Abstract
Introduction
Cemented femoral fixation has been shown to carry a lower risk of peri-prosthetic fracture (PPF). The aim of this study was to determine whether adequate (1) stem position and (2) cement mantle (i.e. factors associated with outcome of cemented stems) can be achieved with the anterior approach as compared to the posterior approach.
Methods
This is a prospective, multi-surgeon, single center, consecutive, case-matched series. Twenty patients/hips (age: 76±SD 14) that underwent cemented fixation of their femoral component via an anterior approach (AA) were matched with twenty hips that received the same cemented femoral components via the posterior approach by the same surgeons. Outcome measures of interest included Barrack classification (A, B, C or D), Coronal alignment defined as Varus (>5º), mild varus (3–5º), neutral, mild valgus (3–5º) and valgus (>5º) of the stem and sagittal component alignment defined as anterior to posterior, neutral, posterior to anterior (±3 degrees) and cement mantle thickness in all Gruen zones.
Results
There was no difference between groups in the Barrack classification (DAA: A:12,B:7, D:1); (Posterior: A:13, B:7) [p=0.56]. Coronal alignment (DAA: 15 neutral, 5 mild varus/valgus); (Post:15 neutral, 3 mild varus/valgus, 2 valgus) [p=0.27] and sagittal alignment was similar between groups [p=0.07]. Cement mantle thickness per Gruen zone was also similar between groups in all zones with particular interest zones 8 [P=0.68] and 12 [p=0.3] confirming comparable sagittal cement mantle thickness.
Conclusion
This study demonstrates that equivalent stem alignment and cement mantle quality can be achieved with both approaches. As such, patients undergoing the AA approach can benefit from a quick recovery and lower risk of peri-prosthetic femur fracture.
