What Works Best, a Cemented or Cementless Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?: Minimum 17-year Followup of a Randomized Controlled Trial
- 909 Downloads
Total hip arthroplasty (THA) has been associated with high survival rates, but debate remains concerning the best fixation mode of THA.
We conducted a randomized controlled trial (RCT) with 250 patients with a mean age of 64 years between October 1987 and January 1992 to compare the results of cementless and cemented fixation.
Patients and Methods
Patients were evaluated for revision of either of the components. One hundred twenty-seven patients had died (51%) and 12 (4.8%) were lost to followup. The minimum 17-year followup data (mean, 20 years; range, 17–21 years) for 52 patients of the cementless group and 41 patients of the cemented group were available for evaluation.
Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis at 20 years revealed lower survival rates of cemented compared with cementless THA. The cementless tapered stem was associated with a survivorship of 99%. Age younger than 65 years and male gender were predictors of revision surgery.
The efficacy of future RCTs can be enhanced by randomizing patients in specific patient cohorts stratified to age and gender in multicenter RCTs. Including only younger patients might improve the efficacy of a future RCT with smaller sample sizes being required. A minimum 10-year followup should be anticipated, but this can be expected to be longer if the difference in level of quality between the compared implants is smaller.
Level of Evidence
Level I, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
KeywordsRevision Rate Cementless Fixation Future Randomized Control Trial Cementless Group Specific Patient Cohort
We thank Andreas Laupacis for his outstanding work in setting up this study. We also thank Ann Belmans, department of Biostatistics, KU Leuven, Belgium, for excellent support and advice in the statistical evaluations of this study.
- 3.Australian Orthopaedic Association. National Joint Replacement Registry Annual Report 2008. Available at: http://www.dmac.adelaide.edu.au/aoanjrr/publications.jsp?section=reports2008. Accessed January 6, 2009.
- 6.Biomet Inc. Product Information Manual, Mallory-Head Total Hip Arthroplasty. Warsaw, IN: Biomet Inc; 1990.Google Scholar
- 8.Buckwalter AE, Callaghan JJ, Liu SS, Pedersen DR, Goetz DD, Sullivan PM, Leinen JA, Johnston RC. Results of Charnley total hip arthroplasty with use of improved femoral cementing techniques: a concise follow-up, at a minimum of twenty-five years, of a previous report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:1481–1485.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Engh CA, McGovern TF, Engh CA Jr, Macalino GE. Clinical experience with the anatomic medullary locking (AML) prosthesis for total hip replacement. In: Morrey BF, ed. Biological, Material, and Mechanical Considerations of Joint Replacement. New York, NY: Raven Press; 1993:167–184.Google Scholar
- 20.Firestone DE, Callaghan JJ, Liu SS, Goetz DD, Sullivan PM, Vittetoe DA, Johnston RC. Total hip arthroplasty with a cemented, polished, collared femoral stem and a cementless acetabular component: a follow-up study at a minimum of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:126–132.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 30.Johnsen SP, Sørensen HT, Lucht U, Søballe K, Overgaard S, Pedersen AB. Patient-related predictors of implant failure after primary total hip replacement in the initial, short- and long-terms: a nationwide Danish follow-up study including 36,984 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88:1303–1308.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 37.Mäkelä K, Eskelinen A, Pulkkinen P, Paavolainen P, Remes V. Cemented total hip replacement for primary osteoarthritis in patients aged 55 years or older: results of the 12 most common cemented implants followed for 25 years in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1562–1569.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 39.Mallory TH, Lombardi AV Jr, Leith JR, Fujita H, Hartman JF, Capps SG, Kefauver CA, Adams JB, Vorys GC. Minimal 10-year results of a tapered cementless femoral component in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2001;16(8 suppl 1):49–54.Google Scholar
- 44.McNulty DE, Liao YS, Haas BD. The influence of sterilization method on wear performance of the low contact stress total knee system. Orthopedics. 2002;25(2 suppl 2):s243–s246.Google Scholar
- 47.National Joint Registry. National Joint Registry for England and Wales: 4th Annual Report. Available at: http://www.njrcentre.org.uk/NjrCentre/Portals/0/Documents/England/Reports/NJR_AR_4.pdf. Accessed January 6, 2009.
- 52.Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB, Laupacis A, Feeny D, Wong C, Tugwell P, Leslie K, Bullas R. A double-blind study of 250 cases comparing cemented with cementless total hip arthroplasty: cost-effectiveness and its impact on health-related quality of life. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994;298:156–164.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 63.Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. Annual Report 2006. Available at: www.jru.orthop.gu.se/. Accessed January 6, 2009.