Table 2.

Comparison of outcomes of PFA from the literature

Study	Technique	Number of hips	Followup (years)	Infection (%)	Fracture (%)	Nonunion (%)	Severe resorption (%)	Loosening (%)	Femoral revision (%)	Dislocations (%)	Failure (%)	Success (%)
Chandler et al. [3]	PFADistal press fit	30	2	3.3		13.6	3.3		10	16.6	10	90
Fox et al. [5]	PFA for tumorPlate or distal fixation	56	7.9	11								81
Langlais et al. [20]	PFA for tumorCemented distally	21	6	0		28.6	4.8	14.3	14.3	0		81
Haddad et al. [14]	PFACemented distally	40	8.8	5	2.5	8	17.5	0	10	10	10	90
Zehr et al. [33]	PFA for tumor	14	10	16.7		5.6		0		0	14.3	76
	Megaprosthesis for tumor	10	10	5.9		11.8		5.9		17.7	47	58
Zmolek and Dorr [34]	Press fit ± plate	15	2	6.7		18			26.7	5.5	26.7	73.3
Safir et al.	PFANo distal fixation	50	16	4	0	6	2	12	14	8	16	84

PFA = proximal femoral allograft.