Cemented Stem Research Articles

Reduced periprosthetic fracture rate when changing from a tapered polished stem to an anatomical stem for cemented hip arthroplasty: an observational prospective cohort study with a follow-up of 2 years

Background and purpose — Straight collarless polished tapered stems have been linked to an increased risk for periprosthetic femur fractures in comparison with anatomically shaped stems, especially in elderly patients. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of an orthopedic department’s full transition from the use of a cemented collarless, polished, tapered stem to a cemented anatomic stem on the cumulative incidence of postoperative periprosthetic fracture (PPF).Patients and methods — This prospective single-center cohort study comprises a consecutive series of 1,077 patients who underwent a cemented hip arthroplasty using either a collarless polished tapered stem (PTS group, n = 543) or an anatomic stem (AS group, n = 534). We assessed the incidence of PPF 2 years postoperatively and used a Cox regression model adjusted for age, sex, ASA class, cognitive impairment, BMI, diagnosis, and surgical approach for outcome analysis.Results — Mean age at primary surgery was 82 years (49–102), 73% of the patients were female, and 75% underwent surgery for a femoral neck fracture. The PPF rate was lowered from 3.3% (n = 18) in the PTS group to 0.4% (n = 2) in the AS group. The overall complication rate was also lowered from 8.8% in the PTS group to 4.5% in the AS group. In the regression model only cognitive dysfunction (HR 3.8, 95% CI 1.4–10) and the type of stem (PTS vs AS, HR 0.1, CI 0.0–0.5) were correlated with outcome.Interpretation — For elderly patients with poor bone quality use of cemented anatomic stems leads to a substantial reduction in periprosthetic fracture rate without increasing other complications.

Do preoperative radiographs help predict intraoperative challenges in revision surgery after previous shoulder hemiarthroplasty?

This study compares preoperative radiographic evaluation with intraoperative video and explant data in patients undergoing revision of a hemiarthroplasty. From 2004 to 2017, 182 shoulder hemiarthroplasties underwent revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty for symptomatic failure. Preoperative radiographs were evaluated for stem fixation, stability, and glenohumeral registry. Intraoperative videos (n = 48) were evaluated for humeral component stability and bone loss after humeral stem extraction. All explants (n = 83) were reviewed for humeral head wear patterns and extraction artifacts (EAs). A well-fixed stem was reliably identified on radiographs as well fixed (true-negative rate, 95%). Of cemented implants, 94% (97 of 103) were radiographically stable and 90% (18 of 20) were stable on intraoperative video. Significant proximal humeral bone loss was identified after cemented stem extraction in 83% of cases, and severe EAs were noted in 28% (14 of 50). Of uncemented implants, 95% (75 of 79) were radiographically stable and 96% (24 of 25) were operatively stable. Significant proximal humeral bone loss was identified after extraction in 36% of cases (9 of 25) (P = .001). Severe EAs were seen in 13% of explanted stems (3 of 23). Eccentrically worn humeral head explants were associated with eccentric glenohumeral registry in 84% of cases (P = .0075). Preoperative radiographs for revision of a failed hemiarthroplasty help identify well-fixed stems and predict humeral bone loss during extraction. Cemented stems will have more EAs and result in greater bone loss than uncemented stems. Glenohumeral registry can help to predict humeral head wear. Eccentric registry leads to eccentric humeral head wear in 84% of cases.

Classifications in Brief: The Hartofilakidis Classification of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip

Classifications in Brief: The Hartofilakidis Classification of Developmental Dysplasia of the Hip

Impaction Bone Grafting or Uncemented Modular Stems for the Treatment of Type B3 Periprosthetic Femoral Fractures? A Complication Rate Analysis

BackgroundBecause the gold standard for the treatment of Vancouver type-B3 periprosthetic femoral fractures (PFFs) is yet to be defined, we sought to analyze the complication rate between the impaction bone grafting (IBG) technique with a cemented stem and reconstruction with an uncemented distally-fixed modular stem (DFMS). MethodsWe retrospectively studied 54 B3 PFFs operated between 2000 and 2016, comparing the complication rate of 33 patients treated with the IBG technique (group A) with 21 patients treated with a DFMS (group B). Median follow-up of groups A and B were 75 months (interquartile range [IQR], 36-111 months) and 55 months (IQR, 32-73 months), respectively (P = .008). Median age of groups A and B were 78 years (IQR, 74-83 years) and 81 years (IQR, 74-86 years), respectively (P = .30). Median grade of Endo-Klink femoral bone defect was 3 (IQR, 3-3) for both groups (P = .11). We performed a multiple regression analysis to determine risk factors for complications including the following variables: age, initial diagnosis, and surgical technique. ResultsAs for infection outcomes, 2-stage revision surgery was more frequent in group A than in group B (4 vs 0, P = .003). Group A presented more implant failures than group B (5 vs 1, P = .195). We found 4 dislocations in group B and 2 in group A (P = .192). Multiple regression analysis showed a significant association between surgical technique and complication rate (P = .01). The IBG technique presented an odds risk for complications of 4.77 (P = .016; IQR, 1.33-17.21). ConclusionFemoral reconstruction with the IBG technique evidenced an ostensibly higher complication rate than that of DFMS for the treatment of B3 PFF.

Primary Monoblock Inset Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Resulted in Decreased Pain and Improved Function

The first-generation, lateral-center-of-rotation reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) modular design has demonstrated durable early-, mid-, and long-term outcomes. The second-generation monoblock implant shares a similar design but eliminates the modular junction and facilitates inset placement within the metaphysis to avoid humeral-sided junctional failures and facilitate metaphyseal press-fit. However, no paper has specifically examined the radiographic findings and improvements in pain and function after the use of this next generation design. (1) After second-generation, lateral-center-of-rotation monoblock RSA, what are the improvements in shoulder scores, general health scores, and ROM at a minimum of 2 years of followup? (2) Are the differences in shoulder scores, health scores, and ROM associated with fixation (cemented versus cementless components)? (3) How frequently do complications occur (defined as humeral loosening, dislocation, baseplate failure, scapular notching, acromial fractures, and revision surgery) after inset monoblock RSA? We retrospectively studied patients undergoing primary RSA between 2010 and 2015 with preoperative data and a minimum of 2 years of clinical followup. Of the 329 primary RSA performed during this period, 125 were excluded based on the use of a different generation humeral stem of the same design, three based on need for a nickel-free implant, and 39 due to a lack of preoperative shoulder scores. Of the remaining 162 patients, 137 patients (85%) met the inclusion criteria with a mean age of 74 years (range, 46-90 years). The predominant indications were osteoarthritis with a massive rotator cuff tear (74%) and fracture sequelae (16%). During the study, humeral implants were typically inserted using an uncemented press-fit technique (85%), with only 21 patients requiring a cemented humeral stem. The mean clinical and radiographic followup period was 37 months (range, 24-82 months). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including the Simple Shoulder Test, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Total, VAS for pain, SF-12, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and measured active motion (forward elevation and external and internal rotation) were recorded at pre- and postoperative intervals. Postoperative radiographs were evaluated for baseplate failure, glenoid and humeral loosening, scapular notching, and acromion fractures. Complications were recorded in the longitudinally maintained institutional repository. At the most recent followup examination, there were improvements in measured motion, general health outcomes, and all PROMs. There were no differences between the cemented and press-fit techniques. Complications observed included 17 of 137 patients (12%) with scapular notching, six postoperative acromion fractures (4%), and two revision procedures (1%). No patients experienced gross humeral loosening or baseplate failure. Primary RSA using a second-generation monoblock inset humeral component resulted in improvements in pain and functional outcomes as well as low rates of acromion fractures, humeral radiolucency, and complications. Future studies are needed to provide a more definitive analysis on the use of an uncemented technique for humeral stem fixation and the effect of an inset stem on postoperative acromion fractures. Level IV, therapeutic study.

Cement-in-cement revision with the Exeter Short Revision Stem: A review of 50 consecutive hips

Revision of a well-fixed cemented femoral stem is technically challenging. The Exeter Short Revision Stem (SRS) was developed to facilitate cement-in-cement revision mitigating some of these challenges. We present the short to mid-term results of 50 cement-in-cement revisions performed with this implant.A retrospective review of all cement-in-cement revision with the Exeter SRS, at our institution, over a seven-year period between 2007 and 2014 was conducted. Records were assessed for radiological and clinical component loosening at greater than 12 months follow-up and for revision and complications at all time points. An Oxford Hip Score (OHS) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) for groin and thigh pain at rest and initial mobilisation were obtained.50 implants in 46 patients were identified. Radiographic and clinical follow-up was available for 42 and 38 implants respectively at greater than 12 months. Mean radiographic follow-up was 5.1 years and clinical 4.9 years. There was no radiographic or clinical evidence of loosening. 3 revisions were performed, one for each of recurrent dislocation, infection and stem breakage. Median OHS was 39 (IQR 12) and mean NRS for groin pain at rest and initial mobilisation was 1.7 and 1.7 respectively and NRS for thigh pain at rest and initial mobilisation was 1.3 and 1.6 respectively with mean follow-up of 6.9 years.The Exeter SRS provides a viable option for cement-in-cement stem revision, with low revision, complication and loosening rates and good patient reported outcomes at short to mid-term follow up.

Risk factors for femoral stem breakage: an analysis of the AOANJRR results.

Breakage of the femoral stem component of a total hip replacement is now uncommon but continues to be seen with certain stem designs and in certain patient groups. Data previously published on this topic has been limited, either gathered from a single surgeon or centre, or included only a single stem design. We reviewed the data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), identified and analysed 143 stem breakages over a period of 16 years, covering 44 different stem designs. Our data confirms previously published findings that risk factors for stem breakage include patient age at implantation of under 70, male gender, as well as the use of exchangeable necks. We found no association with initial diagnosis, or type of acetabular component implanted. We did however also find, excluding exchangeable neck designs, that after 4.5 years a cemented stem had a significantly higher risk of breakage then a cementless stem. To our knowledge this is the 1st paper to suggest cemented fixation as a specific risk factor for stem breakage. The analysis of rare complications such as stem breakage is only possible through large data collection systems such as the AOANJRR. Whilst there have been recent advances in materials and manufacturing techniques, we recommend that surgeons are aware of all the specific risks when considering implant choices for individual patients.

Breaking Bad: A Comparative Descriptive Analysis of Periprosthetic Fractures Around Cemented and Uncemented Femoral Stems

BackgroundPeriprosthetic fractures are most commonly classified according to the Vancouver classification system and more recently the Unified Classification System. The aim of this study is to provide a descriptive analysis of fracture patterns in femoral periprosthetic fractures (PPFs) by femoral stem fixation. MethodsA retrospective observational study of all femoral PPFs over a 10-year period at our institution was conducted. Presenting radiographs were examined to assess the fracture pattern. ResultsOver the 10-year period, 138 femoral PPFs that underwent operative treatment were examined. Mean age of patients was 78 years with 45.7% male and median American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade 3. The femoral stem fixation was cemented in 83 patients and uncemented in 55 patients. Uncemented femoral stems most commonly caused a simple oblique fracture pattern (69.1%) with a more comminuted pattern seen in cemented fixation (59%). ConclusionFracture patterns differ according to femoral stem fixation. A simple “sickle-like” oblique fracture pattern was more commonly seen in uncemented stems while cemented tapered stems resulted in a comminuted “axe splitting” pattern.

Peri-prosthetic bone remodeling and change in bone mineral density in the femur after cemented polished tapered stem implantation.

We examined longitudinal changes in bone mineral density (BMD) around the femur for 5years after total hip arthroplasty (THA) using cemented collarless polished double-tapered stem implantation and investigated the influence of BMD changes on radiological remodeling of the femur. Sixty hips from 56 patients who underwent cemented THA with a collarless polished double-tapered stem were included. BMD was measured 2weeks postoperatively (baseline), 3months, 6months, 1year and annually thereafter until 5years after surgery using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry on the lumbar spine and proximal femur of the operated side according to the Gruen's zone classification. We analyzed predictable factors for BMD preservation in the proximal femur and compared radiological remodeling of the femur and changes in BMD. BMD at 5years in zone 7 decreased less than 10%, whereas BMD in zone 1 increased to over the baseline (+ 1.9%). Multiple linear regression analyses revealed that body weight was a predictor for positive BMD change in the proximal femur. The frequency of radiolucency of the femur was significantly lower in patients who exhibited an increase in BMD at 5years compared with BMD at 2weeks in zone 7. BMD preservation of the proximal femur after cemented collarless polished double-tapered stem implantation was more effective in heavier patients. Furthermore, the frequency of radiolucency around the stem was significantly lower in patients who exceeded 100% of the baseline BMD in zone 7 at 5years.

Cemented Femoral Component Use in Hip Arthroplasty.

Elderly patients undergoing both elective and nonelective hip arthroplasty contribute markedly to health care spending, and the current aging population is likely to require even more resources. Several national joint replacement registries show a lower risk of revision surgery in patients older than 75 years who received cemented femoral components compared with cementless implants for primary total hip arthroplasty. Despite a higher incidence of early periprosthetic femoral fracture, noncemented femoral components are being used with increasing frequency in elderly patients worldwide. Improvements in cementing technique and modifications to cemented stem design over several decades allow surgeons to obtain femoral component fixation in poor-quality bone with a relatively low risk of complications. Achieving durable cemented stem fixation requires the surgeon to understand the basic handling properties of cement, how to prepare the femoral bone, and differences in stem design and surface finish.

The design of the cemented stem influences the risk of Vancouver type B fractures, but not of type C: an analysis of 82,837 Lubinus SPII and Exeter Polished stems

Background and purpose — In total hip replacements, stem design may affect the occurrence of periprosthetic femoral fracture. We studied risk factors for fractures around and distal to the 2 most used cemented femoral stems in Sweden.Patients and methods — This is a register study including all standard primary Lubinus SPII and Exeter Polished stems operated in Sweden between 2001 and 2009. The outcome was any kind of reoperation due to fracture around (Vancouver type B) or distal to the stem (Vancouver type C), with use of age, sex, diagnosis at primary THR, and year of index operation as covariates in a Cox regression analysis. A separate analysis of the primary osteoarthritis patient group was done in order to evaluate eventual influence of the surgical approach (lateral versus posterior) on the risk for Vancouver type B fractures.Results — The Exeter stem had a 10-times (95% CI 7–13) higher risk for type B fractures, compared with the Lubinus, while no statistically significant difference was noticed for type C fractures. The elderly, and patients with hip fracture or idiopathic femoral head necrosis, had a higher risk for both fracture types. Inflammatory arthritis was a risk factor only for type C fractures. Type B fractures were more common in men, and type C in women. A lateral approach was associated with decreased risk for Type B fracture.Interpretation — Stem design influenced the risk for type B, but not for type C fracture. The influence of surgical approach on the risk for periprosthetic femoral fracture should be studied further.

To cement or not to cement acetabular cups in total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and re-evaluation.

Introduction: Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA) in the treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the hip has evolved to a very safe and cost-effective intervention with revision rates below 5% after 10 years. To this day, however, controversy remains on whether or not to cement the acetabular cup. Methods: A comprehensive PubMed search of the English literature for studies published between 2007 and 2018 was performed. Studies comparing the clinical (revision rate, functionality), radiological (wear) or economic (cost) differences between cemented (cemented stem with cemented cup) and hybrid (cemented stem with uncemented cup) prostheses for primary osteoarthritis of the hip were identified as eligible. Results: A total of 1032 studies were identified whereof twelve were included for qualitative synthesis. All studies concerning the risk of revision were based on registry data, covering a total of 365,693 cups. Cemented prostheses had a similar or lower risk of revision compared to hybrid prostheses in every study, but performed slightly worse on functionality and quality of life. While cemented prostheses were the cheapest option, hybrids were the most cost-effective. Discussion: The widespread preference for cementless fixation of the acetabulum cannot be explained by a superior survival of cementless or hybrid models. Irrespective of age, cemented fixation of the acetabulum remains the gold standard to which other techniques should be compared.

Plate fixation in periprosthetic femur fractures Vancouver type B1: preliminary report of macroscopic evaluation of the cement mantle and short literature review.

The goal of our preliminary report is to investigate hip stem stability and intra-operative cement mantle integrity after screw insertion in plate fixation of periprosthetic Vancouver B1 femur fractures. From a cohort of 50 patients with a periprosthetic femur fracture treated in our department from February 2012 until February 2017, we included in our study patients with a periprostethic Vancouver B1 femoral fracture in cemented hip arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty, operated with ORIF using a 4.5/5.0 LCP Proximal Femoral Hook Plate ® (Synthes, Switzerland) with at least one screw perforating the cement mantle. Anteroposterior and lateral femur views and pelvis X-rays were performed preoperatively. The stability of the hip implant and the cemented mantle integrity was evaluated intra-operatively in a macroscopic way and with a post-operative X-ray in anteroposterior and lateral views. Only 7 patients satisfied the inclusion criteria; no lesion/break of the cement mantle occurred intra-operatively at any step during drilling or screw insertion, also confirmed with C-arm assessment. No cases of stem mobilization were found and cement mantle integrity was maintained in every case. Insertion of screws around a cemented stem for plate fixation in periprosthetic femur fractures Vancouver type B1 could be considered a safe procedure. However, further and more extended studies are necessary for proving additional knowledge at the evaluation of the cement mantle in osteosynthesis procedures. (www.actabiomedica.it)

Charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement - Clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years.

Introduction: In 1979, in his first book dealing with low-friction arthroplasty (LFA), Charnley highlighted the use of a cement restrictor. Breusch and Malchau described in 2005 the “second-generation cementing technique.”The main objective of this study was to report on the clinical survival of 100 cases of Charnley femoral component implanted in 2007 and 2008 using a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and a low-viscosity antibiotic-loaded cement.The secondary objectives were to analyze the complications and side effects and the accuracy of the device positioning.Material and methods: This was a monocentric retrospective review of a prospectively compiled database.Diaphyseal restrictor was biodegradable and permeable to gas, blood, and fluids to avoid intramedullary over pression during cementation. The cement was a low-viscosity antibiotic-loaded cement.Among 3555 patients, we selected the first continuous 100 cases of patients where we implanted the device.Survival probability was computed according to Kaplan–Meier method.Results: Mean follow-up was 6.55 ± 2.6 (range 1–11).Considering femoral component revision as the endpoint, survival rate was 100%.No patients died intraoperatively, none in the first month and the first year after surgery.No early periprosthetic fractures have been reported.Discussion: As described initially by Charnley, the use of a cement restrictor was highly recommended through the different generations of cementing techniques.Hypotensive episodes and cardiac arrest have been reported during cement insertion.In our series, we did not deplore any adverse effect related to the cementation.Conclusion: Our study demonstrates a 100% survival rate of a cemented femoral component without adverse effects when using routinely a resorbable and permeable cement restrictor and a low-viscosity cement. Bone cement is still a fantastic ally for the surgeon and the patients.

Total Hip Arthroplasty in Octogenarians: A Local Retrospective Case Series

With improving healthcare, the number of Filipino octogenarians is increasing. Projected population of octogenarians as reported by the Philippine National Statistics Office will increase by 28% to 3,227,253 by year 2040 (from 2015: 912,817). This is a multicenter retrospective case series involving 24 patients (1 patient with surgery on 2 hips), with an average age at the time of surgery of 82 years old (range: 80-88 years old) who underwent total hip arthroplasty during the period 2007-2016. Indications for total hip arthroplasty included 12 cases of degenerative osteoarthritis, 8 cases of displaced femoral neck fractures, 4 cases of untreated femoral neck fractures, and 1 case of subtrochanteric fracture with hip arthritis. Of the 24 patients, 21 were females and 3 were males. Of the 25 hips, 19 were treated with cemented total hip, 5 with hybrid implants, and 1 with calcar replacing cemented femoral stem. Average follow-up was 36 months (range: 6-87 months). All patients were able to ambulate and return to premorbid function. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications encountered. Revision rate was zero percent as of last follow-up. Clinical/functional results were assessed using the Harris Hip Scoring system. The results of this study affirm that primary total hip arthroplasty is a viable treatment option for active octogenarians with end-stage arthritis and hip fractures.

3D finite element analysis of stem–cement interface under cavity effect

3D finite element analysis of stem–cement interface under cavity effect

A minimally invasive technique to remove broken cemented stems and its reconstruction with cement-in-cement.

Historically the removal of fractured stems was associated with complex revision and loss of bone stock. This study describes a minimally invasive procedure for extraction of the distal part of a broken cemented stem that does not compromise the bone stock and results with the cement-in-cement reconstruction technique. 7 patients with an average age of 74 years who underwent total hip replacement (THR) revision for fracture of femoral stems were included. The average follow-up was 8.7 years. For the removal of the distal fragment of the broken stem, a set of instruments have been manufactured using a coupling through the wrought of a thread over the fractured face of the stem. 6 cases were reconstructed using a cement-in-cement technique. In 1 case an extended trochanteric osteotomy was required. There were no complications associated with the surgical technique. Early rehabilitation and standing were achieved in all patients at 48 hours postoperatively. No patient required a blood transfusion. No clinical or radiological loosening was detected at final follow-up. Different methods have been described for the extraction of distal fragments of a broken femoral stem. The majority include the use of femoral osteotomies, bone windows and knee arthrotomies. These techniques are associated with bone loss and bleeding. The advantages of the method described are, its low complexity, low-cost, accelerated functional recovery and the preservation of bone stock with the possibility of performing cement-in-cement reconstruction techniques.

Is There a Difference between Cemented and Uncemented Femoral Stem Extensions in Revision Knee Arthroplasty?

A stem is usually recommended for the femoral component in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for reasons of alignment, fixation, and bone loss. However, the optimal method of fixation for the femoral component stem remains controversial. We queried the prospective revision TKA database of one surgeon and performed a clinical and radiographic evaluation of 84 knee revisions in which a femoral component stem extension was implanted. There was no established protocol for fixation of the femoral stem during this time. There were 34 knees with cemented (C) fixation and 50 with uncemented (UC) fixation. There were no significant differences in age, gender, body mass index (BMI), or Anderson's Orthopaedic Research Institute (AORI) defect between the two groups. Patients were evaluated using the classic Knee Society clinical and radiographic scores and followed for a mean of 6 years (range: 2-17 years). There was no statistically significant difference in prevalence of reoperation for loosening between cemented and uncemented stems (cemented 3.3% vs. uncemented 10%; p = 0.4). Post hoc power analysis showed that 203 knees in each group would be needed for statistical significance. With the numbers available, there was no difference in aseptic component loosening and radiographic loosening combined (one revision and two radiographic loosening, 9%, in the C group vs. five revisions and three radiographic loosening, 16%, in the UC group; p = 0.51). There was no difference between the groups in the overall rate of any reoperation. There were no differences in postoperative Knee Society pain score, change in pain score, Knee Society function score, or change in function score. Due to the numbers required, a large multicenter study will be needed to determine the optimal method of fixation of the femoral stem in revision TKA.

Fourteen-year experience with short cemented stems in total hip replacement.

The age of the population requiring total hip replacement (THR) is increasing and this may lead to a return of cemented stems. Advantages of a short cemented femoral device include preservation of metaphyseal bone, easier insertion, and easier cement removal in case of revision. The purpose of this study is to describe the rationale and assess midterm results of unique innovative short cemented double-tapered polished stem applied with contemporary cementing techniques. Our experience with this short cemented stem includes two different groups of elderly patients. Group 1 (prototype version of the short stem) from January 2005 to January 2008 counts 43 THR. Group 2 (final commercial version of the short stem) from January 2013 to January 2015 counts 54 THR. The average age in groups 1 and 2 was 79 and 75 respectively. Patients underwent clinical follow-up with the Harris Hip Score (HHS) and completed radiographic evaluation. Thirty-one patients of group 1 had died for reasons unrelated to their THR. The surviving 9 hips have a follow-up of 11.2years. In group 2, eight patients died for reasons unrelated to their THR. Follow-up for the surviving 40 patients is 4.6years. HHS improved in both groups. In 34/43 hips of group 1 and in 41/54 of group 2 we observed a Barrack grade A cement mantle. Survival with revision of the stem for aseptic loosening as the endpoint was 100%. This study confirms the effectiveness of a short, polished, collarless, tapered cemented stem implanted with contemporary cementing techniques which appears as successful as the standard sized components.

Patient- and Surgery-Related Factors that Affect Patient-Reported Outcomes after Total Hip Arthroplasty

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are used to assess satisfaction after total hip arthroplasty (THA); however, the factors that determine these PROMs remain unclear. This study aimed to identify the patient- and surgery-related factors that affect patient satisfaction after THA as indicated by the Oxford Hip Score (OHS). One-hundred-and-twenty patients who underwent primary THA were included. Various patient-related factors, including clinical scores, and surgery-related factors were examined for potential correlations with the OHS at 3, 6, and 12 months post-THA. Univariate regression analysis showed that higher preoperative University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score (p = 0.027) and better preoperative OHS (p = 0.0037) were correlated with better OHS at 3 months post-THA. At 6 months post-THA, the factors associated with better OHS were higher preoperative UCLA activity score (p = 0.039), better preoperative OHS (p = 0.0006), and use of a cemented stem (p = 0.0071). At 12 months post-THA, the factors associated with better OHS were higher preoperative UCLA activity score (p = 0.0075) and better preoperative OHS (p < 0.0001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the factors significantly correlated with better OHS were female sex (p = 0.011 at 3 months post-THA), osteoarthritis (p = 0.043 at 6 months), higher preoperative OHS (p < 0.001 at 3 and 12 months, p = 0.018 at 6 months), higher preoperative Harris Hip Score (p = 0.001 at 3 months), higher preoperative UCLA activity score (p = 0.0075 at 3 months), and the use of a cemented femoral component (p = 0.012 at 6 months). Patient- and surgery-related factors affecting post-THA PROMs were identified, although the effect of these factors decreased over time.