Literature DB >> 12377914

Comparison of total hip arthroplasty performed with and without cement : a randomized trial.

Andreas Laupacis1, Robert Bourne, Cecil Rorabeck, David Feeny, Peter Tugwell, Cindy Wong.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to compare the fixation of a Mallory-Head total hip prosthesis with and without cement.
METHODS: Two hundred and fifty patients with osteoarthritis of the hip were randomized to receive a Mallory-Head total hip prosthesis designed for insertion with cement or the same prosthesis designed for insertion without cement. Neither the patient nor the outcomes assessor was aware of the type of prosthesis. Outcomes were assessed with respect to mortality, revision arthroplasty, health-related quality of life (evaluated with the Harris hip score, Merle d'Aubign and Postel hip score, McMaster-Toronto Arthritis Patient Preference Disability Questionnaire (MACTAR), Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and the time trade-off technique), and the six-minute-walk test. Patients were seen at three, six, and twelve months and yearly thereafter.
RESULTS: The prosthesis was inserted with cement in 124 patients and without cement in 126 patients. The mean age of the patients was sixty-four years, 48% were female, and the mean duration of follow-up was 6.3 years. There were thirteen revisions in the group that had fixation with cement and six in the group that had fixation without cement (p = 0.11), and more femoral components were revised in the group that had fixation with cement (twelve versus one; p = 0.002). All health-related quality-of-life measures improved postoperatively in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, the group that had the cemented Mallory-Head hip prostheses required more revisions of the femoral component than did the group with the cementless Mallory-Head prostheses, which was perhaps related to the titanium-alloy femoral stem. Our findings are specific to the implants evaluated in this study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12377914     DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200210000-00013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  26 in total

1.  Effect of the initial implant fitting on the predicted secondary stability of a cementless stem.

Authors:  M Viceconti; A Pancanti; M Dotti; F Traina; L Cristofolini
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2004-03       Impact factor: 2.602

2.  Users' guide to the surgical literature. How to assess a randomized controlled trial in surgery.

Authors:  Achilleas Thoma; Forough Farrokhyar; Mohit Bhandari; Ved Tandan
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 2.089

3.  Cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures.

Authors:  Wender Figved; Vidar Opland; Frede Frihagen; Tore Jervidalo; Jan Erik Madsen; Lars Nordsletten
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-01-07       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  Is there evidence for a superior method of socket fixation in hip arthroplasty? A systematic review.

Authors:  Dean Pakvis; Gijs van Hellemondt; Enrico de Visser; Wilco Jacobs; Maarten Spruit
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2011-03-15       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  What works best, a cemented or cementless primary total hip arthroplasty?: minimum 17-year followup of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Kristoff Corten; Robert B Bourne; Kory D Charron; Keegan Au; Cecil H Rorabeck
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-07-13       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  Long-term survival of the uncemented Balgrist total hip replacement cup.

Authors:  Jiri Gallo; Jiri Lostak; Katerina Langova
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-06-08       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Can patients return to high-impact physical activities after hip resurfacing? A prospective study.

Authors:  Julien Girard; Bruno Miletic; Anthony Deny; Henri Migaud; Nicolas Fouilleron
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2013-03-02       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Validation and patient acceptance of a computer touch screen version of the WOMAC 3.1 osteoarthritis index.

Authors:  H A Bischoff-Ferrari; M Vondechend; N Bellamy; R Theiler
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  2004-07-01       Impact factor: 19.103

9.  Which functional assessments predict long-term wear after total hip arthroplasty?

Authors:  Ryan K Takenaga; John J Callaghan; Nicholas A Bedard; Steve S Liu; Yubo Gao
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2013-04-09       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 10.  Hip resurfacing versus total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review comparing standardized outcomes.

Authors:  Deborah A Marshall; Karen Pykerman; Jason Werle; Diane Lorenzetti; Tracy Wasylak; Tom Noseworthy; Donald A Dick; Greg O'Connor; Aish Sundaram; Sanne Heintzbergen; Cy Frank
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.