62 in proximal femur fractures by a log splitting mechanism. We did not ﬁnd this to be a limitation in the clinical out- come. There were two (7%) calcar fractures, which required circlage wire ﬁxation in the 28 THAs. This compares well with fracture incidence of using extensively porous-coated and modular stem designs in revision THA. Some have reported fracture rate of 9–30% [4, 5, 17]. We believe the Zweymuller femoral stem provides reliable stable ﬁxation in femoral revision surgery. We have had no case of ﬁxation failure up to 15 years in this relatively small series. This technique is especially useful in those cases where there is no extensive segmental bone deﬁciency in the proximal femur. Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank Laurine E. Zatorski, RN for her assistance in this project. Conﬂict of interest statement The authors declare that they have no conﬂict of interest related to the publication of this manuscript. References 1. Callaghan JJ, Rosenberg AG, Rubash HE (1998) The adult hip, 1st edn. Lippincott-Raven, Philadelphia 2. Haydon CM, Mehin R, Burnett S et al. (2004) Revision total hip arthroplasty with use of a cemented femoral component. Results at a mean of 10 years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:1179–1185 3. Emerson RH Jr, Head WCHiggins LL (2003) Clinical and radiographic analysis of the Mallory-Head femoral component in revision total hip arthroplasty. A minimum 8.8-year and average 11-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:1921–1926 4. Paprosky WG, Greidanus NV, Antoniou J (1999) Minimum 10- year results of extensively porous-coated stems in revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 369:230–242 5. Christie MJ, DeBoer DK, Tingstad EM et al (2000) Clinical experience with a modular noncemented femoral component in J Orthopaed Traumatol (2008) 9:57–62 revision total hip arthroplasty: 4–7-year results. J Arthroplasty 15:840–848 6. Kwong LM, Miller AJ, Lubinus P (2003) A modular distal ﬁx- ation option for proximal bone loss in revision total hip arthroplasty: a 2–6-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty 18:94–97 7. D’Antonio J, McCarthy JC, Bargar WL et al. (1993) Classiﬁca- tion of femoral abnormalities in total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 296:133–139 8. Kennon R, Keggi J, Zatorski LE et al. (2004) Anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty: beyond the minimally invasive tech- nique. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86(Suppl 2):91–97 9. Kennon RE, Keggi JM, Wetmore RS et al. (2003) Total hip arthroplasty through a minimally invasive anterior surgical approach. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85(Suppl 4):39–48 10. Harris WH (1969) Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end- result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 51:737–755 11. Huo MH, Martin RP, Zatorski LE et al (1995) Total hip arthro- plasty using the Zweymuller stem implanted without cement. A prospective study of consecutive patients with minimum 3-year follow-up period. J Arthroplasty 10:793–799 12. Brooker AF, Bowerman JW, Robinson RA et al. (1973) Ectopic ossiﬁcation following total hip replacement. Incidence and a method of classiﬁcation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 55:1629– 1632 13. Kurtz S, Mowat F, Ong K et al (2005) Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:1487–1497 14. Engh CA, McGovern TF, Bobyn JD et al. (1992) A quantitative evaluation of periprosthetic bone-remodeling after cementless total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:1009–1020 15. Keisu KS, Mathiesen EB, Lindgren JU (2001) The uncemented fully textured Lord hip prosthesis: a 10–15-year follow-up study. Clin Orthop 382:133–142 16. Engh CA Jr, Young AM, Engh CA Sr et al. (2003) Clinical consequences of stress shielding after porous-coated total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 417:157–163 17. Meek RMD, Garbuz DS, Masri BA et al. (2004) Intraoperative fracture of the femur in revision total hip arthroplasty with a diaphyseal ﬁtting stem. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:480–485 123