Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Are cementless acetabular components contra-indicated in the elderly?

Les cupules acétabulaires non cimentées sont-elles contre-indiquées chez les patients âgés?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The long-term success of primary total hip arthroplasty in elderly patients has been well documented. In addition, the use of uncemented acetabular components in younger patients has been well established. However, as yet, there has not been widespread use of uncemented acetabular components in older patients. This study reviews a single surgeon series of 179 consecutive primary total hip replacements using an uncemented acetabular component. Patients were followed up clinically, radiologically and by means of a postal questionnaire. Patients were divided into under-70 years (n = 80) and 70 years and older (n = 99). There were 88 males and 91 females who were followed up to a mean of 24.1 months. There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to the need for additional screw fixation, post-operative complications or implant loosening. Functionally, no differences were recorded in terms of pain, limp, mobility or ability to put on shoes and socks post-operatively. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the levels of satisfaction reported. These results justify the use of uncemented acetabular components in older patients.

Résumé

Les succès à long terme de l’arthroplastie totale de hanche de première intention chez les personnes âgées a été bien analysée et documentée. De plus l’utilisation de cupules acétabulaires non cimentées chez des sujets plus jeunes est bien établie. Cependant à ce jour l’utilisation large de cupules non cimentées chez les patients âgés n’a pas été prônée. Cette étude porte sur 179 poses consécutives de prothèses de hanche par le même chirurgien avec utilisation d’une cupule acétabulaire non cimentée. Les patients ont été suivis cliniquement, radiologiquement et grâce à un questionnaire envoyé par la poste. Les patients ont été regroupés en deux groupes, âge inférieur à 70 ans (n = 80) et âge de 70 ans et au-delà (n = 99). Il y avait 88 hommes et 91 femmes qui ont été suivis en moyenne 24.1 mois. Il n’ a pas été noté de différence significative entre les deux groupes concernant la nécessité de vis additionnelles, les complications post-opératoires ou le descellement des implants. Au point de vue fonctionnel aucune différence n’a pas non plus été notée concernant les douleurs, la boiterie, la mobilité, la possibilité de se chausser et de mettre ses bas ou chaussettes. Enfin aucune différence n’est apparue entre les deux groupes quant au degré de satisfaction. Ces résultats justifient l’utilisation de cupules acétabulaires non cimentées chez les personnes âgées.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Adler E, Stuchin SA, Kummer FJ (1992) Stability of press-fit acetabular cups. J Arthroplasty 7(3):295–301

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Berry DJ, Harmsen WS, Cabanela ME, Morrey BF (2002) Twenty-five year survivorship of two thousand consecutive primary Charnley total hip replacements: factors affecting survivorship of acetabular and femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg 84A:171–177

    Google Scholar 

  3. Boettcher WG (1992) Total hip arthroplasties in the elderly. Morbidity, mortality, and cost effectiveness. Clin Orthop 274:30–34

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brander VA, Malhotra S, Jet J, Heinemann AW, Stulberg SD (1997) Outcome of hip and knee arthroplasty in persons aged 80 years and older. Clin Orthop 345:67–78

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Christie J, Burnett R, Potts HR, Pell AC (1994) Echocardiography of transatrial embolism during cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty of the hip. J Bone Joint Surg 76B:409–412

    Google Scholar 

  6. Curtis MJ, Jinnah RH, Wilson VD, Hungerford DS (1992) The initial stability of uncemented acetabular components. J Bone Joint Surg 74B:372–376

    Google Scholar 

  7. Della Valle AG, Zoppi A, Peterson MG, Salvati EA (2004) Clinical and radiographic results associated with a modern, cementless modular cup design in total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 86A:1998–2003

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dorr LD, Wan Z, Gruen T (1997) Functional results in total hip replacement in patients 65 years and older. Clin Orthop 336:143–151

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Dunkley AB, Eldridge JD, Lee MB, Smith EJ, Learmonth ID (2000) Cementless acetabular replacement in the young. A 5- to 10-year prospective study. Clin Orthop 376:149–155

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ekelund A, Rydell N, Nilsson OS (1992) Total hip arthroplasty in patients 80 years of age and older. Clin Orthop 281:101–106

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hagio K, Sugano N, Takashina M, Nishii T, Yoshikawa H, Ochi T (2003) Embolic events during total hip arthroplasty: an echocardiographic study. J Arthroplasty 18(2):186–192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Healy WL (1995) Economic considerations in total hip arthroplasty and implant standardization. Clin Orthop 311:102–108

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Healy WL (2002) Hip implant selection for total hip arthroplasty in elderly patients. Clin Orthop 405:54–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Keisu KS, Orozco F, Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH (2001) Primary cementless total hip arthroplasty in octogenarians: two to eleven-year follow up. J Bone Joint Surg 83A:359–363

    Google Scholar 

  15. Levy RN, Levy CM, Snyder J, Digiovanni J (1995) Outcome and long-term results following total hip replacement in elderly patients. Clin Orthop 316:25–30

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Massin P, Schmidt L, Engh CA (1989) Evaluation of cementless acetabular component migration. An experimental study. J Arthroplasty 4(3):245–251

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Orsini EC, Byrick RJ, Mullen JB, Kay JC, Waddell JP (1987) Cardiopulmonary function and pulmonary microemboli during arthroplasty using cemented or non-cemented components. The role of intramedullary pressure. J Bone Joint Surg 69A:822–832

    Google Scholar 

  18. Pettine KA, Aamild BC, Cabanela ME (1991) Elective total hip arthroplasty in patients older than 80 years of age. Clin Orthop 266:127–132

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB, Mulliken BD, Nayak N (1997) Acetabular osteolysis with cementless cups: a 5 to 7 year follow-up. Acta Orthop Belg 63(Suppl 1):83–92

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Callaghan JJ et al (1999) Acetabular fracture associated with cementless acetabular component insertion: a report of 13 cases. J Arthroplasty 18(2):186–192

    Google Scholar 

  21. Spicer DD, Schaper LA, Pomeroy DL, et al (2001) Cementless cup fixation in total hip arthroplasty after 5–8 years. Int Orthop 25(5):286–289

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Torga Spak R, Stuchin SA (2005) Cementless porous-coated sockets without holes implanted with pure press-fit technique. J Arthroplasty 20(1):4–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wixson RL, Stulberg SD, Mehlhoff M (1991) Total hip replacement with cemented, uncemented, and hybrid prostheses. A comparison of clinical and radiographic results at two to four years. J Bone Joint Surg 73A:257–270

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. F. Quinlan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wahab, A., Quinlan, J.F., Sherif, S. et al. Are cementless acetabular components contra-indicated in the elderly?. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 17, 263–266 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-006-0170-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-006-0170-4

Keywords

Mots clés

Navigation