header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

Hip

CEMENT IN CEMENT FEMORAL COMPONENT REVISION: MID-TERM RESULTS USING TWO COLLARLESS, TAPERED STEMS

The British Hip Society (BHS)



Abstract

Introduction

Cement in cement revision with preservation of the original cement mantle has become an attractive and commonly practised technique in revision hip surgery. Since introducing this technique to our unit we have used two types of polished tapered stem. We report the clinical and radiological outcomes for cement in cement femoral revisions performed using these prostheses.

Materials and Methods

All patients who underwent femoral cement in cement revision with a smooth tapered stem between 2005 –2013 were assessed. Data collected included indication for revision surgery and components used. All patients were followed up annually. Outcomes recorded were radiographic analysis, clinical outcome scores (Oxford Hip Score, WOMAC and SF-12) and complications, including requirement for further revision surgery. Median follow-up was 5 years (range 1 – 8 years).

116 revision procedures utilising cement in cement femoral revision were performed in the 8 year study period (68 females, 48 males, and mean age of 69 years). The femoral component was a C-stem AMT (Depuy) in 59 cases and Exeter stem (Stryker) in 57 cases.

Results

Radiographic analysis demonstrated no progressive radiolucencies around the femoral component in any patient and no evidence of stem loosening at most recent review. Median Oxford Hip Score increased from 15 to 32, WOMAC from 22 to 38, and SF-12 from 25 to 32. Two patients had a further revision procedure for recurrent dislocation and 1 patient for infection. Two patients had a peri-prosthetic fracture at 4 years following initial revision surgery. There were 2 femoral stem fractures (occurring at 3 and 4 years post revision, both occurring in Exeter stems).

Conclusion

Our results report cement in cement revision of the femoral component provides promising mid-term radiographic and clinical results. No femoral stems required revision for aseptic loosening. Stem fracture however occurred in 2 cases suggesting stem design is crucial for this technique.