Skip to main content
Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England logoLink to Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England
. 1994 Nov;76(6):396–400.

Current attitudes to cementing techniques in British hip surgery.

A Hashemi-Nejad 1, N C Birch 1, N J Goddard 1
PMCID: PMC2502283  PMID: 7702322

Abstract

Aseptic loosening is the major problem in hip joint replacement. Improved cementing techniques have been shown to improve the long-term survival of implants significantly. To assess the use of modern cementing techniques in British surgeons, a detailed questionnaire was sent to all Fellows of The British Orthopaedic Association (BOA) regarding cement preparation, bone preparation, cementing technique and prostheses used in total hip arthroplasty. Excluding retired fellows, surgeons who use no cement, and those who had filled in forms inadequately, 668 responded, who between them performed 43,680 hip arthroplasties per year. In this survey, 21 different types of hip prostheses were implanted by the surgeons; 48% of hips implanted were Charnley type. Of the surgeons, 46% used Palacos with gentamicin as their cement for both the femur and acetabulum. For the femur, 44% of surgeons remove all cancellous bone, 40% use pulse lavage, 59% use a brush to clear debris, 94% dry the femur, 97% plug the femur, 76% use a cement gun and 70% pressurise the cement. For the acetabulum, 88% of surgeons retain the subchondral bone, 40% use pulse lavage, 100% dry the acetabulum, 22% use hypotensive anaesthesia and 58% pressurise the cement. Overall only 25% of surgeons (26% of hips implanted) use 'modern' cementing techniques. This has implications for the number of arthroplasties that may require early revision.

Full text

PDF
396

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Harris W. H., Davies J. P. Modern use of modern cement for total hip replacement. Orthop Clin North Am. 1988 Jul;19(3):581–589. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Harris W. H. One step back; two steps forward. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993 Jul;75(7):959–960. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199307000-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Joshi A. B., Porter M. L., Trail I. A., Hunt L. P., Murphy J. C., Hardinge K. Long-term results of Charnley low-friction arthroplasty in young patients. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1993 Jul;75(4):616–623. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.75B4.8331119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Livermore J., Ilstrup D., Morrey B. Effect of femoral head size on wear of the polyethylene acetabular component. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1990 Apr;72(4):518–528. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Morrey B. F., Ilstrup D. Size of the femoral head and acetabular revision in total hip-replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989 Jan;71(1):50–55. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Mulroy R. D., Jr, Harris W. H. The effect of improved cementing techniques on component loosening in total hip replacement. An 11-year radiographic review. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990 Sep;72(5):757–760. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.72B5.2211749. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Newman K. J. Total hip and knee replacements: a survey of 261 hospitals in England. J R Soc Med. 1993 Sep;86(9):527–529. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Roberts D. W., Poss R., Kelley K. Radiographic comparison of cementing techniques in total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1986;1(4):241–247. doi: 10.1016/s0883-5403(86)80014-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Schulte K. R., Callaghan J. J., Kelley S. S., Johnston R. C. The outcome of Charnley total hip arthroplasty with cement after a minimum twenty-year follow-up. The results of one surgeon. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993 Jul;75(7):961–975. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199307000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Sutherland C. J., Wilde A. H., Borden L. S., Marks K. E. A ten-year follow-up of one hundred consecutive Müller curved-stem total hip-replacement arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982 Sep;64(7):970–982. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England are provided here courtesy of The Royal College of Surgeons of England

RESOURCES