The optimum cementing technique for the tibial
component in cemented primary total knee replacement (TKR) remains
controversial. The technique of cementing, the volume of cement
and the penetration are largely dependent on the operator, and hence
large variations can occur. Clinical, experimental and computational
studies have been performed, with conflicting results. Early implant
migration is an indication of loosening. Aseptic loosening is the
most common cause of failure in primary TKR and is the product of
several factors. Sufficient penetration of cement has been shown
to increase implant stability. This review discusses the relevant literature regarding all aspects
of the cementing of the tibial component at primary TKR. Cite this article:
We report the clinical and radiological results of a two- to three-year prospective randomised study which was designed to compare a minimally-invasive technique with a standard technique in total knee replacement and was undertaken between January 2004 and May 2007. The mini-midvastus approach was used on 50 patients (group A) and a standard approach on 50 patients (group B). The mean follow-up in both groups was 23 months (24 to 35). The functional outcome was better in group A up to nine months after operation, as shown by statistically significant differences in the mean function score, mean total score and the mean Oxford knee score (all, p = 0.05). Patients in group A had statistically significant greater early flexion (p = 0.04) and reached their greatest mean knee flexion of 126.5° (95° to 135°) 21 days after operation. However, at final follow-up there was no significant difference in the mean maximum flexion between the groups (p = 0.08). Technical errors were identified in six patients from group A (12%) on radiological evaluation. Based on these results, the authors currently use minimally-invasive techniques in total knee replacement in selected cases only.
