Literature DB >> 18594093

Survival of polished compared with precoated roughened cemented femoral components. A prospective, randomized study.

Paul F Lachiewicz1, Scott S Kelley, Elizabeth S Soileau.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The optimal surface finish for cemented femoral components remains controversial. The purpose of this randomized clinical trial was to compare the survival of two femoral components with similar geometry but substantially different surface finishes.
METHODS: During a five-year period, 201 patients (219 hips) were prospectively randomized to be treated with a total hip arthroplasty with either a polished (Ra, 0.18 to 0.3 microm) or a precoated roughened (Ra, 1.8 to 2.3 microm) cemented femoral component with similar geometry. There were no significant differences between the patient groups in terms of age, sex, weight, preoperative diagnosis, component size, or cement grade. So-called third-generation cementing techniques were used. One hundred and thirteen polished components and 106 precoated roughened components were followed for a mean of 5.3 years. Complete clinical and radiographic data were available for 134 hips at a minimum of five years (mean, 6.1 years; range, five to ten years) postoperatively.
RESULTS: In the entire cohort of 219 hips, there was no significant difference (log rank p = 0.66) in survival, with the end point defined as component removal for any reason or definite radiographic loosening, between the precoated components (96.2%; 95% confidence interval, 90.9% to 100%) and the polished components (97.1%; 95% confidence interval, 93.8% to 100%). There was a periprosthetic fracture in three hips with a polished component. Two precoated roughened components were revised because of loosening, and two polished components were revised: one because of loosening and one because of a nonunion of a periprosthetic fracture. There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to the Harris hip scores or the clinical results. There was also no significant difference with regard to the presence or number of bone-cement radiolucent lines.
CONCLUSIONS: Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed no significant differences between two types of cemented femoral components with similar geometry but substantially different surface finishes at seven years. In the patient population selected for treatment with a cemented femoral component, the surface finish may not be a crucial factor affecting component survival at a minimum of five years, provided that good cement technique is used.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18594093     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.G.01043

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


  3 in total

1.  The effect of a collar and surface finish on cemented femoral stems: a prospective randomised trial of four stem designs.

Authors:  Jonathan Hutt; Alexandra Hazlerigg; Ansari Aneel; Geoffrey Epie; Husam Dabis; Roy Twyman; Andrew Cobb
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-01-29       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Do outcomes reported in randomised controlled trials of joint replacement surgery fulfil the OMERACT 2.0 Filter? A review of the 2008 and 2013 literature.

Authors:  Peter D H Wall; Bethan L Richards; Andrew Sprowson; Rachelle Buchbinder; Jasvinder A Singh
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2017-05-30

3.  Not all cemented hips are the same: a register-based (NJR) comparison of taper-slip and composite beam femoral stems.

Authors:  Hussain A Kazi; Sarah L Whitehouse; Jonathan R Howell; A John Timperley
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2019-03-06       Impact factor: 3.717

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.