Unipolar, Bipolar or Total Hip Endoprosthesis after Femoral Neck Fracture: What is a Right Decision?

Dragica Smrke, Mirza Biščević


The aim of this study was to recognize differences in midterm clinical outcome after femoral neck fracture and hip endoprosthesis implantation. A total of 145 patients were examined, 32 patients with unipolar, 70 with bipolar and 43 patients with total hip endoprosthesis. The mean values of Harris Hip Score, after 3.8 ± 1.9 years, were: 72.1 ± 17.8, 74.27 ± 19.1, 78.2 ± 22.5 for patients with unipolar, bipolar and total hip endoprosthesis, respectively. No statistically significant difference was observed (p = 0.704). The in-hospital mortality rates were: 4.3%, 4.6%, and 5.3% for groups of patients with bipolar, unipolar and total hip endoprosthesis, respectively. Considering clinical outcomes, general health and costs, it can be concluded that the choice of endoprosthesis does not pose an obstacle to a patient’s recovery.


Hip, Fracture, Endoprosthesis, Result, Function

Full Text:



Meunier PJ. Prevention of hip fractures. Am J Med. 1993;95(5A):75S-78S.

Parker MJ, Myles JW, Anand JK, Drewett R.. Costbenefit analysis of hip fracture treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1992;74(2):261-4.

Lavernia C, Lyon R. The short-term economic implications of prosthetic selection in hemiarthroplasty of the hip. Am J Orthop. 1998;27(6):415-3.

Calder SJ, Anderson GH, Jagger C, Harper WM, Gregg PJ. Unipolar or bipolar prosthesis for displaced intracapsular hip fracture in octogenerians. J Bone Joint Surg r.1996;78(B):391-4.

Cornel CN, Levine D, O’ Doherty J, Lyden J. Uniporal versus bipolar arthroplasty for the treatment of femoral neck fractures in the elderly. Clin Orthop Relat Res.1998;(348):67-71.

Raia FJ, Chapman CB, Herrera MF, Schweppe MW, Michelsen CB, Rosenwasser MP. Unipolar or bipolar hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures in the elderly? Clin Orthop Relat Res.


Gilbert MS, Capozzi J. Unipolar or bipolar prosthesis for displaced intracapsular hip fractures?: An unaswered question. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;(353):81-5.

Hudson JI, Kenzora JE, Hebel JR, Gardner JF, Scherlis L, Epstein RS, Magaziner JS. Eight-year outcome associated with clinical options in the management of femoral neck fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;(348):59-7.

Long JW, Knight W. Bateman UPF prosthesis in fractures of femoral neck. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;(152):198-201.

Ong BC, Maurer SG, Aharonoff GB, Zuckerman JD, Koval KJ. Unipolar versus bipolar hemiarthroplasty: functional outcome after femoral neck fracture at a minimum of thirty-six months of follow-up. J Orthop Trauma. 2002;16(5):317-22.

Overgaard S, Jensen TT, Bonde G, Mossing NB. The uncemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures. Acta Orthop Scand. 1991;62(2):115-20.

Wathne RA, Koval KJ, Aharonoff GB, Zuckerman JD, Jones DA. Modular unipolar versus bipolar prosthesis: a prospective evaluation of functional outcome after femoral neck fracture. J Orthop Trauma. 1995;9(4):298-4.

Devas M, Hinves B. Prevention of acetabular erosion after hemiarthroplasty for fractured neck of femur. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1983;65(5):548-51.

Kenzora J. Outcome after hemiarthroplasty for femoral neck fractures in the elderly. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1998;(348):51-8.

Rodriguez-Merchan EC. Displaced intracapsular hip fractures: hemiarthroplasty or total arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;(399):72-7.

Nottage WM, McMaster WC. Comparison of bipolar implants with fixed-neck prosthesis in femoral neck fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990;(251):38-43.

Reymond MA, Kohler O, Chevalley JP, Rothenbuhler JM, Regazzoni P. Is implantation of a unipolar femoral endoprosthesis obsolete? Helv Chir Acta. 1992;58(5):693-5.

Dixon S, Bannister G. Cemented bipolar hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fracture in the mobile active elderly patient. Injury 2004;35(2):152-6.

Yamagata M, Chao EY, Ilstrup DM, Melton LJ 3rd, Coventry MB, Stauffer RN. Fixed-head and bipolar hip endoprostheses: a retrospective clinical and roentgenographic study. J Arthroplasty. 1987;2(4):327-41.

Smrke D, Beden R, Stankoviski V. Bipolar versus total hip endoprosthesis: functional results. Arch. Orthop Trauma Surg. 2000;120(5-6):259-61.

Eyssel M, Schwenk W, Badke A, Krebs S, Stock W. Total endoprosthesis or dual head prosthesis in endoprosthetic management of femoral neck fractures? Unfallchirurg. 1994;97(7):347-52.

van der Lugt JC, Dijkstra SD. Satisfactory results of Stanmore total hip arthroplasty after failed osteosynthesis of the femoral neck. Acta Orthop Belg. 2004;70(1):25-30.

Soderman P, Malchau H. Is the Harris hip score system useful to study the outcome of total hip replacement? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;(384):189-97.

Dai KR, Dong F, Wang YY. Comparative study of three different hip function evaluation systems. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi. 1994;32(9):535-8.

Henning F, Hoepffner HJ, Muth A. Indications for bipolar prosthesis in femoral neck fractures. A retrospective study of the prognosis in geriatric patients with bipolar prosthesis with reference to the preoperative health status. Unfallchirurg. 1991;94(8):409-16.

Lestrange NR. Bipolar arthroplasty for 496 hip fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990;(251):7-19.

Pai VS, Arden D, Wilson N. Fractured neck of femur in the mobile independent elderly patient: should we treat with total hip replacement? J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2003;11(2):123-8.

Goldhill VB, Lyden JP, Cornell CN, Bochman RM. Bipolar hemiarthroplasty for fracture of the femoral neck. J Orthop Trauma. 1991;5(3):318-24.

Lyons R. Clinical outcomes and treatment of hip fractures. Am J Med. 1997; 103(2A) 51-12.

Ichihashi K, Imura S, Oomori H, Gesso H. Stress analysis on the acetabular side of bipolar hemiarthroplasty by the two -dimensional finite element method incorporating the boundary friction layer. Nippon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi. 1994;68(11):939-52.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

2019 Department of Medical Sciences, Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina. All rights reserved.
The full text of articles published in this journal can be used free of charge for personal and educational purposes while respecting authors and publishers’ copyrights. For commercial purposes no part of this journal may be reproduced without the written permission of the publisher.