‘Getting It Right First Time’ guidance recommends the universal use of cemented prostheses in patients aged over 65 within the UK. This cut off has since been raised to 70. The report claims that the increased cost of uncemented technology is not justifiable in terms of patient outcomes. Our aim was to evaluate any disparity between patients across these age thresholds, in terms of functional outcomes, complication and costs following elective uncemented THR.

We utilised a single surgeon prospectively updated database, to compare functional outcome of patients aged over and under 65 and again at 70 following elective uncemented THR. We measured functional outcome using Oxford Hip Score (OHS). Patients were followed routinely for up to 2 years and subsequently up to 6 years.

Patient ages ranged from 23–89. Over 97% of patients reported an improvement in hip function, with an average increase of 24.1 in OHS. There was no statistical significance between patient age and functional hip outcome, p=0.108 with a cut off at 65 and p=0229 at 70. 1.1% of under 65s required revision surgery, compared to 2.3% of over 65s. 1.4% of patients under 70 required revision surgery, compared to 2.5% in those above. The most common reason for revision surgery was debridement, antibiotics and implant retention. Patients under 65 had a 1.4% chance of experiencing a fracture or dislocation, compared to 2.5% of patients over 65. 2.0% of patients under 70 experienced a fracture or dislocation, in comparison to 2.2% in those over 70. There was 1 recorded mortality, a patient aged over 70. Cost analysis is challenging accounting for all variables between techniques. Cementing invariably requires additional operating time and diminished theatre efficiency, with direct cost estimated at £364 in theatre running fees per case.

Within the series, uncemented THRs was found to be a safe and efficacious procedure irrespective of age. Functional hip outcome was not correlated to patient age, conflicting with GIRFT recommendations. The extra duration of cemented surgery may equilibrate the financial disparity of uncemented practice.

Abstract