Cemented versus uncemented total hip replacement for femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: A retrospective, multicentre study with a mean 5-year follow-up

7Citations
Citations of this article
41Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: Cemented or uncemented total hip replacement (CTR or UTR) for femoral neck fractures (AO/OTA type 31B/C) is a relatively common procedure in elderly individuals. The recent literature is limited regarding long-term outcomes following CTR versus UTR in the Asian population. Methods: Using our institutional database, we performed long-term outcome analysis on 268 patients with femoral neck fractures (AO/OTA type 31B/C) who had undergone a primary UTR or CTR (CTR: n = 132, mean age, 67.43 ± 6.51 years; UTR: n = 136, mean age, 67.65 ± 6.13 years) during 2007-2014, and these patients were followed until 2019. Follow-up occurred 1, 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively and yearly thereafter. The primary endpoint was the Harris hip score (HHS); the secondary endpoint was the incidence of orthopaedic complications. Results: The mean follow-up time was 62.5 months (range, 50.1-76.1 months). At the final follow-up, the HHS was 79.39 ± 16.92 vs 74.18 ± 17.55 (CTR vs UTR, respectively, p = 0.011). Between-group significant differences were observed regarding the incidence of prosthesis revision, prosthesis loosening, and periprosthetic fracture (7.6% [95% CI, 6.4-8.2] for CTR vs 16.9% [95% CI, 14.7-17.3] for UTR, p = 0.020; 9.8% [95% CI, 8.3-10.7] for CTR vs 19.9% [95% CI, 18.2-20.9] for UTR, p = 0.022; 5.3% [95% CI, 4.4-6.7] for CTR vs 13.2% [95% CI, 12.1-13.8] for UTR, p = 0.026, respectively). Conclusion: CTR showed superiority to UTR by improving the HHS and decreasing the incidence of orthopaedic complications. Our findings need to be confirmed in a prospective, randomized controlled study to verify whether they can be applicable to a broader population.

References Powered by Scopus

The epidemiology of revision total hip arthroplasty in the united states

1501Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia including Alzheimer's disease

483Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Uncemented and cemented primary total hip arthroplasty in the Swedish Hip Arthroplasty Register: Evaluation of 170,413 operations

376Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Comparison of functional outcomes and complications of cemented vs uncemented total hip arthroplasty in the elderly neck of femur fracture patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

7Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Mid-Term Outcomes of Cemented or Uncemented Total Hip Arthroplasty for Failed Proximal Femoral Nail Antirotation Following Intertrochanteric Femur Fractures: A Retrospective Observational Study

3Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

In Which Patients Should Cemented Femoral Components Be Used During Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty?

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mao, S., Chen, B., Zhu, Y., Qian, L., Lin, J., Zhang, X., … Han, G. (2020). Cemented versus uncemented total hip replacement for femoral neck fractures in elderly patients: A retrospective, multicentre study with a mean 5-year follow-up. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-01980-4

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 6

67%

Researcher 2

22%

Professor / Associate Prof. 1

11%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 7

70%

Engineering 2

20%

Nursing and Health Professions 1

10%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free