To cement or not to cement? Selective uncemented hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients with intracapsular hip fractures: The Highland experience

Abstract

Current evidence suggests that we should be moving away from Thompson9s hemiarthroplasties for patients with intracapsular hip fractures. Furthermore, the use of cement when inserting these prostheses is controversial. This study aims to show the Inverness experience. We performed a retrospective review of all NHS Highland patients who underwent a hemiarthroplasty for an intracapsular neck of femur fracture over the last 15 years. Demographics and the use of cement were documented. Further analysis of this group was performed to identify any of these patients who required revision of their prosthesis. Patients requiring revision had their case-notes reviewed to identify the cause for further surgery. From 1996 until present 2221 patients from the Highland area had a hemiarthroplasty for an intracapsular neck of femur fracture. 1708 where female (77%) and 513 male (23%). The ages ranged from 28 years to 104 years (mean 80 years, median 81). 2180 of this group had their operations in Raigmore Hospital with the remaining 41 at various centres throughout Scotland. 623 (28%)had a cemented hemiarthroplasty, with the remaining 1578 (72%) having an uncemented Thompson9s hemiarthroplasty. The revision rate for the cemented group was 2% (13 of 623 patients). In the uncemented group it was 0.4% (6 of 1578). Reasons from revision included dislocation, periprosthetic fracture, infection and pain. Current evidence from some joint registers regarding the use of Thompson9s hemiarthroplasty in the elderly is discouraging. The use of bone cement in this group with multiple co-morbidities is not without it9s risks. Our data suggests that uncemented Thompson9s hemiarthroplasties in low demand elderly patients with multiple co-morbidities can yield excellent results with less risk to the patients.