To achieve the functional benefits of the direct anterior (DA) approach and the fixation benefits of cemented replacement, this study combined the two techniques posing the following questions: does the limited access of the DA approach adversely affect the cement technique?; and does such a cementing technique reduce the incidence of cementless complications? A consecutive series of 341 patients (360 hips) receiving the DA approach between 2016 and 2018 were reviewed. There were 203 cementless stems and 157 cemented stems. Mean age was 75 years (70 to 86) in the cementless group and 76 years (52 to 94) in the cemented group, with 239 (70%) females in the whole series. Femoral complications were compared between the two groups. Mean follow-up was 1.5 years (0.1 to 4.4) for patients in the cementless group and 1.3 years (0.0 to 3.9) for patients in the cemented group.Aims
Methods
The acknowledged benefit of the direct anterior (DA) approach is early functional return. Most surgeons in the U.S. use cementless femoral replacement given the negative track record of some cemented designs. However, delayed osseointegration of a femoral stem typically seen in older patients with poor bone quality will delay recovery, diminishing the benefits of the DA approach. Registry studies have shown a higher revision rate and complications in this patient population leading to a renewed interest in cemented fixation. To achieve the functional benefits of the DA approach and the fixation benefits of cemented replacement, this study combined the 2 techniques posing the following questions:1) Does the limited access of the DA approach adversely affect the cement technique? 2) Does such a cementing technique reduce the incidence of cementless complications?Background
Questions posed
