Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Similar survival between screw cementless and cemented tibial components in young patients with osteoarthritis

  • Knee
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of tibial fixation with either a cemented or cementless with screw augmentation component in young patients with non-inflammatory arthritis.

Methods

Ninety-three patients aged 55 or younger with non-inflammatory arthritis were randomized to compare outcomes between cemented tibial fixation (48 patients) and cementless fixation with screw augmentation (45 patients). The femoral component was cementless in both groups. Post-operative evaluation was assessed by the clinical and radiological criteria of The Knee Society and WOMAC questionnaire.

Results

The median follow-up was 6.7 (5–12) years. Significant differences were found for knee score (p = 0.02), range of motion (p = 0.04), and WOMAC score (p = 0.03). In the cemented group, there was one deep wound infection, four tibial aseptic loosening, and one polyethylene wear, all of which were revised. In the cementless group there was one tibial aseptic loosening and one polyethylene wear, both being revised. There was no difference in revision rate, and the cumulative survival at 9-year for aseptic reason was 93.7 % (95 % CI, 82–100 %) in the cementless group and 90.0 % (95 % CI, 80–100 %) in the cemented group (n.s.).

Conclusions

Cementless total knee arthroplasty was found to be a reliable option in younger patients with osteoarthritis. Although the revision rate and survival were similar in both groups, better clinical outcomes were obtained with cementless tibial components.

Level of evidence

I.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Australian Orthopaedic Association (2011) National joint replacement registry: annual report. Available in http://www.dmac.adelaide.edu.au/aoanjrr/publications.jsp?section=reports2011

  2. Bellamy 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 patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol 15:1833–1840

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Berger RA, Lyon JH, Jacobs JJ, Barden RM, Berkson EM, Sheinkop MB, Rosenberg AG, Galante JO (2001) Problems with cementless total knee arthroplasty at 11 years follow-up. Clin Orthop Relat Res 392:196–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. 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 7:233–238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Diduch DR, Insall JN, Scott WN, Scuderi GR, Font-Rodriguez D (1997) Total knee replacement in young, active patients: long-term follow-up and functional outcome. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79:575–582

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Duffy GP, Crowder AR, Trousdale RR, Berry DJ (2007) Cemented total knee arthroplasty using a modern prosthesis in young patients with osteoarthritis. J Arthroplasty 22(Suppl 2):67–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ewald FC (1989) The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:9–12

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gandhi R, Tsvetkov D, Davey JR, Mahomed NN (2009) Survival and clinical function of cemented and uncemented prostheses in total knee replacement: a meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:889–895

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gao F, Henricson A, Nilsson KG (2009) Cemented versus uncemented fixation of the femoral component of the NexGen CR total knee replacement in patients younger than 60 years: a prospective randomised controlled RSA study. Knee 16:200–206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Henricson A, Linder L, Nilsson KG (2008) A trabecular metal tibial component in total knee replacement in patients younger than 60 years: a two-year radiostereophotogrammetric analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 90:1585–1593

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hofmann AA, Heithoff SM, Camargo M (2002) Cementless total knee arthroplasty in patients 50 years or younger. Clin Orthop Relat Res 404:102–107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN (1989) Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res 248:13–14

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Khaw FM, Kirk LM, Morris RW, Gregg PJ (2002) A randomised, controlled trial of cemented versus cementless press-fit condylar total knee replacement: ten-year survival analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:658–666

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Lewis PL, Rorabeck CH, Bourne RB (1995) Screw osteolysis after cementless total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 321:173–177

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lonner JH, Hershman S, Mont M, Lotke PA (2000) Total knee arthroplasty in patients 40 years of age and younger with osteoarthritis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 380:85–90

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mont MA, Lee CW, Sheldon M, Lennon WC, Hungerford DS (2002) Total knee arthroplasty in patients </=50 years old. J Arthroplasty 17:538543

    Google Scholar 

  17. National Joint Registry for England and Wales (2011) 8th Annual Report. Available in http://www.njrcentre.org.uk/NjrCentre/Portals/0/Documents/NJR%208th%20Annual%20Report%202011pdf

  18. Nilsson KG, Henricson A, Norgren B, Dalen T (2006) Uncemented HA-coated implant is the optimum fixation for TKA in the young patient. Clin Orthop Relat Res 448:129–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Odland AN, Callaghan JJ, Liu SS, Wells CW (2011) Wear and lysis is the problem in modular TKA in the young OA patient at 10 years. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:41–47

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Park JW, Kim YH (2011) Simultaneous cemented and cementless total knee replacement in the same patients: a prospective comparison of long-term outcomes using an identical design of NexGen prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:1479–1486

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Robertsson O, Knutson K, Lewold S, Lidgren L (2001) The Swedish knee arthroplasty register 1975–1997: an update with special emphasis on 41,223 knees operated on in 1988–1997. Acta Orthop 72:503–513

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sumner DR, Turner TM, Dawson D, Rosenberg AG, Urban RM, Galante JO (1994) Effect of pegs and screws on bone ingrowth in cementless total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 309:150–155

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tai CC, Cross MJ (2006) Five- to 12-year follow-up of a hydroxyapatite-coated, cementless total knee replacement in young, active patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:1158–1163

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Voigt JD, Mosier M (2011) Hydroxyapatite (HA) coating appears to be of benefit for implant durability of tibial components in primary total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 82:448–459

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Whiteside LA, Viganò R (2007) Young and heavy patients with a cementless TKA do as well as older and lightweight patients. Clin Orthop Relat Res 464:93–98

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital General Elda, Ctra Elda-Sax s/n, 03600, Elda, Alicante, Spain

    Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla & Francisco A. Miralles-Muñoz

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Miguel Hernandez University School of Medicine, Elche, Alicante, Spain

    Fernando A. Lopez-Prats

  3. Servicio de Cirugia Ortopedica, Hospital General Elda, Ctra Elda-Sax s/n, 03600, Elda, Alicante, Spain

    Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla

Authors
  1. Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francisco A. Miralles-Muñoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fernando A. Lopez-Prats
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alejandro Lizaur-Utrilla.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lizaur-Utrilla, A., Miralles-Muñoz, F.A. & Lopez-Prats, F.A. Similar survival between screw cementless and cemented tibial components in young patients with osteoarthritis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 22, 1585–1590 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2291-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2291-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation