Although the Fitmore Hip Stem has been on the market for almost 15 years, it is still not well documented in randomized controlled trials. This study compares the Fitmore stem with the CementLeSs (CLS) in several different clinical and radiological aspects. The hypothesis is that there will be no difference in outcome between stems. In total, 44 patients with bilateral hip osteoarthritis were recruited from the outpatient clinic at a single tertiary orthopaedic centre. The patients were operated with bilateral one-stage total hip arthroplasty. The most painful hip was randomized to either Fitmore or CLS femoral component; the second hip was operated with the femoral component not used on the first side. Patients were evaluated at three and six months and at one, two, and five years postoperatively with patient-reported outcome measures, radiostereometric analysis, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, and conventional radiography. A total of 39 patients attended the follow-up visit at two years (primary outcome) and 35 patients at five years. The primary outcome was which hip the patient considered to have the best function at two years.Aims
Methods
“Get It Right First Time” (GIRFT) and NHS England’s Best Practice Tariff (BPT) have published directives advising that patients over the ages of 65 (GIRFT) and 69 years (BPT) receiving total hip arthroplasty (THA) should receive cemented implants and have brought in financial penalties if this policy is not observed. Despite this, worldwide, uncemented component use has increased, a situation described as a ‘paradox’. GIRFT and BPT do, however, acknowledge more data are required to support this edict with current policies based on the National Joint Registry survivorship and implant costs. This study compares THA outcomes for over 1,000 uncemented Corail/Pinnacle constructs used in all age groups/patient frailty, under one surgeon, with identical pre- and postoperative pathways over a nine-year period with mean follow-up of five years and two months (range: nine months to nine years and nine months). Implant information, survivorship, and regular postoperative Oxford Hip Scores (OHS) were collected and two comparisons undertaken: a comparison of those aged over 65 years with those 65 and under and a second comparison of those aged 70 years and over with those aged under 70.Aims
Methods
The main aims were to identify risk factors predictive of a radiolucent line (RLL) around the acetabular component with an interface bioactive bone cement (IBBC) technique in the first year after THA, and evaluate whether these risk factors influence the development of RLLs at five and ten years after THA. A retrospective review was undertaken of 980 primary cemented THAs in 876 patients using cemented acetabular components with the IBBC technique. The outcome variable was any RLLs that could be observed around the acetabular component at the first year after THA. Univariate analyses with univariate logistic regression and multivariate analyses with exact logistic regression were performed to identify risk factors for any RLLs based on radiological classification of hip osteoarthritis.Aims
Methods
Cementless knee arthroplasty has seen a recent resurgence in popularity due to conceptual advantages, including improved osseointegration providing biological fixation, increased surgical efficiency, and reduced systemic complications associated with cement impaction and wear from cement debris. Increasingly younger and higher demand patients are requiring knee arthroplasty, and as such, there is optimism cementless fixation may improve implant survivorship and functional outcomes. Compared to cemented implants, the National Joint Registry (NJR) currently reports higher revision rates in cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA), but lower in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). However, recent studies are beginning to show excellent outcomes with cementless implants, particularly with UKA which has shown superior performance to cemented varieties. Cementless TKA has yet to show long-term benefit, and currently performs equivalently to cemented in short- to medium-term cohort studies. However, with novel concepts including 3D-printed coatings, robotic-assisted surgery, radiostereometric analysis, and kinematic or functional knee alignment principles, it is hoped they may help improve the outcomes of cementless TKA in the long-term. In addition, though cementless implant costs remain higher due to novel implant coatings, it is speculated cost-effectiveness can be achieved through greater surgical efficiency and potential reduction in revision costs. There is paucity of level one data on long-term outcomes between fixation methods and the cost-effectiveness of modern cementless knee arthroplasty. This review explores recent literature on cementless knee arthroplasty, with regards to clinical outcomes, implant survivorship, complications, and cost-effectiveness; providing a concise update to assist clinicians on implant choice. Cite this article:
