Cementless fixation is an alternative to cemented unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR), with several advantages over cementation. This study reports on the 15-year survival and 10-year clinical outcomes of the cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement (OUKR). This prospective study describes the clinical outcomes and survival of first 693 consecutive cementless medial OUKRs implanted in New Zealand. The sixteen-year survival was 89.2%, with forty-six knees being revised. The commonest reason for revision was progression of arthritis, which occurred in twenty-three knees, followed by primary dislocation of the bearing, which occurred in nine knees. There were two bearing dislocations secondary to trauma and a ruptured ACL, and two tibial plateau fractures. There were four revisions for polyethylene wear. There were four revisions for aseptic tibial loosening, and one revision for impingement secondary to overhang of the tibial component. There was only one revision for deep infection and one revision where the indication was not stated. The mean OKS improved from 23.3 (7.4 SD) to 40.59 (SD 6.8) at a mean follow-up of sixteen years. In conclusion, the cementless OUKR is a safe and reproducible procedure with excellent sixteen-year survival and clinical outcomes

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Recent registry data from around the world has strongly suggested that using cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has lower revision rates compared to cementless hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck hip fractures. The adoption of using cemented hemiarthroplasty for hip fracture has been slow as many surgeons continue to use uncemented stems. One of the reasons is that surgeons feel more comfortable with uncemented hemiarthroplasty as they have used it routinely. The purpose of this study is to compare the difference in revision rates of cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty and stratify the risk by surgeon experience. By using a surgeons annual volume of Total Hip Replacements performed as an indicator for surgeon experience. The Canadian Joint Replacement Registry Database was used to collect and compare the outcomes to report on the revision rates based on surgeon volume. This is a large Canadian Registry Study where 68447 patients were identified for having a hip hemiarthroplasty from 2012-2020. This is a retrospective cohort study, identifying patients that had cementless or cemented hip hemiarthroplasty. The surgeons who performed the procedures were linked to the procedure Total Hip Replacement. Individuals were categorized as experienced hip surgeons or not based on whether they performed 50 hip replacements a year. Identifying high volume surgeon (>50 cases/year) and low volume (<50 cases/year) surgeons. Hazard ratios adjusted for age and sex were performed for risk of revision over this 8-year span. A p-value <0.05 was deemed significant. For high volume surgeons, cementless fixation had a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.29 (1.05-1.56), p=0.017. This pattern was similar for low volume surgeons, with cementless fixation having a higher revision risk than cemented fixation, HR 1.37 (1.11-1.70) p=0.004 We could not detect a difference in revision risk for cemented fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons; at 0-1.5 years the HR was 0.96 (0.72-1.28) p=0.786, and at 1.5+ years the HR was 1.61 (0.83-3.11) p=0.159. Similarly, we could not detect a difference in revision risk for cementless fixation between low volume and high volume surgeons, HR 1.11 (0.96-1.29) p=0.161. Using large registry data, cemented hip hemiarthroplasty has a significant lower revision rate than the use of cementless stems even when surgeons are stratified to high and low volume. Low volume surgeons who use uncemented prostheses have the highest rate of revision. The low volume hip surgeon who cements has a lower revision rate than the high volume cementless surgeon. The results of this study should help to guide surgeons that no matter the level of experience, using a cemented hip hemiarthroplasty for acute femoral neck fracture is the safest option. That high volume surgeons who perform cementless hemiarthroplasty are not immune to having revisions due to their technique. Increased training and education should be offered to surgeons to improve comfort when using this technique

Increasing femoral offset in total hip replacement (THR) has several benefits including improved hip abductor strength and enhanced range of motion. Biomechanical studies have suggested that this may negatively impact on stem stability. However, it is unclear whether this has a clinical impact. Using data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), the aim of this study was to determine the impact of stem offset and stem size for the three most common cementless THR prostheses revised for aseptic loosening. The study period was September 1999 to December 2020. The study population included all primary procedures for osteoarthritis with a cementless THR using the Corail, Quadra-H and Polarstem. Procedures were divided into small and large stem sizes and by standard and high stem offset for each stem system. Hazard ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazards models, adjusting for age and gender, were performed to compare revision for aseptic loosening for offset and stem size for each of the three femoral stems. There were 55,194 Corail stems, 13,642 Quadra-H stem, and 13,736 Polarstem prostheses included in this study. For the Corail stem, offset had an impact only when small stems were used (sizes 8-11). Revision for aseptic loosening was increased for the high offset stem (HR=1.90;95% CI 1.53–2.37;p<0.001). There was also a higher revision risk for aseptic loosening for high offset small size Quadra-H stems (sizes 0-3). Similar to the Corail stem, offset did not impact on the revision risk for larger stems (Corail sizes 12-20, Quadra-H sizes 4-7). The Polarstem did not show any difference in aseptic loosening revision risk when high and standard offset stems were compared, and this was irrespective of stem size. High offset may be associated with increased revision for aseptic loosening, but this is both stem size and prosthesis specific

Introduction. Varus alignment in total knee replacement (TKR) results in a larger portion of the joint load carried by the medial compartment. [1]. Increased burden on the medial compartment could negatively impact the implant fixation, especially for cementless TKR that requires bone ingrowth. Our aim was to quantify the effect varus alignment on the bone-implant interaction of cementless tibial baseplates. To this end, we evaluated the bone-implant micromotion and the amount of bone at risk of failure. [2,3]. Methods. Finite element models (Fig.1) were developed from pre-operative CT scans of the tibiae of 11 female patients with osteoarthritis (age: 58–77 years). We sought to compare two loading conditions from Smith et al.;. [1]. these corresponded to a mechanically aligned knee and a knee with 4° of varus. Consequently, we virtually implanted each model with a two-peg cementless baseplate following two tibial alignment strategies: mechanical alignment (i.e., perpendicular to the tibial mechanical axis) and 2° tibial varus alignment (the femoral resection accounts for additional 2° varus). The baseplate was modeled as solid titanium (E=114.3 GPa; v=0.33). The pegs and a 1.2 mm layer on the bone-contact surface were modeled as 3D-printed porous titanium (E=1.1 GPa; v=0.3). Bone material properties were non-homogeneous, determined from the CT scans using relationships specific to the proximal tibia. [2,4]. The bone-implant interface was modelled as frictional with friction coefficients for solid and porous titanium of 0.6 and 1.1, respectively. The tibia was fixed 77 mm distal to the resection. For mechanical alignment, instrumented TKR loads previously measured in vivo. [5]. were applied to the top of the baseplate throughout level gait in 2% intervals (Fig.1a). For varus alignment, the varus/valgus moment was modified to match the ratio of medial-lateral force distribution from Smith et al. [1]. (Fig.1b). Results. For both alignments and all bones, the largest micromotion and amount of bone at risk of failure occurred during mid stance, at 16% of gait (Figs.2,3). Peak micromotion, located at the antero-lateral edge of the baseplate, was 153±32 µm and 273±48 µm for mechanical and varus alignment, respectively. The area of the baseplate with micromotion above 40 µm (the threshold for bone ingrowth. [3]. ) was 28±5% and 41±4% for mechanical and varus alignment, respectively. The amount of bone at risk of failure at the bone-implant interface was 0.5±0.3% and 0.8±0.3% for the mechanical and varus alignment, respectively. Discussion. The peak micromotion and the baseplate area with micromotion above 40 µm increased with varus alignment compared to mechanical alignment. Furthermore, the amount of bone at risk of failure, although small for both alignments, was greater for varus alignment. These results suggest that varus alignment, consisting of a combination of femoral and tibial alignment, may negatively impact bone ingrowth and increase the risk of bone failure for cementless tibial baseplates of this TKR design

Introduction. To evaluate the effect of hydroxyapatite coating, two same shape cementless stems were compared in this randomized control trial study. Methods. Between May 2003 and February 2010, 88 patients had a primary cementless total hip arthroplasty with two different types of cementless stems. Forty-three patients had Proarc stems (P group) (Kyocera Medical, Osaka, Japan), and Forty-five patients had Proarc HA stems (HA group) (Kyocera Medical, Osaka, Japan) which was coated with thin (20 micrometer) hydroxyapatite on Proarc rough porous coating. Gender distribution, average age at surgery, average weight and average follow-up period were same in the two groups. The average follow-up period was 8.5 years (range, 5 to 13 years). The average age at the time of surgery was 63 years. Porous acetabular shells and highly crosslinked polyethylene liners made by Kyocera Medical corporation were implanted into all hips. Stems were implanted with a modified Hardinge surgical approach without trochanteric osteotomy. Harris Hip Score was used for clinical evaluation. Post-op radiographs of these patients were evaluated. Fisher's exact probability test was used for statistical analysis. P values of less than 0.05 were considered to be significant. Results. The mean preoperative score and postoperative score of P group were 39 points and 86 points, respectively. The mean preoperative score and postoperative score of HA group were 46 points and 87 points, respectively. All stems were evaluated as bone-ingrown fixation in both groups. The rate of varus inclination was not different between two groups. The rate of severe stress shielding was not different. Discussion. However hydroxyapatite coating is useful for early fixation, the adverse effect, such as delamination for long-term in vivo situation is questionable. There was no significant difference between P-group and HA group in the present study. Longer follow-up is required to evaluate hydroxyapatite coating

Introduction. Cementless Total Knee Replacement (TKR) was introduced to improve the longevity of implant; but has yet to be widely adopted because of reports of higher earlier failures in some series. The cementless TKR design has evolved recently and we have been using cementless component – both femoral and tibial on our patients. The long follow-up for fully TKR has been scarce in the literature. The purpose of this study isto investigate the minimum of ten years clinical and radiographic result of cementless titanium component and cementless tantalum component in primary TKR. Material & method. From 2008 to 2010 317 TKR underwent primary total knee with cementless femoral component titanium based (Zimmer Nexgen) and cementless tantalum component monoblock tibial component, The surgery was performed mainly on younger patients - average age was 48 yrs old ranging from 26 yrs old to 62 yrs old. All surgeries were performed by single surgeon. All patients were followed clinically and radiographically for a minimum of 8 yrs. Mean 7.8 years and range from 7 to 9 years. The underlying diagnosis for majority of the cases were degenerative arthritis in 97 of the cases and rheumatoid arthritis on the 3%. Result. We have revised 6 cases − 3 cases were for sepsis. They were revised in 2 stages. And we also revised 5 cases for loosening of femoral component. The tibial component revision for aseptic loosening or osteolysis for an end point for survivorship was a 100% for the tibia monoblock design. There was no radiographic evidence of tibial component loosening or subsidence, or migration at the time of the latest follow-up for tibia monoblock. On the femoral part we documented 16 cases other than those 4 revision for osteolysis, where limited osteolysis happened in some area of the tibial component but it did not affect stability and those has been followed up for a longer term. There was interesting phenomena in some of those cases where bone growth happened around the anterior cortex where it sealed the component entirely. Knee society scores improved from 51 pre-operatively to 94 pre-operatively on the last clinical visit. We had 32 cases where the patientswere able to regain their full mobility flexion of over 150 degrees. Conclusion. Our data clearly shows that the cementless TKR has excellent result as compared to the cemented with a good survival ship at 10 years. The tantalum tibial component shows an excellent survivorship. The femoral component also present reasonably good result but we still faced a few cases of loosening. The functional outcome for the implant with the surgery was satisfactory. With this result we strongly recommend using the cementless implant in young patients. We believe that cementless tibial is totally safe at this point as well as the femoral cementless prosthesis. However, we expect some improvement with the outcome with the femoral component when using the tantalum

There is no question that at some point many TKAs will be cementless-the question is when. The advantages of cementless TKA include a shorter operative time, no need for a tourniquet, more suitability for MIS, no concern for cement extrusion, and the history of THA. The concerns for cementless TKA include the history to date with cementless TKA (tibia and metal-backed patella), variable bony substrate, surgical cut precision, cost, revision concerns, and the patella (for patella component resurfacers). Cemented total knee arthroplasty remains the gold standard and has proven to provide durable results in most patients. The early experience with cementless tibial fixation was problematic due to tibial micromotion leading to pain and loosening. Screw fixed tibial components had additional problems as portals for polyethylene debris leading to tibial osteolysis. Moreover, metal-backed patellar components were associated with a high failure rate and most surgeons began to cement all three components. Renewed interest in cementless tibial fixation is driven in part by newer materials felt to be more suitable for ingrowth and by the perceived benefit of minimally invasive surgery. One of the concerns in limited exposure total knee arthroplasty is the difficulty in preventing the extravasation of cement posteriorly. If there is evidence-based data that quad sparing non-patella everting and limited incision length facilitates rehabilitation and does not jeopardise outcome, cementless tibial fixation will be a more attractive option in some patients. An additional concern is that the tibial surface is frequently quite variable in terms of the strength of the cancellous bone. Bone cement stabilises those differences and provides a homogeneous platform for load bearing through the tibial component

Total knee arthroplasty is an excellent operation and the results have been well documented for both cemented and cementless techniques. It is generally accepted that the results for cemented total knee outpace the results for cementless total knees. Despite this there remains great interest in developing systems and techniques that might allow predictable biologic fixation for knee arthroplasty. There is a long list of requirements that must be met to predictably allow bone ingrowth. These include viable bone, optimal pore size, optimal pore depth, optimal porosity, minimal gaps between bone and implant and minimal micromotion. Implant design is critical but it is proposed that operative techniques can help with some of these issues. We will discuss these operative issues during the surgical demo. These technique issues include: replication of normal posterior slope of the tibia, irrigation of all cuts to avoid thermal necrosis, and application of autologous bone chips to interface - “bone slurry”. These are obviously not all of the issues to consider but we feel they are some of the more important factors related to the cementless technique. The surgeon also has to be mindful of all of the other techniques that are essential to primary total knee arthroplasty. This demo will also utilise an ultracongruent bearing and with Vitamin E polyethylene

Total hip arthroplasty has become one of the most successful orthopaedic procedures with long-term survival rate. An ever-increasing acceptance of the potential longevity of THA systems has contributed to an increasing incidence of THA in younger and more active patients. Nowadays, especially in younger patients, cementless THA is the favored method worldwide. Since the first cementless THA in late 1970s, many implant designs and modifications have been made. Despite excellent long-term results for traditional straight cementless stems, periprosthetic fractures or gluteal insufficiency are still a concern. For instance, as reported in a meta-analysis by Masonis and Bourne, the incidence of gluteal insufficiency after THA varies between 4% and 22%. In contrast, the flattened lateral profile of the SP-CL. ®. anatomical cementless stem can protect the greater trochanter during the use of cancellous bone compressors and can avoid gluteal insufficiency after THA. Another benefit of this stem design is the rotational stability and the natural load transfer due to the anatomical concept. In this context, we report our experiences using the SP-CL. ®. anatomical cementless stem. The study group consists of 1452 THA cases (850 male, 602 female) with an average age of 62 years (range 25–76 years). After a mean follow-up of 20 months, in seven cases (0.5%) a stem exchange was necessitated. The reason for stem revision was periprosthetic fracture in 4 cases (0.3%) and periprosthetic joint infection in three cases (0.2%). In five patients, hip dislocation and in four patients migration of the stem occurred. However, stem exchange was not required in those cases. In conclusion, the SP-CL. ®. anatomical cementless stem has excellent short-term results

Total knee replacements are being more commonly performed in active younger and obese patients. Fifteen-year survivorship studies demonstrate that cemented total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85 to 97%. Cemented knee arthroplasties are doomed to failure due to loss of cement-bone interlock over time. Inferior survivorship occurs in younger patients and obese patients who would be expected to place increased stress on the bone-cement interfaces. Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA) studies have indicated that cementless fixation should perform better than cemented fixation. However, cementless fixation for total knee replacement has not gained widespread utilization due to the plethora of poor results reported in early series. The poor initial results with cementless total knee replacement have occurred due to poor implant designs such as cobalt chrome porous interfaces, poor initial tibial component stability, lack of continuous porous coating, poor polyethylene, and use of metal-backed patellae. I have used cementless fixation for total knee replacements for young, active, and heavy patients since 1986 when durability over 20 years is desirable. My series of over 1,300 cementless TKAs represents about 20% of the 6,500 total knees I have performed from 1986 to 2017. I have seen initial failures in my series due to the use of metal-backed patellae with thin polyethylene, older generation polyethylene, and use of screws with the tibial components which provide access to the metaphyseal bone for polyethylene wear debris. Overall implant fixation failures were still significantly low due to the use of a highly porous titanium surface on both the tibial and femoral components. With the advent of utilizing implants with continuous porous surfaces and highly crosslinked polyethylene, and elimination of use of metal-backed patellae and tibial screws, I have only had one revision due to aseptic loosening or osteolysis in the last 1,071 cases performed since 2002. Almost 50% of total knees are now performed on patients under the age of 65. A 55-year-old patient has a 30 year life expectancy. Modern total knee replacement design has made biological fixation predictable for young and heavy patients. Because it is a biological interface, it should respond better than cement to the increased stresses that will be applied over many years by our younger, more active and heavier total knee population

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is reliable, durable, and reproducible in relieving pain and improving function in patients with arthritis of the knee joint. Cemented fixation is the gold standard with low rates of loosening and excellent survivorship in several large clinical series and joint registries. While cementless knee designs have been available for the past 3 decades, changing patient demographics (i.e. younger patients), improved implant designs and materials, and a shift towards TKA procedures being performed in ambulatory surgery centers has rekindled the debate of the role of cementless knee implants in TKA. The drive towards achieving biologic implant fixation in TKA is also driven by the successful transition from cemented hip implants to uncemented THA. However, new technologies and new techniques must be adopted as a result of an unmet need, significant improvement, and/or clinical advantage. Thus, the questions remain: 1) Why switch; and 2) Is cementless TKA more reliable, durable, or reproducible compared to cemented TKA?. There are several advantages to using cement during TKA. First, the technique can be universally applied to all cases without exception and without concerns for bone health or structure. Second, cement can mask imprecisions in bone cuts and is a remarkably durable grout. Third, cement allows for antibiotic delivery at the time surrounding surgery which has been shown in some instances to reduce the risk of subsequent infection. Finally, cement fixation has provided successful and durable fixation across various types knee designs, surface finishes, and articulations. On the other hand, cementless knee implants have had an inconsistent track record throughout history. While some have fared very well, others have exhibited early failures and high revision rates. Behery et al. reported on a series of 70 consecutive cases of cementless TKA matched with 70 cemented TKA cases based on implant design and demographics and found that cementless TKA was associated with a greater risk of aseptic loosening and revision surgery at 5 years follow up. Finally, to date, there has not been a randomised controlled clinical trial demonstrating superiority of cementless fixation compared to cemented fixation in TKA. Improvements in materials and designs have definitely made cementless TKA designs viable. However, concerns with added cost, reproducibility, and durability remain. Cement fixation has withstood the test of time and is not the main cause of TKA failure. Therefore, until there is significant data showing that cementless TKA is more durable, reliable, and reproducible compared to cemented TKA, the widespread use of these implants cannot be recommended

Introduction. Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs are clinically successful and allow for long term biological fixation. Utilizing morselized bone to promote biological fixation is a strategy in cementless implantation. However, it is unknown how bone debris influences the initial placement of the tray. Recent findings show that unseated tibia trays without good contact with the tibial resection experience increased motion. This current study focuses on the effect of technique and instrument design on the initial implantation of a cementless porous tibia. Specifically, can technique or instrument design influence generation of bone debris, and thereby change the forces required to fully seat a cementless tray with pegs?. Methods. This bench top test measured the force-displacement curve during controlled insertion of a modern cementless tibia plate with two fixation pegs. A total of nine pairs of stripped human cadaver tibias were prepared according to the surgical technique. However, the holes for the fixation pegs were drilled intentionally shallow to isolate changes in insertion force due to the hole preparation. A first generation instrument set (Instrument 1.0) and new instrument set design (Instrument 2.0), including a new drill bit designed to remove debris from the peg hole, were used. The tibias prepared with Instrument 1.0 were either cleaned to remove bone debris from the holes or not cleaned. The tibias prepared with the Instrument 2.0 instruments were not cleaned, resulting in three groups: Instrument 1.0 (n=7), Instrument 1.0 Cleaned (n=5), and Instrument 2.0 (n=6). Following tibia resection and preparation of holes for the fixation pegs, the tibias were cut and potted in bone cement ensuring the osteotomy was horizontal. The tibial tray was mounted in a load frame (Enduratec) and the trays were inserted at a constant rate (0.169mm/sec) while recording the force. The test was concluded when the pegs were clearly past the bottom of the intentionally shallow holes. Results. The force-displacement curves from this method were dependent on the instrument used and cleaning of the holes. Instrument 2.0 specimens were inserted about 2 mm past the maximum peg depth before experiencing a significant increased resistance. The Instrument 1.0 Cleaned holes saw an increase in force slightly past the maximum peg depth, while the Instrument 1.0 group saw increase in force around 1 mm before reaching the maximum peg depth. The average insertion force required to reach maximum peg depth was significantly higher (p<0.05) for the Instrument 1.0 group (790.7 N, sd=185.9) than both the Instrument 1.0 Cleaned (429.7 N, sd=116.8) and the Instrument 2.0 group (580.4 N, sd=89.3). The insertion forces at a ‘mid-tunnel’ location, before the increase in resistance, were not affected by drill design as the drill diameters were the same, resulting in the same press fit. Conclusions. Bone debris in fixation feature holes increases the force to fully seat a cementless tibia plate. This suggests there is a cost to leaving morselized bone in place. Removing bone debris through instrument design or surgical technique can ensure that a tibial plate is fully seated at time of implantation, maximizing initial fixation

Cemented unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) has been used for many years and has excellent results in many follow-up studies. However, concerns about the quality of fixation, cementing errors, and radiolucent lines have encouraged the development of cementless prostheses. Mobile bearing UKR are probably the ideal implants for cementless fixation as the loads at the interface tend to be compressive. Prior to the widespread introduction of cementless mobile bearing UKR three studies have been performed to assess this device. In a randomised radiostereometric (RSA) study the migration of cementless and cemented devices were the same in the second year suggesting the quality of fixation achieved was similar. A clinical randomised study demonstrated a dramatic reduction in radiolucent lines with cementless components compared to cemented and no difference in clinical outcome. A prospective cohort study of 1000 patients demonstrated no overall difference in complications or revision rate and identified no contraindications for cementless fixation. There are however anecdotal reports of occasional tibial plateau fracture and early subsidence of cementless components. Data from the National Registers would suggest that the revision rate with cementless is about half that compared to cemented however this difference may be because only experienced surgeons are using the cementless device. Cementless mobile bearing UKR does seem to be a good evolutionary step in the development of UKR. It is important however that surgeons are trained in the use of the device and are careful with the technique

Background. Well-fixed cementless stems are sometimes needed to be extracted in patients with complications including periprosthetic infection, stem-neck breakage or trunnionosis. The purpose of this study was to report the clinical outcome in patients undergoing re-implantation surgery following removal of a well-fixed porous-coated cementless stem by the femoral longitudinal split (FLS) procedure(Fig.1, Fig.2). Methods. We conducted a retrospective study and radiographic review of 16 patients who had undergone re-implantation following the FLS procedure to remove a well-fixed stem due to periprosthetic infection, stem-neck breakage or trunnionosis. The study group consisted of 2 men and 14women with an average age of 68.4 years. Mean follow-up was 33.1± 25.0 months. Operation time, intraoperative bleeding, complications, causes of re-operation and clinical score were evaluated and the Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate the longevity of the stem. Results. The average operation time was 272±63 minutes and intraoperative bleeding was 420±170 ml. Although postoperative dislocation occurred in 5 hips and sinking of the stem was found in 3 hips after surgery, no progression of the stem sinking was observed and the clinical JOA and JHEQ scores were both improved after re-implantation surgery. Re-implantation surgery with Zweymüller-type stems, which are shorter than those removed, revealed evidence of osseointegration of the stem without femoral fracture. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis of stem revision for any reason as the end point revealed 70.3% survival at 9 years (Fig.3). Conclusion. The FLS procedure is expected to confer successful clinical results without loosening of the stem, following safe extraction of well-fixed porous-coated cementless stems without fracture and will allow re-implantation with shorter cementless stems than those removed. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Background. Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty has been developed to reduce the incidence of failure secondary to aseptic loosening, osteolysis and stress-induced osteopenia, especially in younger and more active patients. However, failures are still more common compared to cemented components, especially those involving the tibia. It is hypothesized that this is caused by incomplete contact between the tibial tray and the underlying bony surface due to: (i) inadequate flatness of the tibial osteotomy, or (ii) failure of implantation to spread the area of contact over the exposed cancellous surface. In the present study we compare the contact area developed during implantation of a cementless tray as a function of the initial flatness of the tibial osteotomy. Method. Eight joint replacement surgeons prepared 14 cadaveric knees for cementless TKR using a standard instrumentation set (ZimmerBiomet Inc). The tibial osteotomy was created using an oscillating bone saw and a 1.27mm blade (Stryker Inc) directed by a slotted cutting guide mounted on an extramedullary rod and fixed to the tibia with pins and screws. The topography of the exposed cancellous surface was captured with a commercial laser scanner (Faro Inc, Halifax, approx. 33,000 surface points). 3D computer models of each tibial surface were generated in a CAD environment (Rapidform, Inuus). After scanning, a cementless tibial tray was implanted on the prepared tibial surface using a manual impactor. The tray-tibia constructs were dissected free of soft tissue, embedded in mounting resin, and sectioned with a diamond wafering saw. Points of bone-tray contact and interface separation were identified by stereomicroscopy and incorporated in the 3D computer models. Maps were generated depicting contacting and non-contacting areas Each model was subdivided into 7 zones for characterizing the distribution of interface contact in terms of anatomic location. Results. The flatness for the tibial osteotomies averaged 1.1±0.35 mm (range: 0.56–1.81mm). After impaction, 79.8±0.3% of the tibial surface had plastically deformed to establish a contacting interface with the implant. 15.1% of the bony surface was within 0.2mm of the tray and 17.6% was within 0.3mm. Gaps large enough to impede ingrowth only occupied 2.6% of the exposed tibial These non-contacting areas were typically located centrally at the ACL, PCL and canal zones. There was an inverse linear relationship between the initial flatness of the tibial osteotomy and the percentage of tray-bone contact. Conclusions. The amount of direct contact between the bone and implant is critical for the development of stability in cementless fixation. We found a relationship between ultimate bony contact and initial flatness. However, we also found that during impaction of the implant, bony contact increased through deformation of the most prominent peaks of the cancellous surface. Interface gaps were consistently observed in central areas of the tibia surface located above the medullary canal which may be reduced through selection of trays with distal keels. For any figures or tables, please contact authors directly

Experience has demonstrated in the hip and knee, related to total joint replacement arthroplasty, polymethyl methacrylate cement fixation can provide problems in terms of loosening, fragmentation, particulate wear and ultimate failure. These same problems have been recognised in total shoulder arthroplasty related to cement fixation of the glenoid. While cement fixation of the humeral component has proven much less problematic, there has been a swelling towards avoidance of using cement to secure the humeral component for fear of difficulty if revision is required. Surprisingly, with the high incidence of lucent lines, bone resorption and frank loosening, representing the most common source of failure in total shoulder arthroplasty, cementless fixation of the glenoid has not been, until now, embraced. The advent of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has demonstrated the ability for secure cementless fixation to provide long-lasting secure implant retention in implants which have inherently higher shear and stress forces passing through the implant/bone interface. In anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty a woven tantalum anchor (Trabecular Metal) has proven to demonstrate secure cementless fixation as well. This presentation will discuss the use of trabecular metal anchored glenoid implants with and without additional screw fixation for anatomic and convertible reverse arthroplasty baseplates. Avoidance of complications with successful long-lasting outcomes requires meticulous surgical attention to detail

Introduction. Appropriate prosthetic alignment is an important factor in maintaining stability and maximising the performance of the bearing after total hip replacement (THR). With a cementless component, the anteversion of the native femur has been shown to influence the anteversion of the prosthetic stem. However, the extent to which anteversion of a cementless stem can be adjusted from the native anteversion has seldom been reported. The aim of this study was to investigate the difference between native and stem anteversion with two different cementless stem designs. Method. 116 patients had 3-dimensional templating as part of their routine planning for THR (Optimized Ortho, Sydney). 96 patients from 3 surgeons (AS, JB, SM) received a blade stem (TriFit TS, Corin, UK) through a posterior approach. 18 patients received a fully HA-coated stem (MetaFix, Corin, UK) through a posterior approach by a single surgeon (WB). The anteversion of the native femoral neck was measured from a 3D reconstruction of the proximal femur. All patients received a post-operative CT scan which was superimposed onto the pre-op CT scan. The difference between native and achieved stem anteversion was then measured. As surgeons had differing philosophies around target stem anteversion, the differences amongst surgeons were also investigated. Results. On average, stems were implanted in less anteversion than native. The mean deviation between native and stem anteversion of the blade stems was −3.5° (−34.8° to 13.8°). The mean deviations of the three surgeons using the blade stem were −7.9° (−34.8° to 10.4°), −3.1° (−18.1° to 12.0°) and 2.7° (−8.9° to 13.8°). These were statistically significant, and represented a difference in philosophy around target anteversion amongst surgeons. The mean deviation between native and stem anteversion of the fully HA-coated stems was −6.5° (−24.6° to 9.2°). Conclusions. Cementless stem anteversion is not dictated by the native femoral anteversion. There were differences in target anteversion philosophies amongst surgeons and this was seen in the results. Surgical approach, proximal entry point, osteotomy angle, stem design and patient anatomy will all influence the ability to dictate cementless stem anteversion. The effect of these variables are the subject of on-going work

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a successful operation associated with a high rate of clinical success and long-term durability. Cementless technology for TKA was first explored 30 years ago with the hope of simplifying the performance of the procedure and reducing an interface for potential failure by eliminating the use of cement. Poor implant design and the use of first generation biomaterials have been implicated in many early failures of these prostheses due to aseptic loosening and reflected the failure of either the tibial or patellar component. Despite this, many excellent intermediate and long-term series have clearly demonstrated the ability of cementless TKA to perform well with good to excellent survival, comparable to that of cemented designs. Lessons learned from the initial experiences with cementless technology in TKA have led to improvements in prosthetic design and materials development. One of the most innovative biomaterials introduced into orthopaedics for cementless fixation is porous tantalum. Compared to other commonly used materials for cementless fixation, porous tantalum has the highest surface friction against bone, optimizing initial stability at the implant-bone interface as a prerequisite for long-term stability of the reconstruction. At the 2013 AAOS Annual Meeting, Abdel presented the 5-year Mayo Clinic experience with cementless TKA utilizing a highly porous monoblock tibial component in 117 knees and found NO difference in survivorship compared to cemented fixation with a re-operation rate of 3.5% in both groups. They had no revisions for aseptic loosening. These early to intermediate results reflect our own experience with all cementless TKA utilizing a cobalt-chromium fibermesh femoral component, as well as monoblock porous tantalum tibial and patellar components with up to 11-year follow up. In that series of 115 patients, there was a 95.7% survival of implants, with no revisions of any components for aseptic loosening. Further advantages to using cementless fixation include the elimination of concerns with regard to monomer-induced hypotension, thermal necrosis from PMMA polymerization, and third body wear secondary to retained or fragmented cement. Savings are also realised from elimination of the costs of cement, a PMMA mixing system, cement gun, pulse lavage system, and irrigation solution. Perhaps the greatest cost savings is derived from the reduction in operating room time. At our institution–a Level 1 county trauma center with an orthopaedic residency training program–we typically spend an average of 19 minutes of operating room time for the cementing of a total knee arthroplasty. Our average time expended for insertion of all three cementless implants is 47 seconds–representing a significant savings in the hospital operating room time charge. From the standpoint of the patient, the shorter operating time reduces the time under anesthesia, the blood loss, the risk of venous thromboembolism, as well as the infection risk–optimizing the conditions for a reduction in post-operative complications, directly impacting a potential reduction in morbidity and mortality. Overall, the performance of all cementless TKA at our facility is cost-saving, is easily performed and reproduced by orthopaedic residents, and brings potential advantages to the patient in the form of a reduction in complications and an improvement in outcomes. Cementless fixation is the wave of the future, and the future is now

Total knee replacements (TKRs) are being more commonly performed in active younger and obese patients. Fifteen year survivorship studies demonstrate that cemented total knee replacements have excellent survivorship, with reports of 85% to 97%. However, inferior survivorship occurs in younger patients and obese patients who would be expected to place increased stress on the bone cement interfaces. Cementless fixation for total knee replacement has not gained widespread utilization due to the plethora of poor results reported in early series. These poor results do not reflect that cementless fixation is not obtainable, since an almost universal acceptance of cementless fixation for total hip replacement has shown. A Cochrane database study of total knees with roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA) demonstrated that the risk of future aseptic loosening should be 50% less with cementless fixation. The poor initial results with cementless total knee replacement have occurred due to poor implant designs such as cobalt chrome porous interfaces, poor initial tibial component fixation, lack of continuous porous coating, poor polyethylene, and use of metal-backed patellae. I have used cementless fixation for total knee replacements for young, active, and heavy patients since 1986 when durability over 20 years is desirable. My series of over 1,000 cementless TKRs represents about 20% of the total knees I have performed from 1986 to 2015. I have seen failures in my series due to the initial use of metal-backed patellae with thin polyethylene and use of screws and femoral and tibial components which provide access to the metaphyseal bone for polyethylene wear debris. Overall failures were still significantly low due to the use of highly porous titanium surfaces on the tibial and femoral components. Isolated aseptic loosening only occurred on one tibial component in my entire series. With the advent of utilizing implants with continuous porous surfaces and highly cross-linked polyethylene, and elimination of use of metal-backed patellae and tibial screws, I have only had one revision due to aseptic loosening or osteolysis in the last 760 cases performed since 2002. Almost 50% of total knees are now performed on patients under the age of 65. A 55-year-old patient has a 30-year life expectancy. Modern total knee replacement design has made biological fixation predictable for young and heavy patients. Because it is a biological interface, it should respond better than cement to the increased stresses that will be applied over many years by our younger, more active and heavier total knee population