The initial success of modern total hip arthroplasty can in large part be attributed to the reliable fixation of the femoral component with the use of acrylic bone cement. Early success with cement led to a common pathway of development in North America and the European countries. Much of the early to mid-term research concentrated on refinement of variables related to the methodology and technique of cement fixation. Scandinavian registries were subsequently able to report on improved survivorship with better cementing technique. The net effect has been standardisation towards a small number of cemented implants with good long-term outcomes representing the majority of stems implanted in Sweden, for example. In North America, during the mid-term development of THA in the late 1980's, the term “cement disease” was coined and the cemented THA saw a precipitous decline in use, now to the point where many American orthopaedic residents are completing training never having seen a cemented THA. Modern uncemented femoral components can now claim good long-term survivorship, perhaps now comparable to cemented fixation. However, this has come at a cost with respect to the premium expense applied to the implant itself as well as lineage of failed uncemented constructs. The last several years have seen a proliferation of uncemented implants, usually at a premium cost, with no demonstrated improvement in survivorship. Osteolysis has not been solved with uncemented implants and cement disease has largely been recognised as a misnomer. Long-term outcomes of cemented femoral fixation have consistently demonstrated excellent survivorship, even in the younger age group. Cemented stems allow for variable positioning of the stem to allow for better soft tissue balancing, without the need for proximal modularity. Cemented stems are more forgiving and fail less often secondary to a reduced incidence of intra-operative complications, such as peri-prosthetic fracture. Cemented stems tend to be less expensive and also have the advantage of adding antimicrobial agents into the cement. This is important in emerging markets. The next iteration of orthopaedic innovation driven by the emerging markets may indeed be back to the future. Key Points: The initial success of total hip arthroplasty was based on cemented femoral fixation. Long-term outcomes in the United States demonstrate good results for cemented femoral fixation. Despite this, cemented fixation is not frequently used in the United States. Results from multiple national joint replacement registries demonstrate superior long-term performance of cemented femoral fixation. European countries, perhaps because of the excellent results in the national registries, use cemented femoral fixation more often than not. Cemented femoral fixation is cost neutral if not less expensive and allows for the addition of antimicrobials. Cemented femoral fixation is perhaps easier to perform as the component can be potted in a range of positions as opposed to the position being dictated by the femoral anatomy

The well-fixed cemented femoral stem and surrounding cement can be challenging to remove. Success requires evaluation of the quality of the cement mantle (interface lucency), position of the stem, extent of cement below the tip of the stem and skill with the specialised instruments and techniques needed to remove the stem and cement without perforating the femur. Smooth surfaced stems can usually be easily removed from the surrounding cement mantle with a variety of stem extractors that attach to the trunnion or an extraction hole on the implant. Roughened stems can be freed from the surrounding cement mantle with osteotomes or a narrow high speed burr and then extracted with the above instruments. Following this, the well-fixed cement mantle needs to be removed.

Adequate exposure and visualization of the cement column is essential to remove the well-fixed cement without damage to the bone in the femur. This is important since fixation of a revision femoral component typically requires at least 4 cm of contact with supportive cortical bone, which can be difficult to obtain if the femur is perforated or if the isthmus damaged. Proximally, cement in the metaphyseal region can be thinned with a high speed burr, then split radially and removed piecemeal. It is essential to remember that both osteotomes and high speed burrs will cut thru bone easier than cement and use of these instruments poses a substantial risk of unintended bone removal and perforation of the femur if done improperly. These instruments should, as a result, be used under direct vision.

Removal of more distal cement in the femur typically requires use of an extended femoral osteotomy (ETO) to allow for adequate access to the well-fixed cement in the bowed femoral canal. An ETO also facilitates more efficient removal of cement in the proximal femur. The ETO should be carefully planned so that it is distal enough to allow for access to the end of the cement column and still allow for stable fixation of a new implant. Too short of an ETO increases the risk of femoral perforation since the straight cement removal instruments cannot negotiate the bowed femoral canal to access the end of the cement column without risk of perforation. An ETO that is too distal makes cement removal easier, but may not allow for sufficient fixation of a new revision femoral stem. Cement below the level of the ETO cannot be directly visualised and specialised instruments are necessary to safely remove this distal cement. Radiofrequency cement removal devices use high frequency (ultrasonic) radio waves to melt the cement within the canal. Although cement removal with these devices is time consuming and tedious, they do substantially reduce the chances of femoral perforation. These devices can, however, generate considerable heat locally and can result in thermal injury to the bone and surrounding tissues. Once the distal end of the cement mantle is penetrated, backbiting or hooked curettes can be use to remove any remaining cement from within the canal. It is important that all cement be removed from the femur since reamers used for preparation of the distal canal will be deflected by any retained cement, which could result in eccentric reaming and inadvertent perforation of the femur and make fixation of a new implant very challenging. An intra-operative x-ray can be very helpful to insure that all cement has been removed before reaming is initiated.

One should always plan for a possible femoral perforation and have cortical strut grafts and a stem available that will safely bypass the end of the cement column and the previous cement restrictor.

The use of a cemented implant instead of a spacer has been proposed due to the improved function in comparison with a spacer. Unfortunately the removal of a conventional cemented stem can be challenging. The use of a short cemented stem can overcome this problem.

Between July 2011 and May 2013, 10 infected hips were treated with a short cemented stem as a spacer. The infected implants were cemented in 6 cases and cementless in 4 cases. Mean time from index operation was 3 years (range 0 to 8 years). It was the first treatment for infection in all cases. Antibiotic loaded cement and an all-poly cup was used in all cases. The bugs were staph aureus and staph epidermidis in most cases. A Friendly short cemented stem with specific cement restrictor and standard cementing tecnique was used in all cases. This stem has been successfully tested in over 200 patients and approved by TUV to be released on the marked.

In all cases, the infection was successfully cured with antibiotics for a period ranging from 3 to 5 months. 2 patients were revised after the infection was cured for recurrent dislocation. No recurrent infection was found at the latest follow up.

One stage revision is gaining in popularity for the decreased morbidity and better quality of life of the patients. Weak points of one-stage revision are slightly inferior results in terms of eradication of the infection and the fact that it can be done only with cemented implants. Cemented implants show inferior durability than cementless implants and are difficult to remove if revision is needed. The use of a short cemented stem can couple the advantages of one stage revision and the fact that it is easily removed if this is needed for various reasons (aseptic loosening, recurrent dislocation and periprosthetic fracture). Contraindications to this technique are severe bone loss in the acetabulum or in the proximal femur.

Starting in 1977 a new cemented stem made of titanium alloy (with vanadium) was designed regarding some principle: rectangular shape, smooth surface covered with thin layer of titanium oxide, filling the medullar cavity. As a consequence: a thin layer of cement. It was designed with a collar. Initial Cementing technique used dough cement, vent tube and finger packing; then we applied cement retractor low viscosity cement and sometimes Harris Syringe. At the moment we went back to initial technique plus a cement retractor made of polyethylene. Many papers looked at long term follow up results depicting about 98 to 100 percent survivors at 10 years and 95 to 98% at 20 years (Hernigou, Hamadouche, Nizard, El Kaim).

Clinical as well as radiological results are available.

Radiological results depicted some radiolucent lines that appeared at the very long term. They could be related to friction between the stem and the cement. As advocated by Robin Ling, he called “French paradox” the fact that if a cemented prosthesis is smooth and fills the medullary cavity, long term excellent results could be expected.

This was the case with stainless steel Kerboull shape, the Ling design (Exeter)and the Ceraver design.

The majority of these stems were implanted with an all alumina bearing system. And in some occasion, when revision had to be performed, the stem was left in place (108 cases over 132 revisions)

Our experience over more than 5000 stems implanted is outstanding (see figure 1: aspect after 30 years).

Discussion other experience with cemented titanium stem were bad (Sarmiento, Fare). We suspect that this was related either to the small size of this flexible material, or to the roughness of its surface.

If one uses titanium cemented stem it must be large enough and extra smooth.

The triple taper polished cemented stem (C-stem, DePuy) was developed to promote calcar loading, and reduce proximal femoral bone resorption and aseptic loosening. We aimed to evaluate the changes in peri-prosthetic bone mineral density using Dual Energy X-ray Absorbtiometry (DEXA) after total hip arthroplasty (THA) using the C-stem prosthesis.

One hundred and three patients were recruited voluntarily through and single institution for THA. The prosthesis used was the triple-taper polished cemented C-Stem (De Puy, Warsaw, Indiana, USA). DEXA scans were performed pre- operatively, then at day for, three months, nine months, 18 months and 24 months post-operativley. Scans were analysed with specialised software (Lunar DPX) to measure bone mineral density (BMD) in all seven Gruen zones at each time interval. Changes in calcar BMD were also correlated with patient age, sex, surgical approach, pre-operative BMD and post-operative mobility to identify risk factors for periprosthetic bone resorption.

One hundred and three patients underwent 103 primary THA over a five-year period (98 osteoarthritis; 5 AVN). No femoral components were loose at the two year review and none were revised. The most marked bone resorption occured in Gruen zones 1 and 7, and was best preserved in zone 5. BMD decreased rapidly in all zones in the first three months post-operatively, after which the rate of decline slowed substantially. BMD was better preserved medially (zones 6 and 5) than laterally (zones 2 and 3) at 24 months. There was delayed recovery of BMD in all zones except zones 4 and 5.

High pre-operative T-scores (>2.0) in the spine, ipsilateral and contralateral femoral neck were associated with the higher post-operative BMD and less bone resorption at all time intervals in Gruen zone 7. Pre-operative osteopenia and osteoporosis were associated with low BMD and accelerated post-operative bone resorption in zone 7.

Patients whose mobility rendered them housebound had lower post-operative BMD, and accelerated post-operative BMD loss in zone 7 when compared to non-housebound patients. Females had a lower post-operative BMD and greater loss of BMD in zone 7. Patient age and surgical approach did not effect post-operative BMD or rate of bone resorption in zone 7.

The triple-taper femoral stem design did not show an increase in periprosthetic bone density at the proximal femur at two years post-operative. Calcar bone resorption is accelerated by low pre-operative BMD, poor post-operative mobility, and in females. Age and surgical approach do not have significant effects on calcar bone remodelling.

Introduction

The cement mantle thickness for cemented stem during total hip arthroplasty (THA) is different between the complete cement mantle technique and the line-to-line technique. In the line-to-line technique, the size of the rasp is same as that of the stem. We performed THA in321 hipsof 289 patientsusing a new designed triple-tapered polished cemented stem. We investigated the short-term result of these 321 hips clinically and radiographically.

Introduction

Varus positioning of cemented ‘composite beam’ stems is associated with increased risks of aseptic loosening and stem fracture. We investigated whether the incidence of varus malalignment of the Exeter polished, double taper design in a multicentre prospective study adversely affected outcome after total hip replacement (THR).

Introduction

We have investigated the long-term (minimum follow-up period; 10 years) clinical results of the total hip arthroplasty (THA) using K-MAX HS-3 tapered stem.

Introduction

We have compared the middle-term (average follow-up period; 10 years) clinical results of the K-MAX HS-3 tapered stem with those of the previous type having cylindrical tip.

The Exeter stem is a polished cemented stem that has been associated with an excellent survivorship. However, this wedge shaped stem has also been associated with a relative higher risk for a peri-periprosthetic fracture due to the wedge-shaped configuration that can lead to a Vancouver type B2 fracture when the stem is being driven downwards inside the femoral canal by a traumatic blast. Traditionally, these fractures should be treated with a revision stem because the stem has become loosened in the fractured cement mantle. We present a case series of 5 cases where our treatment algorithm was to first let the non-displaced fracture to consolidate by 6 weeks of limited weight bearing as tolerated in order to conduct a second stage in-cement revision. This would simplify the revision procedure dramatically. However, all patients are currently pain free and do not require revision surgery although they are being monitored very closely.

We conclude that non-displaced Vancouver type B2 fractures can be approached by a 2 stage treatment algorithm where the initial step is to let the fracture consolidate with limited weight bearing.

The initial success of modern total hip arthroplasty can in large part be attributed to the reliable fixation of the femoral component with the use of acrylic bone cement. Early success with cement led to a common pathway of development in North America and the European countries. Much of the early- to mid-term research concentrated on refinement of variables related to the methodology and technique of cement fixation. Scandinavian registries were subsequently able to report on improved survivorship with better cementing technique. The net effect has been standardisation towards a small number of cemented implants with good long-term outcomes representing the majority of stems implanted in Sweden, for example. In North America, during the mid-term development of THA in the late 1980's, the term “cement disease” was coined and the cemented THA saw a precipitous decline in use, now to the point where many American orthopaedic residents are completing training never having seen a cemented THA. Modern uncemented femoral components can now claim good long-term survivorship, perhaps now comparable to cemented fixation. However, this has come at a cost with respect to the premium expense applied to the implant itself as well as lineage of failed uncemented constructs. The last several years have seen a proliferation of uncemented implants, usually at a premium cost, with no demonstrated improvement in survivorship. Osteolysis has not been solved with uncemented implants and cement disease has largely been recognised as a misnomer. Long-term outcomes of cemented femoral fixation have consistently demonstrated excellent survivorship, even in the younger age group. Cemented stems allow for variable positioning of the stem to allow for better soft tissue balancing, without the need for proximal modularity. Cemented stems are more forgiving and fail less often secondary to a reduced incidence of intraoperative complications, such as periprosthetic fracture. Cemented stems tend to be less expensive and also have the advantage of adding antimicrobial agents into the cement. This is important in emerging markets. The next iteration of orthopaedic innovation driven by the emerging markets may indeed be back to the future

Introduction. The use of stems in TKA revision surgery is well established. Stems off-load stress over a broad surface area of the diaphysis and help protect the metaphyseal interface areas from failure. Stems can provide an area of extra fixation. Uncemented Stems. Pros and Cons. Advantages. (1) Expeditious, (2) Compatible with intramedullary based revision instrumentation (3) Easy to remove if necessary (4) By filling diaphysis they help guarantee axial alignment. Disadvantages. (1) They help off load stress, but how much fixation do they really provide? (2) They don't fit all canal deformities, and under some circumstances can actually force implants into malalignment. (3) ? potential for end of stem pain. Cemented Stems. Pros and Cons. Advantages. (1) Cemented stem adds fixation in fresh metaphyseal and diaphyseal bone. (2) Proven 10-year track record. (3) Allow the surgeon to adjust for canal geometry abnormalities. Disadvantages. (1) More difficult to remove, if required. (2) They don't fill the canal so they don't guarantee alignment as well under most circumstances. Results. Favorable results with uncemented and cemented stems have been reported in several series. Cemented stems have longer term data. Technique Issues. Uncemented Stems. (1) Take advantage of offset bolts, tibial trays, stems to fit the stem/implant to the patient's anatomy. (2) Don't let the stem force you into suboptimal implant position. (3) Longer stems can be narrower but help engage more diaphysis. (4) Do a good job of restoring/uncovering cancellous bone in metaphysis for cement interdigitation. The cement provides the fixation. Cemented Stems. (1) Intra-operative x-ray with trials helps guarantee optimal alignment. (2) Use cement restrictors. (3) Cement tibia/femur separately. Metaphyseal Fixation. (1) Area of new emphasis. (2) Cones and sleeves can improve cemented and uncemented fixation

Introduction. The use of stems in TKA revision surgery is well established. Stems off-load stress over a broad surface area of the diaphysis and help protect the metaphyseal interface areas from failure. Stems can provide an area of extra fixation. Uncemented Stems: Advantages – Expeditious; Compatible with intramedullary based revision instrumentation; Easy to remove if necessary; By filling diaphysis they help guarantee axial alignment. Disadvantages - They help off load stress, but how much fixation do they really provide?; They don't fit all canal deformities, and under some circumstances can actually force implants into malalignment; ? potential for end of stem pain. Cemented Stems: Advantages - Cemented stem adds fixation in fresh metaphyseal and diaphyseal bone; Proven 10-year track record; Allow the surgeon to adjust for canal geometry abnormalities. Disadvantages - More difficult to remove if required; They don't fill the canal so they don't guarantee alignment as well under most circumstances. Results:. Favorable results with uncemented and cemented stems have been reported in several series; Cemented stems have longer term data. Technique Issues: Uncemented Stems - Take advantage of offset bolts, tibial trays, stems to fit the stem/implant to the patient's anatomy. Don't let the stem force you into suboptimal implant position; Longer stems can be narrower but help engage more diaphysis; Do a good job of restoring/uncovering cancellous bone in metaphysis for cement interdigitation. The cement provides the fixation. Cemented Stems - Intraoperative x-ray with trials helps guarantee optimal alignment; Use cement restrictors; Cement tibia/femur separately. Metaphyseal Fixation - Area of new emphasis; Cover and sleeves can improve cemented and uncemented fixation

The use of modular systems adds versatility to the implant system, better restoration of hip biomechanics and lower inventory to the hospital. There have been reports of high metal ions, ARMD reactions and high implant failure rates due to potential problems from taper failures. These are more common in metal-on-metal hip replacements, but are being also reported in other bearings. Between 2001 and 2010, we performed 383 consecutive metal-on-metal (MoM) THRs through a posterior approach, using a BHR cup and Birmingham modular head with one of three different stems, all with 12/14 tapers. The earliest 104 hips employed a cemented MS30 stem (Zimmer GmbH, Winterthur, Switzerland). Subsequent 256 were Synergy and then 23 Anthology (both uncemented and both Smith and Nephew Orthopaedics, Memphis TN USA). There was no significant difference in the average age at surgery (65.4 years cemented vs 65.6 uncemented, p = 0.69), gender ratio (1.68 vs 1.89, p = 0.64), or bearing diameter (46.7 vs 46.8, p = 0.31). The earlier 203 Synergy stems were monoblock heads, while the remaining uncemented stems included a tapered sleeve in addition. There were 3 deep infections and 11 debris-related failures (overall revision rate 4.9%). The revision rate from aseptic failures (ALTR, effusion, osteolysis or component loosening) is 2.87%. Kaplan-Meier analysis of the entire cohort showed a 10-year implant survival of 96.8% with revision for any reason as the end-point. Cemented stems had a 100% survival at 10 years and 98.6% at 12 years. The uncemented stems had a 93.8% survival at 10 years. Within the uncemented group, the monoblocks had a 5 and 10-year survival of 99.0% and 96.4% respectively while the sleeved had 98.7% (5 years) and 96.3% (7 years) and 82.5% at 8 years. Retreival analysis showed clear evidence of taper failure. Our experience suggests taper failure leading to ALTRs and its sequelae. Others have reported ALTR type reactions in metal on polyethylene and ceramic on polyethylene bearing types as well in bearing diameters ranging from 28mm to 40mm. There is a need to improve taper design especially for use with large heads, and in high demand patients

Introduction. Humeral radiolucent lines after anatomic TSA (aTSA) have been well described; however, little clinical consequences have been attributed to them. The recent emergence of shorter humeral stems has demonstrated higher incidences of humeral radiolucencies than has been reported historically with standard length components. This large scale database analysis quantifies and compares the clinical outcomes of aTSAs with and without radiolucent humeral lines using one specific prosthesis to determine their impact on clinical outcomes. Methodology. This is a multicenter, retrospective, case controlled radiographic and clinical review. Preoperative and postoperative data was analyzed from 671 aTSA patients with a minimum of 2 years followup. 538 of these 671 aTSA patients had full radiographic followup (80.2%) and were included in this study; these patients had an average followup of 45.3 months). 459 patients had noncemented humeral stems; whereas, 79 patients had cemented humeral stems. Radiographs were reviewed at latest follow up for humeral radiolucent lines based on the technique described by Gruen et al. Patients were evaluated and scored pre-operatively and at latest follow-up using the SST, UCLA, ASES, Constant, and SPADI scoring metrics; ROM was also recorded. A Student's two-tailed, unpaired t-test was used to identify differences in pre-operative, post-operative, and improvement in results, where p<0.05 denoted a significant difference. Results. All patients demonstrated significant improvements in pain and function following treatment with the primary shoulder arthroplasty. 14 patients (8 female, avg: 65.6 yrs; 6 male, avg: 61.7 yrs) were observed to have radiolucent lines around the humeral component (2.6%). The rate of humeral radiolucent lines was observed to be significantly higher in patients with cemented (7.6%) vs. noncemented (1.7%) humeral stems (p = 0.0025). Pre-operatively, no difference was noted in any clinical metric score between patients with or without radiolucent humeral lines. (Figure 1) However post-operatively, patients with radiolucent humeral lines had significantly worse ASES (p=0.0087), UCLA (p=0.0371), SST (p=0.0341), and SPADI (p=0.0051) scores (Figure 2) and significantly lower improvements in outcomes according to ASES (p=0.0120) and SPADI (p=0.0247) scores (Figure 3), relative to patients without radiolucent humeral lines. Additionally, radiolucent lines had a more profound effect on cemented stems (as compared to noncemented stems), where cemented stems with radiolucent humeral liners were associated with significantly lower post-operative outcomes and significantly lower improvements in outcomes. Finally, patients with humeral radiolucent lines had a significantly higher complication rate (21.4% vs 4.6%, p = 0.004) as compared to the complication rate of patients without radiolucent humeral lines. Conclusions. The study demonstrated a relatively low incidence of humeral radiolucent lines with anatomic TSA. Cemented stems were associated with a significantly higher rate of humeral radiolucent lines as compared to noncemented stems. Patients whose shoulders had radiolucent humeral lines were associated with significantly lower clinical outcomes and significantly less active ROM as compared to those without radiolucent lines. This diminished outcome was more pronounced with cemented humeral stems. Additional and longer term clinical followup is necessary to confirm the results of this study

Introduction. Cemented stems have shown 90–100% survivorship when coupled with polyethylene acetabular component. This study aims to compare cemented stem behaviour in combination with large metal on metal (MOM) vs. metal on poly (MOP) bearings. Patients and Methods. 100 patients were recruited into a single centre RCT (we required 40 in each group for power .90 to confirm stem subsidence of >0.5mm at 2 years; p< 0.05). Recruits were randomized to MOP (28mm) or MOM femoral heads with CPCS cemented femoral stem. Assessments included X-rays (AP pelvis), Harris Hip Scores, blood metal ion levels and patient questionnaires (WOMAC, SF-36, satisfaction questionnaire). Evaluations were done pre-operatively and 3, 12 and 24 months post operatively; blood metal ion measures at 1 year. Results. There were 50 patients in each arm of study matched for age (64 ± 8.5) and BMI (29.04 ±5.5). There was no difference in femoral stem subsidence at 2 years 1.34 (±1.3) and 1.4 (±1.2) mm for MOM and MOP respectively (p=0.88). There was significant improvement in HHS from pre-op to 3 months: 41 to 87 for MOM and 44 to 86 for MOP (p=0.00). This was maintained with no difference between groups at 2 years (p=0.74). Similar pattern was seen for WOMAC and SF-36 scores for both groups at 2 years (p>0.05). Increased blood Cobalt and Chromium levels were observed in 17% and 0% for MOM and MOP group. MOM group reported better patient satisfaction for overall (91% vs. 79%), pain relief (82% vs 66%) and improvement in ADL activities (94% vs.70%) at 2 years. Conclusions. There were no significant differences between groups for stem behavior, clinical and patient reported outcomes. Despite higher patient satisfaction reported by MOM patients, increased metal ion levels had raised concerns regarding the use of MOM bearings with cemented stems for primary THR

Background. Cemented femoral stems have an excellent long-term outcome. Modern cement techniques should be used to optimize femoral stem fixation. Bleeding from the bone surface during cemented hip arthroplasty compromises the bone-cement interface. However, no studies have examined this bleeding in vivo nor the effect the different cleaning methods used. In the present study we evaluated bleeding patterns and efficacy of cleaning methods used in third generation cementing techniques. Methods. We prospectively performed a medulloscopy with a 10 mm laparoscope in 200 primary hip arthroplasties. Intramedullary bleeding was evaluated after femoral canal preparation and use of the different cleaning methods. The femoral canal was divided into three areas to facilitate comparison. The intramedullary bleeding was standardized on a four point scale. A non-parametric repeated measures ANOVA was used for statistical analysis. Results. Cotton swabs and brushes did not reduce the intramedullary bleeding significantly after broaching of the canal. Compared to these standard cleaning methods, pulsed lavage and the addition of brushing provided better blood removal (p<0.001). There was a trend, although not statistical significant (p=0.24), towards better canal cleaning if a canal filling tampon with suction was added. Arterial bleeding originating from the posterior wall of the canal was noticed in 26 cases (13 percent). These could only be controlled by diathermy tools. Conclusion. Most standard preparation techniques are insufficient to prepare the femoral canal before cement insertion. In case of severe intramedullary bleeding, an arterial bleeding should be ruled out and if necessary treated with the aid of diathermy tools. We recommend pulsed lavage combined with a brush and a canal filling tampon for femoral canal preparation in cemented primary hip arthroplasty for optimal reduction of intramedullary bleeding