Optimal outcomes of revision femoral arthroplasty include achieving rotational stability of the revision implant, preventing axial migration of the implant to obtain stability, and reproducing normal hip biomechanics. Cemented and proximally porous-coated implants are not well-suited to achieving these goals in the presence of metaphyseal bone defects and poor endosteal cement bonding. Extensively porous-coated implants are more likely to achieve these goals if the selection of the implant is appropriate for each defect encountered and if technical problems can be identified that may arise during canal preparation andcomponent insertion. The selection of curved implants for longer revisions may help avoid complications.