Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

, Volume 472, Issue 4, pp 1291–1299 | Cite as

Cemented versus Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty for Displaced Femoral Neck Fractures: 5-year Followup of a Randomized Trial

  • Ellen Langslet
  • Frede Frihagen
  • Vidar Opland
  • Jan Erik Madsen
  • Lars Nordsletten
  • Wender Figved
Clinical Research

Abstract

Background

Displaced femoral neck fractures usually are treated with hemiarthroplasty. However, the degree to which the design of the implant used (cemented or uncemented) affects the outcome is not known and may be therapeutically important.

Questions/purposes

In this randomized controlled trial, we sought to compare cemented with cementless fixation in bipolar hemiarthroplasties at 5 years in terms of (1) Harris hip scores; (2) femoral fractures; (3) overall health outcomes using the Barthel Index and EQ-5D scores; and (4) complications, reoperations, and mortality since our earlier report on this cohort at 1-year followup.

Methods

We present followup at a median of 5 years after surgery (range, 56–65 months) from a randomized trial comparing a cemented hemiarthroplasty (112 hips) with an uncemented, hydroxyapatite-coated hemiarthroplasty (108 hips), both with a bipolar head. Results were previously reported at 1-year followup. Harris hip scores, Barthel Index, and EQ-5D scores were assessed by one research nurse and one orthopaedic surgeon. Complications and reoperations were determined by chart review and radiographs examined by three orthopaedic surgeons. Sixty patients (56%) had died in the cemented group and 63 (60%) in the uncemented group. Respectively, three and two patients (2.7% and 1.9%) were completely lost to followup.

Results

Harris hip scores at 5 years were higher in the uncemented group than in the cemented group (86.2 versus 76.3; mean difference 9.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9–17.9). The prevalence of postoperative periprosthetic femoral fractures was 7.4% in the uncemented group and 0.9% in the cemented group (hazard ratio [HR], 9.3; 95% CI, 1.16–74.5). Barthel Index and EQ-5D scores were not different between the groups. Between 1 and 5 years, we found no additional infections or dislocations. The mortality rate was not different between the groups (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.82–1.7).

Conclusions

Both arthroplasties may be used with good medium-term results after displaced femoral neck fractures. The uncemented hemiarthroplasty may result in higher hip scores but appears to carry an unacceptably high risk of later femoral fractures.

Level of Evidence

Level I, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

References

  1. 1.
    Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, Tornetta P 3rd, Swiontkowski MF, Berry DJ, Haidukewych G, Schemitsch EH, Hanson BP, Koval K, Dirschl D, Leece P, Keel M, Petrisor B, Heetveld M, Guyatt GH. Operative management of displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly patients. An international survey. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2122–2130.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dolan P, Gudex C, Kind P, Williams A. The time trade-off method: results from a general population study. Health Econ. 1996;5:141–154.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Espehaug B, Furnes O, Engesaeter LB, Havelin LI. 18 years of results with cemented primary hip prostheses in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register: concerns about some newer implants. Acta Orthop. 2009;80:402–412.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    EuroQol_Group. EuroQol—a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy. 1990;16:199–208.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Figved W, Opland V, Frihagen F, Jervidalo T, Madsen JE, Nordsletten L. Cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2426–2435.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Frihagen F, Grotle M, Madsen JE, Wyller TB, Mowinckel P, Nordsletten L. Outcome after femoral neck fractures: a comparison of Harris Hip Score, Eq-5d and Barthel Index. Injury. 2008;39:1147–1156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garellick G, Malchau H, Herberts P. The Charnley versus the Spectron hip prosthesis: clinical evaluation of a randomized, prospective study of 2 different hip implants. J Arthroplasty. 1999;14:407–413.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gjertsen JE, Lie SA, Vinje T, Engesaeter LB, Hallan G, Matre K, Furnes O. More re-operations after uncemented than cemented hemiarthroplasty used in the treatment of displaced fractures of the femoral neck: an observational study of 11,116 hemiarthroplasties from a national register. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2012;94:1113–1119.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hallan G, Lie SA, Furnes O, Engesaeter LB, Vollset SE, Havelin LI. Medium- and long-term performance of 11,516 uncemented primary femoral stems from the Norwegian arthroplasty register. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89:1574–1580.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harris WH. Traumatic arthritis of the hip after dislocation and acetabular fractures: treatment by mold arthroplasty. An end-result study using a new method of result evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51:737–755.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hossain M, Andrew JG. Is there a difference in perioperative mortality between cemented and uncemented implants in hip fracture surgery? Injury. 2012;43:2161–2164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Issack PS, Botero HG, Hiebert RN, Bong MR, Stuchin SA, Zuckerman JD, Di Cesare PE. Sixteen-year follow-up of the cemented spectron femoral stem for hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003;18:925–930.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lennox IA, McLauchlan J. Comparing the mortality and morbidity of cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasties. Injury. 1993;24:185–186.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lindahl H, Malchau H, Herberts P, Garellick G. Periprosthetic femoral fractures classification and demographics of 1049 periprosthetic femoral fractures from the Swedish National Hip Arthroplasty Register. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:857–865.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel Index. Md State Med J. 1965;14:61–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Oishi CS, Walker RH, Colwell CW Jr. The femoral component in total hip arthroplasty. Six to eight-year follow-up of one hundred consecutive patients after use of a third-generation cementing technique. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1994;76:1130–1136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Palmer JS, Huber CP. Operative management of hip fractures: a review of the NICE guidelines. Br J Hosp Med. 2012;73:C141–144.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Parker MI, Pryor G, Gurusamy K. Cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty for intracapsular hip fractures: A randomised controlled trial in 400 patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2010;92:116–122.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Parker MJ, Gurusamy KS, Azegami S. Arthroplasties (with and without bone cement) for proximal femoral fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;6:CD001706.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Parvizi J, Ereth MH, Lewallen DG. Thirty-day mortality following hip arthroplasty for acute fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:1983–1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Parvizi J, Holiday AD, Ereth MH, Lewallen DG. The Frank Stinchfield Award. Sudden death during primary hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1999;369:39–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Piaggio G, Elbourne DR, Pocock SJ, Evans SJ, Altman DG, Group C. Reporting of noninferiority and equivalence randomized trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement. JAMA. 2012;308:2594–2604.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Reikeras O, Gunderson RB. Excellent results of HA coating on a grit-blasted stem: 245 patients followed for 8–12 years. Acta Orthop Scand. 2003;74:140–145.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Taylor F, Wright M, Zhu M. Hemiarthroplasty of the hip with and without cement: a randomized clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94:577–583.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    The management of hip fracture in adults. Clinical guidelines, CG124. Issued: June 2011. Available at: http://guidance.nice.org.Uk/CG124. Accessed February 12, 2013.
  26. 26.
    Vidalain JP. Twenty-year results of the cementless Corail stem. Int Orthop. 2011;35:189–194.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ellen Langslet
    • 1
    • 2
  • Frede Frihagen
    • 2
  • Vidar Opland
    • 1
  • Jan Erik Madsen
    • 2
    • 3
  • Lars Nordsletten
    • 2
    • 3
  • Wender Figved
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Orthopaedic DepartmentBaerum Hospital, Vestre Viken Hospital TrustRudNorway
  2. 2.Department of OrthopaedicsOslo University HospitalOsloNorway
  3. 3.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations