Cementless and cemented total knee arthroplasty in patients younger than fifty five years. Which is better?
- First Online:
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.
KeywordsCementless Cemented Total knee arthroplasty Young patients
- 7.ƠRourke MR, Callaghan JJ, Goetz DD, Sullivan PM, Johnston RC (2002) Osteolysis associated with a cemented modular posterior –cruciate-substituting total knee design: five to eight- year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84(8):1362–1371Google Scholar
- 15.McCaskie AW, Deehan DJ, Green TP, Lock KR, Rhompson JR, Harper WM, Gregg PJ (1998) Randomised, prospective study comparing cemented and cementless total knee replacement: results of press-fit condylar total knee replacement at five years. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80(6):971–975PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Ahlbäck S (1968) Osteoarthrosis of the knee: a radiographic investigation. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 277(Supple):7–72Google Scholar
- 20.Belllamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt LW (1988) Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patient with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15(2):1833–1840Google Scholar
- 22.Kaplan EL, Meier P (1977) Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. JSTOR 53 (282):457–481Google Scholar
- 23.Greenwood M (1926) The natural duration of cancer: Reports on public health and medical subjects. Her Majesty’s stationery office, London, pp 1–26Google Scholar
- 31.Ranawat CS, Flynn WF Jr, Saddler S, Hansrai KK, Maynard MJ (1996) Long-term results of the total condylar knee arthroplasty: a 15-years survivorship study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 286:94–102Google Scholar
- 41.Chockalingam S, Scott G (2000) The outcome of cemented vs cementless fixation of a femoral component in total knee replacement (TKR) with the identification of radiological signs for the prediction of failure. Knee 7(4):233–238Google Scholar