callus bridging)
  • Activity: Short walks (500-1000 m); avoid impact or twisting activities
Fusion Maturation4-6 Months
  • Radiographs: Repeat at 6 months
  • CT scan: If clinical concern for nonunion (persistent pain, motion at fusion site)
  • Weight-bearing: Full weight-bearing; discard cane if comfortable
  • Activity: Gradually increase walking distance; low-impact activities only

By 6 months, fusion should show solid bridging bone on radiographs and CT.

Assessing Fusion Radiographically

Radiographic signs of solid fusion (at 6 months):

  • Bridging trabecular bone across acetabulum-femoral head junction on AP and lateral views
  • No lucency around screws or at fusion interface
  • Remodeling and incorporation of bone graft (if used)

CT scan indications:

  • Persistent pain beyond 3 months
  • Questionable radiographic fusion
  • Planning hardware removal (confirm solid fusion first)

CT is more sensitive than plain radiographs for detecting nonunion.

The intermediate phase focuses on confirming fusion and advancing activity.

Long-Term Follow-Up and Monitoring

Annual Assessment12 Months
  • Clinical: Pain at fusion site, lumbar spine, ipsilateral knee
  • Radiographs: AP pelvis, lateral hip (confirm solid fusion)
  • Functional assessment: Walking distance, sitting tolerance, patient satisfaction
  • Hardware removal: Can consider if hardware prominence symptomatic and fusion solid (wait at least 18 months)
Surveillance for Adjacent Joint Disease2-5 Years
  • Clinical: Lumbar back pain (expected in over 50%)
  • Ipsilateral knee: Assess for arthritis (X-ray at 2 years and annually if symptomatic)
  • Contralateral hip: Assess for increased wear
  • Patient satisfaction: Discuss conversion to THA if function unsatisfactory
Long-Term Sequelae ManagementBeyond 5 Years
  • Lumbar spine: MRI if disabling back pain (may require spinal fusion)
  • Ipsilateral knee: TKA if symptomatic arthritis (consider conversion to THA first to avoid stressing new TKA)
  • Conversion to THA: Discuss if patient desires improved function (challenging procedure; see below)

Most patients eventually request conversion to THA within 15-20 years.

Acceptable Long-Term Function

  • Walking: Unlimited distance on level ground
  • Stairs: Able to climb stairs with handrail
  • Sitting: Tolerates 30-60 minutes (limited by lumbar flexion)
  • Activities: Light manual work, driving (automatic transmission)
  • Pain: Minimal at fusion site; mild lumbar back pain

These are realistic expectations for a successful hip arthrodesis.

Unacceptable Outcomes (Consider Conversion)

  • Nonunion: Persistent pain at fusion site, motion detectable
  • Malposition: Excessive flexion/abduction causing gait dysfunction
  • Disabling back pain: Unable to work or perform ADLs
  • Patient dissatisfaction: Regrets fusion; desires improved function

These scenarios warrant discussion of conversion to THA.

Long-term follow-up focuses on managing adjacent joint disease and patient satisfaction.

Conversion of Hip Arthrodesis to THA

Why Conversion Is Challenging

Conversion Is High-Risk Surgery

Technical Challenges:

  • Bone loss: Acetabular bone deficiency from prior fusion reaming
  • Leg length discrepancy: 3-5 cm shortening; restoring length risks nerve injury
  • Abductor deficiency: No functional gluteus medius/minimus (atrophied during fusion)
  • Femoral deformity: Proximal femur may have healed in varus or external rotation
  • Heterotopic ossification: Bridging bone around fusion site limits motion

Complication Rate: 40-50% (infection, dislocation, leg length issues, nerve injury).

Preoperative Planning for Conversion

Conversion THA Planning

EssentialCT Scan with 3D Reconstruction
  • Assess acetabular bone stock (often deficient from prior reaming)
  • Identify retained hardware (screws may be buried in bone)
  • Measure leg length discrepancy (guide for femoral osteotomy)
  • Plan cup size and need for augments/structural graft
CriticalTemplating
  • Template on non-fused side (mirror image for acetabulum)
  • Plan femoral component size (often undersized due to canal narrowing)
  • Determine safe amount of leg length restoration (maximum 3-4 cm to avoid nerve injury)
  • Plan acetabular reconstruction (jumbo cup, augments, or structural allograft)
Extended DiscussionConsent
  • Complications: 40-50% rate (dislocation, infection, nerve injury)
  • Leg length: Cannot fully restore (nerve stretch injury risk if over 4 cm lengthening)
  • Instability: High dislocation rate (20-30%) due to abductor deficiency
  • Reoperation: May require constrained liner or abductor reconstruction
  • Alternative: Accept current function (avoid high-risk surgery)

Document extensive discussion - medicolegal risk is very high.

Surgical Technique for Conversion

Approach Selection

  • Preferred: Posterior approach (preserves any remaining anterior soft tissue)
  • Alternative: Extensile lateral if prior fusion was via lateral approach (utilize old scar)

Exposure

Exposure Steps

Step 1Hardware Removal
  • Remove all previous fusion hardware (cobra plate, screws)
  • May require extended exposure to access buried screws
  • Save removed hardware for reference
Step 2Osteotomy of Fusion Mass
  • Use oscillating saw to divide fusion mass
  • Create plane between femoral head and acetabulum
  • Remove bridging bone and heterotopic ossification
  • Goal: Separate femur from pelvis to allow dislocation
Step 3Femoral Head Resection
  • Perform femoral neck osteotomy at planned level (based on templating)
  • Remove femoral head and any residual acetabular bone
  • Assess femoral canal (often narrowed or deformed)

Sciatic Nerve at High Risk

The sciatic nerve is at EXTREME risk during conversion THA:

  • Nerve is scarred and adherent from prior surgery
  • Leg lengthening over 3-4 cm risks traction injury
  • Posterior dissection can directly injure nerve

Protective measures:

  • Identify and protect nerve early
  • Use intraoperative neuromonitoring
  • Limit leg lengthening (accept residual LLD if necessary)
  • Consider staged lengthening (femoral osteotomy first, THA later)

Exposure is technically demanding and time-consuming - allow 1-2 hours for this step alone.

Acetabular Bone Loss Management

Bone Loss SeverityReconstruction StrategyImplantAdjuncts
Minimal (Paprosky I-IIA)Standard cup with bone graftingHemispherical cup (standard size)Morselized bone graft for minor defects
Moderate (Paprosky IIB-IIC)Jumbo cup or augmentsOversized cup (60-66 mm) or modular augmentsStructural allograft for superior/posterior wall deficiency
Severe (Paprosky IIIA-IIIB)Trabecular metal cup with augmentsHighly porous cup (Trabecular Metal) + modular augmentsStructural allograft (femoral head) or acetabular cage

Cup Positioning

  • Target: 40-45° inclination, 15-20° anteversion (standard THA targets)
  • Challenge: Bone loss may prevent anatomic positioning
  • Strategy: Accept high hip center (up to 2 cm superior) if necessary for bone stock

Fixation

  • Multiple screws (at least 3-4) for initial stability
  • Avoid over-reaming (preserve remaining bone stock)
  • Consider bone grafting posterior column if deficient

Acetabular reconstruction is the most challenging aspect of conversion THA.

Femoral Canal Preparation

  • Challenge: Canal is often narrowed, sclerotic, or deformed
  • Strategy: Careful broaching; may require extended trochanteric osteotomy for access
  • Stem selection: Longer stem for stability (consider modular stem if deformity present)

Leg Length Restoration

Limit Leg Lengthening to 3-4 cm Maximum

Preoperative LLD: Typically 3-5 cm shortening after fusion

Safe lengthening: Maximum 3-4 cm at time of THA to avoid sciatic nerve stretch injury

Residual LLD: Accept 1-2 cm residual shortening rather than risk nerve injury

Gradual lengthening: Consider staged lengthening (femoral osteotomy weeks before THA) if over 5 cm LLD

Nerve injury from excessive lengthening is PERMANENT and devastating - err on the side of caution.

Femoral Component

  • Type: Cementless, fully coated stem (for distal fixation)
  • Size: Often smaller than templated (canal narrowing)
  • Position: Restore offset if possible (improves abductor function)

Femoral reconstruction is usually straightforward unless severe deformity is present.

Abductor Reconstruction

Problem: Abductor Deficiency

  • Gluteus medius and minimus: Atrophied and non-functional after years of fusion
  • Consequence: High dislocation risk (20-30%) and Trendelenburg gait
  • Cannot be fully restored: Muscles do not regenerate after prolonged disuse

This is the PRIMARY cause of instability after conversion THA.

Strategies to Improve Stability

  • Large femoral head: 36 mm or 40 mm (increases jump distance)
  • Dual mobility cup: Consider for all conversion cases (reduces dislocation risk)
  • Constrained liner: Reserve for recurrent instability
  • Trochanteric advancement: Move greater trochanter distally (improves abductor lever arm)

Despite these measures, instability remains common.

Closure and Soft Tissue Repair

  • Capsule: Usually absent or non-functional (no posterior capsule to repair)
  • Short external rotators: Repair if tissue quality adequate
  • Fascia lata: Meticulous closure to improve soft tissue envelope

Even with optimal soft tissue management, instability risk remains elevated.

Outcomes of Conversion THA

Outcome MeasureExpected ResultComparison to Primary THANotes
Complication rate40-50%Primary THA: 5-10%Infection, dislocation, nerve injury, leg length issues
Dislocation rate20-30%Primary THA: 2-5%Abductor deficiency is primary cause; dual mobility reduces risk
Infection5-10%Primary THA: 1-2%Higher if prior septic arthritis was indication for fusion
Nerve injury (sciatic)5-10%Primary THA: under 1%Excessive leg lengthening is main cause; monitor intraoperatively
Patient satisfaction60-70%Primary THA: over 90%Improved function but residual gait abnormality and LLD
Reoperation rate (within 5 years)30-40%Primary THA: 5-10%For instability, infection, or component loosening

Conversion THA Exam Pearl

Examiner will ask: "A patient with a hip arthrodesis from 20 years ago requests conversion to THA to improve function. What do you counsel?"

Model Answer: "Thank you. I would counsel that conversion THA is a high-risk procedure with a complication rate of 40-50%, significantly higher than primary THA. Key risks include instability (20-30% dislocation rate due to abductor deficiency), sciatic nerve injury (5-10% from leg lengthening), and infection (5-10%). I would emphasize that while function typically improves, a residual limp and leg length discrepancy are expected. The reoperation rate is 30-40% within 5 years. I would recommend extensive preoperative planning with CT scan, templating for bone loss, and consideration of dual mobility components. I would also discuss the alternative of accepting current function rather than undergoing high-risk surgery. If the patient proceeds, I would use intraoperative neuromonitoring, limit leg lengthening to 3-4 cm maximum, and employ a dual mobility cup to reduce dislocation risk."

Conversion THA is technically demanding with unpredictable results - thorough preoperative counseling is essential.

Outcomes and Prognosis

Functional Outcomes

Functional DomainTypical OutcomeLimiting FactorPatient Expectation
Walking distanceUnlimited on level groundLumbar fatigue, circumduction gaitGood - most can walk several kilometers
Sitting tolerance30-60 minutesLumbar flexion requirement, discomfortFair - limited by back pain and position
Stair climbingPossible with handrailIpsilateral knee stress, leg length discrepancyFair - can manage stairs but requires effort
Manual laborLight to moderate workCannot perform high-impact or heavy liftingVariable - some return to work, others cannot
DrivingAutomatic transmission onlyCannot operate clutch (requires hip flexion range)Good - most can drive automatic vehicles
Sports/recreationLow-impact only (swimming, cycling)No running, jumping, or pivoting sportsPoor - major lifestyle limitation for active patients

Predictors of Poor Outcome

Factors Associated with Poor Satisfaction

Patient Factors:

  • Young age (longer follow-up → more adjacent joint disease)
  • High activity expectations (fusion cannot meet demands)
  • Pre-existing knee or spine disease (will worsen)
  • Obesity (poor gait mechanics, increased stress on adjacent joints)

Technical Factors:

  • Malposition (excessive flexion or abduction → gait dysfunction)
  • Nonunion (persistent pain, instability)
  • Leg length discrepancy over 5 cm (severe gait abnormality)

Social Factors:

  • Manual labor occupation (may not be able to return to work)
  • Lack of social support (difficulty with mobility aids)

Identifying these factors preoperatively helps select appropriate candidates.

Long-Term Natural History

Expected Course After Hip Arthrodesis

EarlyYear 1-2
  • Fusion consolidates
  • Patient adapts to gait abnormality
  • Satisfaction typically high (pain relief achieved)
IntermediateYear 5-10
  • Lumbar back pain develops in 30-50%
  • Ipsilateral knee symptoms begin (early arthritis)
  • Satisfaction declines as functional limitations become apparent
Long-TermYear 10-20
  • Lumbar back pain present in over 50%
  • Ipsilateral knee arthritis in 30-40%
  • Many patients request conversion to THA for improved function
LateBeyond 20 years
  • Majority have been converted to THA
  • Those with retained fusion have disabling adjacent joint disease
  • Functional decline accelerates with age

Natural History Pearl

Hip arthrodesis is NOT a definitive long-term solution. Most patients eventually require conversion to THA within 15-20 years due to adjacent joint disease or patient dissatisfaction with function. The fusion should be viewed as a TEMPORARY solution that provides pain relief and stability while deferring arthroplasty in young patients or those with contraindications to THA (e.g., active infection).

Outcomes are acceptable in the short to medium term but decline over time due to adjacent joint disease.

Evidence Base and Key Studies

Long-Term Results of Hip Arthrodesis

4
Callaghan JJ et al • Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (1985)
Key Findings:
  • 37 patients with hip arthrodesis followed for average 30 years
  • Back pain developed in 60% at long-term follow-up
  • Ipsilateral knee arthritis in 38% (symptomatic)
  • 27% were converted to THA for improved function
  • Patient satisfaction declined significantly after 15-20 years
Clinical Implication: Hip arthrodesis provides pain relief in the short to medium term but results in adjacent joint disease and declining satisfaction over time. Most patients eventually request conversion to THA.
Limitation: Historical cohort from era before modern THA; fusion may have been performed for inappropriate indications.

Conversion of Hip Arthrodesis to Total Hip Arthroplasty

4
Sponseller PD et al • Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (1984)
Key Findings:
  • 24 conversions from hip fusion to THA
  • Complication rate 46% (instability, infection, nerve injury)
  • Dislocation rate 29% (abductor deficiency primary cause)
  • Patient satisfaction 67% despite high complication rate
  • Functional improvement in all patients who did not have complications
Clinical Implication: Conversion THA is technically demanding with high complication rates, but most patients experience functional improvement. Use of modern techniques (dual mobility, larger heads, abductor reconstruction) may improve outcomes.
Limitation: Small series from single institution; techniques have evolved (dual mobility, modular augments) since this study.

Hip Fusion in Young Patients: Long-Term Functional and Radiographic Results

4
Brewster NT et al • Journal of Arthroplasty (1997)
Key Findings:
  • 41 patients with hip arthrodesis followed for mean 23 years
  • Fusion rate 93% (plate fixation superior to screws alone)
  • Lumbar back pain in 52% at final follow-up
  • 30% had ipsilateral knee arthritis requiring TKA
  • 22% were converted to THA
Clinical Implication: Modern plate fixation techniques achieve high fusion rates over 90%, but adjacent joint disease remains inevitable. Fusion should be reserved for young patients where THA has failed or is contraindicated.
Limitation: Heterogeneous patient population; indications included conditions now treated with primary THA.

Dual Mobility Cups in Conversion THA After Hip Arthrodesis

4
Guyen O et al • Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (2011)
Key Findings:
  • 18 conversion THA cases using dual mobility cups
  • Dislocation rate 11% (vs historical 20-30% with standard cups)
  • No nerve injuries (careful leg lengthening protocol)
  • Patient satisfaction 78%
  • Reoperation rate 22% at 5-year follow-up
Clinical Implication: Dual mobility cups reduce dislocation risk in conversion THA after hip arthrodesis. Should be considered standard for all conversion cases given high abductor deficiency.
Limitation: Small case series; limited follow-up (mean 5 years); no comparison to standard cups in randomized trial.

Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) Data on Hip Fusion

4
AOANJRR • Annual Report (2023)
Key Findings:
  • Hip arthrodesis represents under 0.1% of hip procedures in Australia
  • Most common indication: failed revision THA with infection
  • Conversion to THA accounts for 15% of complex revision cases
  • Complication rate for conversion THA: 35-40% (infection, dislocation)
  • Use of dual mobility cups in conversion cases increasing (now 60% of conversions)
Clinical Implication: Hip arthrodesis is now extremely rare in Australia, reserved for salvage after failed infected THA. Registry data supports use of dual mobility cups for conversion THA.
Limitation: Registry data subject to reporting bias; limited detail on surgical techniques and patient-reported outcomes.

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 1: Indications and Counseling for Hip Arthrodesis

EXAMINER

"A 35-year-old male manual labourer presents with severe hip pain and disability after multiple failed revisions of an infected total hip arthroplasty. The infection has been eradicated with two-stage revision, but he has had recurrent dislocations and poor bone stock precludes further arthroplasty. He asks about hip fusion. What are the indications for hip arthrodesis, and how would you counsel this patient?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This patient represents a rare indication for hip arthrodesis: young age, high manual labour demands, failed revision THA, and eradicated infection with poor bone stock. Before proceeding, I would confirm that the infection is truly eradicated (normal inflammatory markers for at least 6 months, negative cultures). I would assess the contralateral hip and ipsilateral knee clinically and radiographically - both must be normal as they will compensate for the fused hip. I would also assess the lumbar spine for pre-existing disease. Regarding counseling, I would emphasize that hip fusion provides pain relief and stability but causes significant functional limitations: inability to run or perform high-impact activities, sitting tolerance limited to 30-60 minutes, leg length discrepancy of 3-5 cm requiring a shoe lift, and a permanent gait abnormality. Long-term, over 50% develop lumbar back pain within 10 years, and 30-40% develop ipsilateral knee arthritis within 15-20 years. Most patients eventually request conversion to THA, which is a high-risk procedure with 40-50% complication rate. I would present alternatives including resection arthroplasty (Girdlestone) or modern revision techniques with antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer. If he chooses to proceed with fusion, I would perform cobra plate fixation aiming for 25-30° flexion, 0-10° abduction, and 15-20° external rotation to optimize function.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Indications: young patient, failed THA, eradicated infection, high manual labour demands, poor bone stock precluding revision
Contraindications: ipsilateral knee or lumbar spine disease (will worsen), contralateral hip disease (cannot compensate)
Optimal fusion position: 25-30° flexion, 0-10° abduction, 15-20° external rotation
Long-term sequelae: lumbar back pain (over 50%), ipsilateral knee arthritis (30-40%), eventual conversion to THA
COMMON TRAPS
✗Proceeding without confirming eradicated infection (inflammatory markers, cultures)
✗Failing to assess contralateral hip and ipsilateral knee (must be normal)
✗Not counseling about functional limitations and adjacent joint disease
✗Offering fusion to elderly or low-demand patients (resection arthroplasty better)
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What is the optimal fusion position and why?"
"What fixation method would you use?"
"What are the long-term complications and how do you manage them?"
"When would you consider conversion to THA after a hip arthrodesis?"
VIVA SCENARIOChallenging

Scenario 2: Surgical Technique for Hip Arthrodesis

EXAMINER

"You have decided to proceed with hip arthrodesis using cobra plate fixation for a young patient with a failed revision THA. Walk me through your surgical technique, focusing on positioning, surface preparation, and fixation."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
My approach would be systematic. First, preoperative planning: I would obtain a CT scan to assess bone stock, template the fusion position on AP and lateral radiographs, and plan fixation strategy. In the operating room, positioning is critical - I use lateral decubitus position with the operative hip up. BEFORE draping, I determine the fusion position using a goniometer: 25-30° flexion relative to the pelvis, 0-10° abduction, and 15-20° external rotation. I confirm this position with fluoroscopy (AP and lateral pelvis) and document with photos. After draping, I make a lateral approach centered over the greater trochanter, extending 8-10 cm proximally and 10-12 cm distally. I perform a complete capsulectomy and may do a trochanteric osteotomy for acetabular access if needed. Surface preparation is critical for fusion: I remove ALL cartilage from both the acetabulum and femoral head using osteotomes and reamers, creating bleeding cancellous surfaces. I shape the femoral head to maximize contact with the acetabulum, aiming for at least 70-80% surface area contact. I reduce the hip in the planned position and use bone graft (from the resected femoral head or iliac crest) to fill any gaps. For fixation, I apply a cobra plate along the lateral aspect spanning from the ilium to the mid-femoral shaft. I first place two K-wires across the fusion site for rotational stability, then apply the plate (which has been pre-contoured to maintain the fusion angles). I secure the plate with at least 3-4 bicortical screws in the ilium and 4-6 in the femoral shaft, and place screws across the fusion site if possible. I confirm compression across the fusion interface and check final position with fluoroscopy. Closure includes deep suction drains and layered repair. Postoperatively, I immobilize in a hip orthosis with touch weight-bearing for 6 weeks, progressing to full weight-bearing as fusion consolidates (confirmed radiographically at 3-6 months).
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Preoperative planning: CT scan, templating, determining fusion position before draping
Fusion position: 25-30° flexion, 0-10° abduction, 15-20° external rotation (confirmed with fluoroscopy)
Surface preparation: complete cartilage removal, maximize bone-to-bone contact (70-80% surface area)
Cobra plate fixation: spans ilium to femoral shaft, at least 6-8 screws total, compression across fusion site
COMMON TRAPS
✗Not determining fusion position before draping (cannot reassess easily once surgery starts)
✗Inadequate surface preparation (poor contact leads to nonunion)
✗Insufficient fixation (need at least 6-8 screws with compression)
✗Accepting suboptimal fusion position because plate is already applied (remove and re-contour if needed)
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What if you achieve poor bone-to-bone contact despite shaping the femoral head?"
"How do you manage a nonunion at 6 months?"
"What is your postoperative weight-bearing protocol?"
"When would you remove the hardware?"
VIVA SCENARIOCritical

Scenario 3: Conversion of Hip Arthrodesis to THA

EXAMINER

"A 55-year-old woman had a hip arthrodesis 20 years ago for post-septic arthritis. She now has disabling lumbar back pain and requests conversion to total hip arthroplasty to improve her function. On examination, she has a 4 cm leg length discrepancy and a Trendelenburg gait (from the contralateral hip compensating). Radiographs show a solid fusion with a cobra plate in situ. How would you approach this case?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This is a complex conversion THA case with high risk. My approach would be systematic. First, I would counsel extensively about the risks: conversion THA has a complication rate of 40-50%, including instability (20-30% dislocation rate due to abductor deficiency), sciatic nerve injury (5-10% from leg lengthening), infection (5-10%), and reoperation rate of 30-40% within 5 years. I would explain that while function typically improves, residual limp and leg length discrepancy are expected, and the procedure is far more complex than primary THA. If she wishes to proceed, I would obtain a CT scan with 3D reconstruction to assess acetabular bone stock (often deficient from prior fusion reaming) and plan for reconstruction with augments or structural graft. I would template on the contralateral side and plan femoral component sizing. Critically, I would counsel that I can only safely restore 3-4 cm of leg length at the time of THA (to avoid sciatic nerve stretch injury), so she will have a residual 1 cm leg length discrepancy. In the operating room, I would use a posterior approach, remove the previous cobra plate hardware, and perform an osteotomy to divide the fusion mass. I would use intraoperative neuromonitoring for the sciatic nerve given the high risk. For acetabular reconstruction, I would assess bone loss (likely Paprosky IIB-IIC or worse) and use a combination of jumbo cup (60-66 mm) or trabecular metal cup with modular augments to achieve stable fixation. For stability, I would use a dual mobility cup (given the abductor deficiency) and a large femoral head (36-40 mm). I would limit leg lengthening to 3-4 cm maximum and monitor nerve function intraoperatively. Postoperatively, I would use hip precautions, abduction orthosis for 6-12 weeks, and close surveillance for instability. I would counsel that despite these measures, dislocation risk remains 20-30%, and she may require conversion to a constrained liner or further surgery if instability occurs. The alternative is to accept her current function and manage the back pain conservatively (physiotherapy, NSAIDs, possible spinal fusion if severe).
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Extensive counseling: 40-50% complication rate, high dislocation risk (20-30%), nerve injury risk, residual LLD
Preoperative planning: CT scan for bone stock assessment, templating for acetabular reconstruction (augments/structural graft)
Limit leg lengthening to 3-4 cm maximum (nerve injury risk); accept residual LLD
Use dual mobility cup and large femoral head for stability (abductor deficiency present)
Intraoperative neuromonitoring for sciatic nerve protection
COMMON TRAPS
✗Attempting to restore full leg length (over 4 cm lengthening → high nerve injury risk)
✗Using standard cup without dual mobility (20-30% dislocation rate vs 10-15% with dual mobility)
✗Underestimating acetabular bone loss (many cases have Paprosky IIC-IIIA defects requiring augments)
✗Failing to counsel about high complication rate and alternative of accepting current function
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What would you do if the patient develops recurrent dislocations after conversion THA?"
"How would you manage a 6 cm leg length discrepancy (cannot safely restore all at once)?"
"What if the CT shows severe acetabular bone loss (Paprosky IIIB)?"
"Would you consider a constrained liner at the index procedure?"

MCQ Practice Points

Fusion Position Question

Q: What is the optimal position for hip arthrodesis? A: 25-30° flexion, 0-10° abduction, 15-20° external rotation. This position allows sitting (flexion), standing without excessive lumbar compensation (not too much flexion), walking without pelvic obliquity (minimal abduction), and sitting with knees together plus foot hygiene (external rotation). Too much flexion impairs standing; too much abduction causes limping.

Long-Term Complications Question

Q: What percentage of patients develop lumbar back pain after hip arthrodesis, and why? A: Over 50% develop lumbar back pain within 10 years. The fused hip transfers motion to the lumbar spine, which must compensate for the loss of hip flexion/extension. This increases lumbar range of motion by 50-100%, accelerating disc degeneration at L4-L5 and L5-S1. Back pain is NOT a complication - it is an expected consequence of altered biomechanics.

Fixation Technique Question

Q: What is the preferred fixation method for hip arthrodesis, and what fusion rate does it achieve? A: Cobra (arthrodesis) plate fixation is preferred, spanning from the ilium to the mid-femoral shaft with at least 6-8 bicortical screws. This achieves a fusion rate of 90-95%. Screw fixation alone (transfixion screws from ilium through acetabulum to femoral head) achieves only 85-90% fusion and has less rotational stability. Compression across the fusion site is critical regardless of fixation method.

Conversion THA Question

Q: What is the most common complication after conversion of hip arthrodesis to THA, and how can it be reduced? A: Dislocation (20-30% incidence) due to abductor deficiency. The gluteus medius and minimus have atrophied during years of fusion and cannot be restored. Risk can be reduced by using dual mobility cups (reduces dislocation to 10-15%), large femoral heads (36-40 mm), and careful soft tissue repair. Despite these measures, instability remains the most common complication requiring reoperation.

Contraindications Question

Q: What are absolute contraindications to hip arthrodesis? A: Ipsilateral knee arthritis (will worsen due to compensatory stress), symptomatic lumbar spine disease (will worsen from increased motion demands), and contralateral hip disease (cannot compensate for the fused hip). The contralateral hip and ipsilateral knee MUST be normal, and the lumbar spine should be asymptomatic. If these joints are diseased, hip fusion will fail due to progressive adjacent joint degeneration and patient dissatisfaction.

Nerve Injury in Conversion Question

Q: What is the maximum safe leg lengthening during conversion of hip arthrodesis to THA, and why? A: 3-4 cm maximum. The sciatic nerve is at extreme risk during conversion THA due to scarring from prior surgery and the need to restore leg length (typical LLD after fusion is 3-5 cm). Lengthening over 4 cm causes traction injury to the sciatic nerve, resulting in permanent foot drop and sensory loss. If preoperative LLD is over 5 cm, consider staged lengthening (femoral osteotomy weeks before THA) or accept residual LLD rather than risk nerve injury. Intraoperative neuromonitoring is recommended.

Australian Context and Medicolegal Considerations

AOANJRR Data

  • Hip arthrodesis: Under 0.1% of hip procedures in Australia (extremely rare)
  • Main indication: Failed infected revision THA after staged treatment
  • Conversion to THA: Accounts for 15% of complex revision hip procedures
  • Dual mobility use: Increasing in conversion cases (now 60% vs 20% historically)
  • Complication rate: Conversion THA has 35-40% complication rate per registry data

Hip fusion is now a salvage procedure of last resort in Australia.

Australian Guidelines

  • ACSQHC surgical site infection guidelines: Extended antibiotic prophylaxis (48 hours) recommended for conversion THA after infected fusion
  • PBS listings: No specific implant subsidies for hip arthrodesis (rarely performed)
  • DVT prophylaxis: Extended LMWH for 35 days (high-risk surgery per NHMRC guidelines)
  • Consent standards: Document extensive discussion of functional limitations and adjacent joint disease

Follow ACSQHC and NHMRC guidelines for perioperative management.

Medicolegal Considerations

High-Risk Procedure - Document Extensively:

Informed Consent Must Include:

  • Functional limitations: no running, limited sitting (30-60 min), gait abnormality, 3-5 cm LLD
  • Adjacent joint disease: over 50% develop back pain, 30-40% develop knee arthritis by 15-20 years
  • Eventual conversion: most patients request THA within 20 years; conversion is high-risk (40-50% complications)
  • Complications: nonunion (5-10%), infection (2-5%), nerve injury (under 1%), hardware prominence
  • Alternatives: revision THA with modern techniques (augments, antibiotic cement), resection arthroplasty

For Conversion THA:

  • Dislocation risk 20-30% (despite dual mobility cups)
  • Nerve injury risk 5-10% from leg lengthening
  • Cannot fully restore leg length (residual LLD expected)
  • Reoperation rate 30-40% within 5 years
  • Alternative: accept current function and manage back pain conservatively

Documentation:

  • Record preoperative assessment of contralateral hip, ipsilateral knee, lumbar spine (must be normal)
  • Document fusion position planning (goniometer measurements, fluoroscopy images)
  • Photograph intraoperative fusion position for medicolegal record
  • Document postoperative counseling about weight-bearing and rehabilitation timeline

Common Litigation Issues:

  • Malposition (wrong fusion angle → lifelong gait dysfunction) - PREVENT with meticulous position verification
  • Nerve injury in conversion THA (excessive leg lengthening) - PREVENT by limiting lengthening to 3-4 cm
  • Failure to warn about functional limitations and adjacent joint disease - PREVENT with extensive documented consent

The medicolegal risk is HIGH for this procedure - document everything.

Hospital System Considerations

  • Pre-approval required: Most private insurers require pre-authorization for hip fusion (high cost, rare procedure)
  • Implant availability: Cobra plates may not be stocked; order in advance
  • Extended LOS: Expect 5-7 days for arthrodesis, 7-10 days for conversion THA (longer than primary THA)
  • Rehabilitation facility: Arrange transfer to rehab hospital if patient cannot mobilize safely

Plan logistics in advance - this is not a routine procedure.

Australian context emphasizes that hip fusion is extremely rare and conversion THA is high-risk with unpredictable outcomes.

Hip Arthrodesis

High-Yield Exam Summary

Optimal Fusion Position

  • •Flexion: 25-30° (allows sitting without excessive lumbar flexion)
  • •Abduction: 0-10° (neutral to slight abduction minimizes pelvic tilt)
  • •External rotation: 15-20° (permits sitting with knees together)
  • •Verify position with goniometer and fluoroscopy BEFORE draping

Indications (Rare)

  • •Failed revision THA with eradicated infection and poor bone stock
  • •Young manual labourer (under 40) with destroyed hip
  • •Massive bone loss precluding arthroplasty
  • •Neurologic conditions requiring hip stability (flail hip)

Surgical Technique

  • •Lateral approach with complete capsulectomy
  • •Remove ALL cartilage; maximize bone-to-bone contact (70-80% surface area)
  • •Cobra plate fixation: ilium to femoral shaft, at least 6-8 screws
  • •Compression across fusion site is critical for union

Long-Term Complications (Expected)

  • •Lumbar back pain: over 50% at 10 years (increased spinal motion)
  • •Ipsilateral knee arthritis: 30-40% at 15-20 years (rotational stress)
  • •Leg length discrepancy: 3-5 cm shortening (counsel preoperatively)
  • •Nonunion: 5-10% with plate fixation; requires revision with bone graft

Conversion to THA Challenges

  • •Complication rate: 40-50% (instability, nerve injury, infection)
  • •Dislocation risk: 20-30% (abductor deficiency); use dual mobility cups
  • •Limit leg lengthening to 3-4 cm maximum (sciatic nerve stretch injury risk)
  • •Acetabular reconstruction: often Paprosky IIB-IIIA bone loss; plan for augments
Quick Stats
Reading Time222 min
Related Topics

Ankle Arthrodesis

Avascular Necrosis of the Humeral Head

Elbow Arthritis

Knee Arthrodesis