EMPOWR blade stem

EMPOWR™ blade stem

for More

MORE fit · MORE efficient · MORE than a blade stem

6340244584112   Watch Video

Your patients are demanding more from their implants: more activity and mobility, quicker recovery, and longer lasting implants. Meanwhile, your hospitals are demanding more: more throughput, more patients treated, and greater efficiencies. EMPOWR™ blade stem is empowering you to make “more” a reality.

To help recreate your patients’ anatomy and desired fit and to ensure long-term stability, EMPOWR blade stem was designed to be slightly more A/P filling than traditional blade stems1. With design elements that enable easy intra-operative decisions, flexibility to accommodate your preferred surgical approach, and one tray instrumentation, this system is efficient in and out of the OR.

EMPOWR blade stem is

MORE than a blade stem.

MORE fit

Metaphyseal Fill

Building on the legacy of Linear® Hip Stem, EMPOWR blade stem features a 6-degree proximal taper, which provides enhanced metaphyseal fill compared to traditional blade stems1 allowing for better fixation, reduced torsional motion, and reduced implant loosening/subsidence, while also maintaining a balance of fit and fill in the femoral canal.

EMPOWR blade stem
M/L Taper
Accolade II
MORE fit

Optimized Proximal-distal Proportions

EMPOWR blade stem features progressive distal lateral reduction and reduced length, helping to achieve desired stability and reduce the chances of distal potting.3,4

Blade Stem vs Linear Stem Dimensions
MORE fit

Clinical Legacy Of 20+ Years

P2 Coating

P2™ Porous Coating

Enovis’ proprietary P2™ porous coating further helps achieve enhanced fixation with its unique structure and material characterization. It has a higher surface roughness than newer generations of non-spherical beads, providing for more bone apposition and percent bone in-growth.5,6

Blade Stem Threads

Micro-threaded Trunnion

Enovis’ legacy 12/14 robust, micro-threaded trunnion, that is known to protect against fretting corrosion3, ultimately helping reduce revision burden7,8.

Built on the legacy of Linear® Hip Stem with one of the lowest revision rates for cementless stems in primary THA9

1 Year

.73 Linear Hip Stem vs. 1.32 Accolade

3 Year

1.05 Linear Hip Stem vs. 1.83 Accolade

5 Year

1.21 Linear Hip Stem vs. 2.10 Accolade

7 Year

1.21 Linear Hip Stem vs. 2.20 Accolade

MORE efficient

For all surgical approaches

Designed to accommodate all surgical approaches, especially the minimally invasive procedures with a shortened stem, easy lead distal tip, and medialized insertion feature

Shortened Stem


Medialized Insertion Feature

MORE efficient

Simplifying The Intraoperative Experience

Nearly one in ten patients suffer from varus deformity and even more may require intraoperative varus correction.10,11 The EMPOWR blade stems feature coxa vara, standard and direct lateral offset options. When coupled with an expansive size offering and constant neck length, restoration of patient anatomy is a streamlined, flexible intraoperative experience requiring minimal calculations for offset changes.

50% tray reduction
MORE efficient

50% Tray Reduction

Whether in a hospital or ASC, our mission is to maximize cost and process efficiency without sacrificing functionality or performance. Our carefully designed instrumentation platform reduces overall tray burden by ~50%, employing a single femoral prep tray for the posterior approach and adding only a small broach ½ tray for DAA.

MORE than a blade stem
  1. Competitive data retrieved from competitor’s website
  2. Cameron HU, Pilliar RM, MacNab I. The effect of movement on the bonding of porous metal to bone. J Biomed Mater Res 1973;7(4):301.
  3. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1924521/AJRR reference of Linear longevity
  4. Report on file with Enovis Surgical, IRPD-2023-0018
  5. Based on ONN 2022 Hip and Knee Update – Jul issue
  6. Data on file at DJO Surgical.
  7. Berstock, J.R., et al. (2018). Trunnion Corrosion: What Surgeons Need to Know in 2018. The Bone and Joint Journal. 100-B(1 Supple A):44–9. http://bjj.boneandjoint.org.uk/content/100-B/1_Supple_A/44).
  8. Trunnionosis accounts for a higher revision burden than infection (~2% vs. ~1%) – Reference (Springer, Bryan D., et al. (2017). Infection burden in total hip and knee arthroplasties: an international registry-based perspective. Arthroplasty Today 3:2: 137-140)
  9. AJRR 2022 Report
  10. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2600987/
  11. https://www.physio-pedia.com/Coxa_Vara_/_Coxa_Valga