Comparison of a hybrid with an uncemented total hip replacement. A retrospective matched-pair study.

Abstract

The efficacy of a type of uncemented total hip replacement was compared with that of a hybrid total hip replacement in which an uncemented acetabular and a cemented femoral component were used. Twenty-five patients who had had a hybrid total hip replacement were matched, by age, weight, sex, and diagnosis, with twenty-five patients who had had an uncemented total hip replacement. All of the operations were done by one surgeon, who used the same operative approach and the same regimen of postoperative rehabilitation. All of the patients were followed for at least two years. The mean postoperative hip score was 96 points for the hybrid group and 84 points for the cementless group (p less than 0.02). Twenty-four (96 per cent) of the patients who had a hybrid prosthesis reported no or only slight pain postoperatively. In the uncemented group, of the six patients (24 per cent) who reported mild to severe pain, five had pain in the thigh, a limp occurred more frequently, five femoral components had migrated, and four hips needed reoperation. The results with the hybrid replacement that had a cemented femoral component were superior to those with the uncemented femoral component over the relatively brief period for which these patients were followed.