CEMENTED VERSUS UNCEMENTED HIP RESURFACING IN THE YOUNG PATIENT – A ONE YEAR POST-OPERATIVE COMPARISON

Abstract

Hip resurfacing is a relatively new concept in hip arthroplasty, but is being performed more frequently in the United Kingdom.

We compared anteroposterior radiographs of 30 patients who had undergone cemented hip resurfacing (Cormet) with those of 30 patients who had undergone uncemented hip resurfacing (Cormet). All operations were performed using the anterolateral approach. We measured the acetabular offset, femoral offset, stem shaft angle, medialisation of the cup, head/neck ratio, cup height, leg length, and the implant seating pre-operatively, immediately postoperatively and one year postoperatively. The data were analysed by paired t-tests.

There were no significant differences between any of the measurements at all three time periods. This demonstrates no loss of offset, no femoral neck thinning and no leg length reduction. We note a smaller femoral offset and a reduction on average of 2mm in seating of the femoral implant in the uncemented group as compared to the cemented group. This we attribute to movement of the femoral implant in the first year post-operatively, and as such restoration of the femoral offset to the pre-operative level.

We conclude that uncemented hip resurfacing does not show any statistical benefit over cemented hip resurfacing, although we did observe a more accurate reproducible femoral offset with better seating of the implant in the uncemented group. We also note that there was no neck thinning in any of these patients at one year post-operatively.