Cementless and cemented total knee arthroplasty in patients younger than fifty five years. Which is better?
- First Online:
- Cite this article as:
- Kim, Y., Park, J., Lim, H. et al. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) (2014) 38: 297. doi:10.1007/s00264-013-2243-4
- 509 Views
The purpose of this prospective, randomised study was to evaluate long-term clinical results, radiographic findings, complications and revision and survivorship rates in patients <55 years at a minimum of 16 years after undergoing bilateral, sequential, simultaneous, cemented and cementless total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) in the same patients.
Bilateral, sequential, simultaneous TKAs were performed in 80 patients (160 knees). There were 63 women and 17 men with a mean age of 54.3 years (range 49–55), who received a cementless prosthesis in one knee and a cemented prosthesis in the other. The mean follow-up was 16.6 years (range 16–17).
At final review, the mean Knee Society (KS) knee scores (95.8 versus 96.9), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) osteoarthritis (OA) index (25.4 versus 25.9), range of motion (ROM) (125°versus 128°), patient satisfaction (8.1 versus 8.3) and radiological results were similar in both groups. Femoral component survival rate was 100 % in both groups at 17 years; at 17 years, the cemented tibial component survival rate was 100 % and the cementless tibial component 98.7 %. No osteolysis was identified in either group.
Long-term results of both cementless and cemented TKAs were encouraging in patients with OA who were <55 years. However, we found no evidence to prove the superiority of cementless over cemented TKAs.