Cementless Versus Cemented Stems in Patients Aged 70 Years or Older Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.

IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Arthroplasty Pub Date : 2025-02-17 DOI:10.1016/j.arth.2025.02.008
Alexandra Rocha, Lyndsay Somerville, Patrick Moody, Brent A Lanting, James L Howard, Doug D R Naudie, Richard W McCalden, Steven J MacDonald, Edward M Vasarhelyi
{"title":"Cementless Versus Cemented Stems in Patients Aged 70 Years or Older Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.","authors":"Alexandra Rocha, Lyndsay Somerville, Patrick Moody, Brent A Lanting, James L Howard, Doug D R Naudie, Richard W McCalden, Steven J MacDonald, Edward M Vasarhelyi","doi":"10.1016/j.arth.2025.02.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Controversy continues to exist regarding the most appropriate femoral implant selection in older patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Our study aimed to compare the survivorship, reasons for revision, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of uncemented versus cemented THA in patients aged ≥ 70 years.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study reviewed primary THAs performed on patients aged ≥ 70 years between January 1, 2007, and October 1, 2019. A total of 2,136 patients [cemented (n = 355), cementless (n = 1,781)] were included. Demographics including age (77 versus 83), Body Mass Index (BMI) (29 versus 26), and sex (59 versus 83% women) were different between the cementless and cemented THA cohorts, respectively. Patient characteristics, implant characteristics, revision information, mortality, and PROMs [Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Veterans Rand 12 Item Health Survey (VR12), and the Harris Hip Score (HHS)] were collected. Kaplan-Meier survivorship was performed with all-cause, aseptic, and aseptic stem revisions as the endpoint. Change scores were calculated and compared with independent t-tests.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no differences in the 5- and 10-year cumulative survival in the cementless and cemented THA cohorts for all-cause (P = 0.11), aseptic (P = 0.83), and aseptic stem revisions (P = 0.61). Both cohorts demonstrated excellent long-term survival for all-cause (96.8 versus 95.5), aseptic (97.8 versus 98.3), and aseptic stem (98.4 versus 98.3) revisions. There were no differences in change scores for WOMAC (33.9 versus 35.3, P = 0.48), VR12 Mental (0.56 versus 1.42, P = 0.58), VR12 Physical (8.9 versus 8.0, P = 0.21), and HHS (43.1 versus 44.9, P = 0.25) scores between the cementless and cemented cohorts at the latest follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No difference was found in survival rates of cementless compared to cemented stems for all causes and aseptic causes in patients aged ≥ 70 years undergoing elective THA. Both cementless and cemented femoral stems provide a safe and efficacious option for performing THA in older patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":51077,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Arthroplasty","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2025.02.008","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Controversy continues to exist regarding the most appropriate femoral implant selection in older patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). Our study aimed to compare the survivorship, reasons for revision, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) of uncemented versus cemented THA in patients aged ≥ 70 years.

Methods: This retrospective study reviewed primary THAs performed on patients aged ≥ 70 years between January 1, 2007, and October 1, 2019. A total of 2,136 patients [cemented (n = 355), cementless (n = 1,781)] were included. Demographics including age (77 versus 83), Body Mass Index (BMI) (29 versus 26), and sex (59 versus 83% women) were different between the cementless and cemented THA cohorts, respectively. Patient characteristics, implant characteristics, revision information, mortality, and PROMs [Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Veterans Rand 12 Item Health Survey (VR12), and the Harris Hip Score (HHS)] were collected. Kaplan-Meier survivorship was performed with all-cause, aseptic, and aseptic stem revisions as the endpoint. Change scores were calculated and compared with independent t-tests.

Results: There were no differences in the 5- and 10-year cumulative survival in the cementless and cemented THA cohorts for all-cause (P = 0.11), aseptic (P = 0.83), and aseptic stem revisions (P = 0.61). Both cohorts demonstrated excellent long-term survival for all-cause (96.8 versus 95.5), aseptic (97.8 versus 98.3), and aseptic stem (98.4 versus 98.3) revisions. There were no differences in change scores for WOMAC (33.9 versus 35.3, P = 0.48), VR12 Mental (0.56 versus 1.42, P = 0.58), VR12 Physical (8.9 versus 8.0, P = 0.21), and HHS (43.1 versus 44.9, P = 0.25) scores between the cementless and cemented cohorts at the latest follow-up.

Conclusion: No difference was found in survival rates of cementless compared to cemented stems for all causes and aseptic causes in patients aged ≥ 70 years undergoing elective THA. Both cementless and cemented femoral stems provide a safe and efficacious option for performing THA in older patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Arthroplasty
Journal of Arthroplasty 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
734
审稿时长
48 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Arthroplasty brings together the clinical and scientific foundations for joint replacement. This peer-reviewed journal publishes original research and manuscripts of the highest quality from all areas relating to joint replacement or the treatment of its complications, including those dealing with clinical series and experience, prosthetic design, biomechanics, biomaterials, metallurgy, biologic response to arthroplasty materials in vivo and in vitro.
期刊最新文献
Outcomes Following Total Hip Arthroplasty in Patients Who Have Previous Pelvic Osteotomy: A Systematic Review. Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Are Patients Still Better Off Than If Primary Arthroplasty Had Not Been Performed? Serum C-Reactive Protein to Hemoglobin Ratio: Novel Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection. Distinctive Polyethylene Damage in Rotating Platform Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Comparative Retrieval Study in Patients Revised with Clinical Instability. Does Stem Design Affect the Incidence of Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures in Arthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fractures? A Secondary Analysis of the HEALTH Trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1