Outcomes of Cement in Cement revision, in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2019.710Keywords:
Cement-in-cement revision, Hip Arthroplasty, Hip Revision, Revision ArthroplastyAbstract
BACKGROUND: The cement-in-cement femoral revision technique involves removing a femoral component from a well-fixed femoral cement mantle and cementing a new stem into the original mantle. This technique, when carried out for the correct indications, is fast, relatively inexpensive and carries a reduced short-term risk for the patient compared with conventional way of removing well-fixed cement.
AIM: To analyze the effectiveness of cement in cement revision of the femoral stem while performing a revision Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA).
METHODS: We analyzed a consecutive series of 79 patients who underwent a cement in cement revision THA between June-2015 to June-2018. All the patients were retrospectively analysed for operative time, complications, clinical and radiological outcomes.
RESULTS: Average age was 76 years (49-86). The mean follow-up was 16.2 months (12-45). The average operative time was 184.6 (90-290) minutes. Most common indication was cup loosening in 28 patients (42.4%), dislocation in 14 patients (21.2%) and stem loosening in 12 patients (18.2%) Nine patients (11%) had one or more complications. Pre-operatively, 10 patients (13%) had lucency at the cement bone interface. Recent review has shown that 8 of these patients’ radiographs have remained unchanged, and in 2 of them there is a slight progression of lucency. Common post op clinical complaintswere persistent pain and abductor weakness. Five (6.3%) patients required a re-revision. Most of the patients had a good or satisfactory outcome.No stems showed radiological loosening.
CONCLUSION: The cement-in-cement technique for revision of the femoral component gave promising results and had the advantages of speed, less blood or bone stock loss, less risk of femoral perforation or fracture, decreased financial costs and reduced post op morbidity.
Downloads
Metrics
Plum Analytics Artifact Widget Block
References
Quinlan JF, O'Shea K, Doyle F, Brady OH. In-cement technique for revision hip arthroplasty. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume. 2006; 88(6):730-3. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.88B6.17037 PMid:16720764
Holt G, Hook S, Hubble M. Revision total hip arthroplasty: the femoral side using cemented implants. International orthopaedics. 2011; 35(2):267-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-010-1167-5 PMid:21165618 PMCid:PMC3032104
Li P, Ingle P, Dowell J. Cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty; should it be done? The Journal Of Bone And Joint Surgery. British Volume. 78-B, 1996:809-811. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.78B5.0780809
Cnudde PH, Kärrholm J, Rolfson O, Timperley AJ, Mohaddes M. Cement-in-cement revision of the femoral stem: analysis of 1179 first-time revisions in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register. The bone & joint journal. 2017; 99(4_Supple_B):27-32. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B4.BJJ-2016-1222.R1 PMid:28363891
Weinrauch PC, Bell C, Wilson L, Goss B, Lutton C, Crawford RW. Shear properties of bilaminar polymethylmethacrylate cement mantles in revision hip joint arthroplasty. The Journal of arthroplasty. 2007; 22(3):394-403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2006.04.010 PMid:17400096
Keeling P, Prendergast PJ, Lennon AB, Kenny PJ. Cement-in-cement revision hip arthroplasty: an analysis of clinical and biomechanical literature. Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery. 2008; 128(10):1193-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-007-0470-0 PMid:17940780
Weber KL, Callaghan JJ, Goetz DD, Johnston RC. Revision of a failed cemented total hip prosthesis with insertion of an acetabular component without cement and a femoral component with cement. A five to eight-year follow-up study. JBJS. 1996; 78(7):982-4. https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-199607000-00002 PMid:8698734
Lieberman JR, Moeckel BH, Evans BG, Salvati EA, Ranawat CS. Cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume. 1993; 75(6):869-71. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.75B6.8245073
Mandziak DG, Howie DW, Neale SD, McGee MA. Cement-within-cement stem exchange using the collarless polished double-taper stem. The Journal of arthroplasty. 2007; 22(7):1000-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2007.06.001 PMid:17920472
Ugino FK, Righetti CM, Alves DP, Guimarães RP, Honda EK, Ono NK. Evaluation of the reliability of the Modified Merle d• Aubigné and Postel Method. Acta ortopedicabrasileira. 2012; 20(4):213-7. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-78522012000400004 PMid:24453605 PMCid:PMC3718401
Barrack RL, Mulroy Jr RD, Harris WH. Improved cementing techniques and femoral component loosening in young patients with hip arthroplasty. A 12-year radiographic review. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume. 1992; 74(3):385-9. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.74B3.1587883
Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC. " Modes of failure" of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clinical orthopaedics and related research. 1979; 141:17-27. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-197906000-00002
Fowler JL, Gie GA, Lee AJ, Ling RS. Experience with the Exeter total hip replacement since 1970. The Orthopedic Clinics of North America. 1988; 19(3):477-89.
Prescott RJ. Book Review: An Introduction To Medical Statistics. Martin Bland, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1995. Statistics in Medicine. 1997; 16(19):2262-3. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19971015)16:19<2262::AID-SIM659>3.0.CO;2-Q
Kaplan EL, Meier P. Estimarea neparametrica a observatiilor incomplete. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations]. Journal of American de Statistical Association. 1958; 53(282):457-81. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1958.10501452
AGoto K, Kawanabe K, Akiyama H, Morimoto T, Nakamura T. Clinical and radiological evaluation of revision hip arthroplasty using the cement-in-cement technique. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume. 2008; 90(8):1013-8. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.90B8.20388 PMid:18669955
Callaghan JJ, Rosenberg AG, Rubash HE, editors. The adult hip. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007.
Issack PS, Guerin J, Butler A, Marwin SE, Bourne RB, Rorabeck CH, Barrack RL, Di Cesare PE. Intraoperative complications of revision hip arthroplasty using a porous-coated, distally slotted, fluted femoral stem. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®. 2004; 425:173-6. https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-200408000-00024 PMid:15292804
Mandziak DG, Howie DW, Neale SD, McGee MA. Cement-within-cement stem exchange using the collarless polished double-taper stem. The Journal of arthroplasty. 2007; 22(7):1000-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2007.06.001 PMid:17920472
Mounsey EJ, Williams DH, Howell JR, Hubble MJ. Revision of hemiarthroplasty to total hip arthroplasty using the cement-in-cement technique. The bone & joint journal. 2015; 97(12):1623-7. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.97B12.35814 PMid:26637675
Duncan WW, Hubble MJ, Howell JR, Whitehouse SL, Timperley AJ, Gie GA. Revision of the cemented femoral stem using a cement-in-cement technique: a five-to 15-year review. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume. 2009; 91(5):577-82. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.91B5.21621 PMid:19407288
Sandiford NA, Jameson SS, Wilson MJ, Hubble MJ, Timperley AJ, Howell JR. Cement-in-cement femoral component revision in the multiply revised total hip arthroplasty: results with a minimum follow-up of five years. The bone & joint journal. 2017; 99(2):199-203. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.99B2.BJJ-2016-0076.R1 PMid:28148661
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2019 Abhijeet Kumar, Martyn Porter, Nikhil Shah, Chakshu Gaba, Paul Siney
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0)
