A 7.5-year randomized controlled clinical study comparing cemented and screw-retained one-piece zirconia-based implant-supported single crowns.

OBJECTIVES: To compare marginal bone levels, biological, and technical outcomes of screw-retained versus cemented all-ceramic implant-supported zirconia-based single crowns after an observation period of 7.5 years. METHODS: Forty-four single implants in the esthetic zone in 44 patients (22 females, 22 males) were randomly assigned to two types of restorations: SR (screw-retained); veneered one-piece zirconia abutment and CR (cement-retained); veneered lithium disilicate crown intraorally cemented on a one-piece zirconia abutment. Patients were recalled annually up to 7.5 years and survival rates, biological, and technical parameters assessed. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients attended the 7.5-year follow-up visit (17 SR group, 14 CR group). The survival rate on the restorative level was 77.5% (74.0% CR, 81.0% SR, p = .6399). Median marginal bone loss (MBL) values yielded -0.073 mm (-0.305; 0.238) in the CR and -0.215 mm (-0.500; 0.555) in the SR group (intergroup p = .6194). Mean bleeding on probing (BoP) values were significantly in favor of group SR with 20 ± 17% compared to 40 ± 22% in group CR (p = .011). The overall biological complication rate amounted to 27.5% (42.1% CR, 14.3% SR, p = .0775), whereas the technical complication rate was 32.5% (42.1% CR, 23.8% SR, p = .314). In total, CR restorations showed significantly more complications (84.2% for CR, 38.1% for SR, p = .0041). CONCLUSION: One-piece zirconia-based single crowns on two-piece dental implants exhibited a high rate of technical and biological complications at 7.5 years of follow-up. Cemented restorations revealed significant higher rates of bleeding on probing and total complications compared to screw-retained restorations.

Pull-Off Forces on Implant-Supported Single Restorations by Sticky Food: An In Vitro Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the pull-off forces on implant-supported restorations caused by sticky food, to understand how much retention force cemented restorations must have to withstand chewing forces without unintentional retention loss. The influence of food type, restoration design, and surface treatment were investigated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Monolithic implant-supported CAD/CAM zirconia crowns were fabricated and divided into groups according to their design: no (NC), flat (FC) and high cusps (HC) and subdivided according to surface roughness: rough (r) and smooth (s) (n = 10/group). NC represented the control group. The crowns were fixed in a universal testing machine opposite to each other. Four sticky foods (caramel, fruit jelly, candy strips and licorice) and a resin crown remover were tested. These were heated (36.4°C), placed between the crowns and compressed, then tensile strength tests were performed. The maximum pull-off force was recorded (Newton [N]). Statistical analysis was performed using 3-way ANOVA. RESULTS: The highest mean pull-off force among food samples was with caramel_HC_r (12.09 ± 1.26 N), whereas the lowest was with licorice_FC_s (3.21 ± 0.15 N). For the resin crown remover, a mean pull-off force of 55.41 ± 3.87 N was measured in the HC_r group. Both food type and crown design showed a significant influence on pull-off force (p < 0.001), whereas no significant effect was reported with different surface roughnesses (p = 0.344). CONCLUSION: This study reported pull-off forces of up to 20 N between all-ceramic restorations caused by sticky food. The clinical implication of these findings is that a cemented implant-restoration must have a minimum retention force of 20 N to withstand unintentional displacement during function.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of hybrid vs. cemented stems - which method is more optimal for revision total knee arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION: The number of primary and revision Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) cases are expected to increase in future. There are various advantages and disadvantage to employing either of the two main types of stem fixation methods - cemented or hybrid technique. This review aimed to study the most optimal fixation method for revision TKAs by comparing radiological outcomes and re-revision rates. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using PubMed and Cochrane Library from 2010 to identify studies explicitly comparing outcomes between cemented against hybrid fixation revision TKA techniques, with a minimum follow up of at least 24 months. A total of 8 studies was included in this review. Egger's test and visual inspection of the funnel plot did not reveal publication bias. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in radiological failure and loosening (OR 0.79, CI 0.37-1.66, I2 = 29%, p = 0.22), all causes of re-revision (OR 1.03, CI 0.73-1.44, I2 = 0%, p = 0.56) and aseptic revision (OR 0.74, CI 0.27-2.02, I2 = 0%, p = 0.41) between cemented and hybrid techniques. Functional and pain outcomes compared between the two fixation techniques were largely similar across the studies included in this meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: Despite a trend favouring hybrid stems in revision TKA, current evidence revealed that radiological outcomes and re-revision rates are largely similar between cemented and hybrid fixation techniques.

Low implantation volume, comorbidities, male sex and implantation of constrained TKA identified as risk factors for septic revision in knee arthroplasty: A register-based study from the German Arthroplasty Registry.

PURPOSE: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a major cause of revision surgery after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA). Patient- and hospital-related risk factors need to be assessed to prevent PJI. This study identifies influential factors and differences in infection rates between different implant types. METHODS: Data were obtained from the German Arthroplasty Registry. Septic revisions were calculated using Kaplan-Meier estimates with septic revision surgery as the primary endpoint. Patients with constrained and unconstrained TKA or UKA were analysed using Holm's multiple log-rank test and Cox's proportional hazards ratio. The 300,998 cases of knee arthroplasty analysed included 254,144 (84.4%) unconstrained TKA, 9993 (3.3%) constrained TKA and 36,861 (12.3%) UKA with a maximum follow-up of 7 years. RESULTS: At 1 year, the PJI rate was 0.5% for UKA and 2.8% for TKA, whereas at 7 years, the PJI rate was 4.5% for UKA and 0.9% for TKA (p < 0.0001). The PJI rate significantly increased for constrained TKA compared to unconstrained TKA (p < 0.0001). The PJI rate was 2.0% for constrained TKA and 0.8% for unconstrained TKA at 1 year and 3.1% and 1.4% at 7 years. Implantation of a constrained TKA (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.55), male sex (HR = 1.84), increased Elixhauser score (HR = 1.18-1.56) and implant volume of less than 25 UKA per year (HR = 2.15) were identified as risk factors for revision surgery; an Elixhauser score of 0 (HR = 0.80) was found to be a preventive factor. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced implant volume and constrained knee arthroplasty are associated with a higher risk of PJI. Comorbidities (elevated Elixhauser score), male sex and low UKA implant volume have been identified as risk factors for PJI. Patients who meet these criteria require specific measures to prevent infection. Further research is required on the potential impact of prevention and risk factor modification. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Microporous titanium and hydroxyapatite improve fixation of the tibial wall in unicompartmental knee replacement.

PURPOSE: Cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement (OUKR) is associated with less pain than cemented OUKR 5 years postoperatively. This may be due to improved fixation at the tibial wall, which transmits tension and reduces stress in the bone below the tibial component. This study compares tibial wall fixation with three different types of fixation: cemented, cementless with hydroxyapatite (HA) and cementless with a microporous titanium coat and HA (HA + MPC). METHODS: Three consecutive cohorts were identified (n = 221 cemented in 2005-2007, n = 118 HA in 2014-2015, n = 125 HA + MPC in 2016-2017). Analysis was performed on anterior-posterior radiographs aligned on the tibial component taken 1-2 years postoperatively. Aligned radiographs are needed to see narrow radiolucencies adjacent to the wall. Alignment was assessed with rotation ratio (RR = wall width/internal wall height). Perfect RR is 0.3, and a maximum threshold of 0.5 was used. Quality of fixation to the wall was assessed with fixation ratio (FR = bone wall contact height/total wall height). Notable radiographic features at the tibial wall were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 33 knees with cement, 37 knees with cementless with HA and 57 knees cementless with HA + MPC had adequately aligned radiographs. Fixation was significantly better with HA compared with cement (55% vs. 25%, p = 0.0016). The microporous coat further improved fixation (81% vs. 55%, p < 0.0001). FR > 80% was achieved in 3% of the cemented implants, 32% of HA and 68% of HA + MPC. In cementless cohorts, features suggestive of a layer of bone that had delaminated from the wall were seen in 8 (22%) HA and 3 (5%) HA + MPC knees. CONCLUSION: Radiographic tibial wall fixation in OUKR is poor with cement. It improves with an HA coating and improves further with an intermediary MPC. Improved tibial wall fixation may explain the lower levels of pain observed with cementless rather than cemented fixation described in the literature, but further clinical correlation is needed. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Cemented vs. press-fit humeral stems: a matched cohort analysis at a mean follow-up of 10 years.

BACKGROUND: Although cementation of humeral stems has long been considered the gold standard for anatomic shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA), cementless, or press-fit, fixation offers a relatively cheaper and less demanding alternative, particularly in the setting of a revision procedure. However, this approach has been accompanied by concerns of implant loosening and high rates of radiolucency. In the present study, we performed a propensity-matched comparison of clinical and patient-reported outcomes between cemented and cementless fixation techniques for aTSA. We hypothesized that cemented fixation of the humeral component would have significantly better implant survival while providing comparable functional outcomes at final follow-up. METHODS: This study was a retrospective comparison of 50 shoulders undergoing aTSA: 25 using cemented humeral fixation vs. 25 using press-fit humeral fixation. Patients in the 2 groups were propensity matched according to age, sex, and preoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score. Primary outcome measures included range of motion (ROM) (forward elevation, external rotation, internal rotation), patient-reported outcomes (ASES, Simple Shoulder Test [SST], visual analog scale [VAS]), and implant survival. RESULTS: At baseline, the 2 fixation groups were similar in regard to age, sex, body mass index, preoperative ASES score, and surgical indication. Mean follow-up was 11.7 ± 4.95 years in the cemented cohort and 9.13 ± 3.77 years in the press-fit cohort (P = .045). Both groups demonstrated significant improvements postoperatively in all included ROM and patient-reported outcomes. However, press-fit patients reported significantly better VAS, ASES, and SST scores. Mean VAS pain score was 1.1 ± 1.8 in press-fit patients and 3.2 ± 3.0 in cemented patients (P = .005). The mean ASES score was 87.7 ± 12.4 in press-fit patients and 69.5 ± 22.7 in cemented patients (P = .002). Lastly, the mean SST score was 9.8 ± 3.1 in press-fit patients and 7.7 ± 3.7 in cemented patients (P = .040). Both fixation techniques provided lasting implant survivorship with only a single revision operation in each of the cohorts. CONCLUSION: Herein, we provide a propensity-matched, long-term comparison of patients receiving anatomic shoulder arthroplasty stratified according to humeral stem fixation technique. The results of this analysis illustrate that both types of humeral fixation techniques yield durable and significant improvements in shoulder function with similar rates of survival at 10 years of follow-up.

A multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing a second-generation uncemented trabecular metal-backed vs. cemented polyethylene glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty: 5-year results.

BACKGROUND: Previously, we reported early (2-year) findings from a randomized controlled trial comparing a second-generation uncemented trabecular metal-backed (TM) glenoid vs. cemented polyethylene glenoid (POLY) in patients undergoing a total shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of the current study is to report disease-specific quality of life, clinical, patient-reported, and radiographic outcomes at midterm (5-year) from this trial. METHODS: Five surgeons from 3 centers participated. Patients 18-79 years with a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis were screened for eligibility. Randomization to an uncemented TM or cemented POLY glenoid was performed intra-operatively after adequate bone stock was confirmed. Study intervals were baseline, 2- and 5-year postoperative. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis Shoulder (WOOS) quality of life score. Secondary outcomes included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, EuroQol-5 Dimensions, and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey scores and clinical and radiographic examinations. Radiographic images were reviewed for metal debris according to Endrizzi. Mixed effects repeated measures analysis of variance for within- and between-group comparisons were performed. RESULTS: Of the 104 patients who consented, 93 were randomized (46 TM; 47 POLY). There were no differences between groups at baseline (TM: mean age 66.5 years [standard deviation (SD) 6.4], 24 male and 22 female; and POLY: mean age 68.4 years [SD 5.5], 23 male / 24 female). Mean (SD) WOOS scores at baseline and 2 and 5 years were as follows: TM, 32 (21), 92 (13), and 93 (11); POLY, 27 (15), 93 (11), and 93 (10), respectively. No statistical or clinically relevant differences were noted with patient-reported outcomes between groups. Metal debris was observed in 11 (23.9%) patients, but outcomes were not negatively impacted, and debris severity was minor (grades 1 and 2). Complication rates were similar between groups (TM: 7 of 46 [15.2%], and POLY: 8 of 47 [17.0%]; P = .813). No aseptic glenoid failures were reported, but 1 patient in the TM group required revision because of infection. CONCLUSIONS: Our short-term (2-year) findings were maintained with longer follow-up. At 5 years postoperation, there were no statistically or clinically significant differences between an uncemented second-generation TM glenoid and a cemented polyethylene glenoid with respect to disease-specific quality of life or patient-reported outcomes. No glenoid implant failures were reported, and complication rates were similar between groups. Only one complication was glenoid related (1 infection in the TM group). Metal debris was observed in 23.9% of patients with a TM glenoid but did not negatively influence implant survival, patient-reported outcomes, or shoulder function.

Periprosthetic Fractures: A Rising Tide of Hip Arthroplasty Failure Noted in the American Joint Replacement Registry and the Preventative Role of Cemented Stems.

BACKGROUND: This investigation examined cemented femoral component use in total hip arthroplasty (THA) and its impact on the incidence of periprosthetic fractures (PPFx), a common failure mode in THA. The study leverages data from the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR) to assess trends in cemented femoral component usage over time, its association with PPFx rates, and compares the survivorship and 90-day complication rates between cemented and cementless femoral component THAs. METHODS: Primary THAs, captured in the AJRR, in patients aged 65 years and older from 2012 to 2021 were analyzed. Variables considered included age, sex, race, region, teaching status, year, Charlson comorbidity index, and institution bed size. Analysis compared fixation types for THA on all-cause linked revision and PPFx. Logistic regression models analyzed the odds ratios for all-cause linked revision and PPFx for any follow-up time as well as for 90-day revision. The models were adjusted for the listed variables. RESULTS: During the study period, the rate of cement utilization as a percentage of primary THAs performed and reported to the AJRR increased from 4.4 to 8.3%. The rate of THA failure from PPFx increased from 11.4 to 33.3%. When both fixation groups were compared in the univariate analysis, there was a statistically significant difference in all demographic variables (P < .001). To account for this, multivariable logistic regression models were applied. In our models, cemented stems showed a 54.4% (odds ratio: 0.456; 95% confidence interval: 0.347 to 0.599; P < .0001) and 65.8% (odds ratio: 0.342; 95% confidence interval: 0.237 to 0.493; P < .0001) lower risk of PPFx linked and PPFx early linked revision, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Periprosthetic fractures are becoming a leading failure mode for THAs in the AJRR. Given cemented fixation's relative resistance to this failure mode compared to cementless fixation, we should consider increasing the utilization of this technique.

A Comparison of the Periprosthetic Fracture Rate of Cemented and Cementless Mobile Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasties: An Analysis of Data From the National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland, and the Isle of Man.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic fractures are rare but serious complications of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Although cementless UKA has a lower risk of loosening than cemented, there are concerns that tibial fracture risk may be higher given the reliance on interference fit for primary stability. The risk of fracture and the effect of surgical fixation are currently unknown. We compared the periprosthetic fracture rate following cemented and cementless UKA surgery. METHODS: A total of 14,122 medial mobile-bearing UKAs (7,061 cemented and 7,061 cementless) from the National Joint Registry and Hospital Episodes Statistics database were propensity score-matched. Cumulative fracture rates were calculated and Cox regressions were used to compare fixation groups. RESULTS: The three-month periprosthetic fracture rates were similar (P = .80), being 0.10% in the cemented group and 0.11% in the cementless group. The fracture rates were highest during the first three months postoperatively, but then decreased and remained constant between one and 10 years after surgery. The one-year cumulative fracture rates were 0.2% (confidence interval [CI]: 0.1 to 0.3) for cemented and 0.2% (CI: 0.1 to 0.3) for cementless cases. The 10-year cumulative fracture rates were 0.8% (CI: 0.2 to 1.3) and 0.8% (CI: 0.3 to 1.3), respectively. The hazard ratio during the whole study period was 1.06 (CI: 0.64 to 1.77; P = .79). CONCLUSIONS: The periprosthetic fracture rate following mobile bearing UKA surgery is low, being about 1% at 10 years. There were no significant differences in fracture rates between cemented and cementless implants after matching. We surmise that surgeons are aware of the higher theoretical risk of early fracture with cementless components and take care with tibial preparation. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE: III.

Minimum 15-Year Survival of a Biconvex Inlay Patellar Component in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Analysis of 2,530 Total Knee Arthroplasties From a Single Institution.

BACKGROUND: Routine patellar resurfacing during primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) remains controversial. To our knowledge, there are no studies reporting the long-term performance of a cemented biconvex all-polyethylene inlay component implanted at the time of primary TKA. The purpose of this study was to examine the 15-year survivorship and long-term clinical outcomes of this biconvex inlay patella used at our institution. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed our prospectively collected institutional database and identified 2,530 patients who underwent cemented TKA with a single prosthetic design (from 1996 to 2007) where the patella was resurfaced using this cemented biconvex inlay patella. The mean age at surgery was 68 years (range, 29 to 93). The mean body mass index was 33.0 (range, 16.4 to 76.3), with 61.9% women. At the time of analysis, the mean time from surgery was 20.4 years (range, 15 to 26). We used Kaplan-Meier analysis to calculate survivorship at 15 years. We analyzed clinical outcomes using 3 patient-reported outcome measures collected prospectively. RESULTS: The 15-year survivorship with revision surgery for all causes as the end point was 97.1% (95% confidence interval 96.1 to 98.1%). The 15-year survivorship with revision surgery for a patella-related complication as the end point was 99.7% (95% confidence interval 99.4 to 1.0). At the final follow-up, patients showed significant improvement in scores for the Knee Society Clinical Rating System (P < .001), Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (P < .001), and Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey physical component (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Routine patellar resurfacing using a biconvex inlay patellar component has excellent survivorship and a low rate of complications at 15 years post-TKA.

Cemented Versus Cementless Femoral Fixation for Total Hip Arthroplasty Following Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The mode of femoral fixation for primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is undetermined, with reported outcomes favoring different fixation methods. This study aimed to compare postoperative complications between cemented and cementless fixation at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years in patients aged 65 years of age and older undergoing THA for osteoarthritis. METHODS: Using an all-payer, national database, patients 65 years and older undergoing primary THA, either with cementless (n = 56,701) or cemented (n = 6,283) femoral fixation for osteoarthritis were identified. A 1:1 propensity-matched analysis for age, sex, comorbidity index, alcohol abuse, tobacco use, obesity, and diabetes was performed, resulting in n = 6,283 patients in each cohort. Postoperative outcomes, including postoperative periprosthetic joint infection, aseptic revision, surgical site infection, pulmonary embolism, venous thromboembolism, wound complications, dislocation, periprosthetic fracture, and aseptic loosening were assessed. RESULTS: The cemented cohort had higher rates of infection (4.5 versus 0.8%, odds ratio [OR] 5.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.33 to 7.93, P < .001), aseptic revision (2.9 versus 2.0%, OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.17 to 1.85, P = .001), venous thromboembolism (1.8 versus 1.3%, OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.87, P < .001), and aseptic loosening (1.5 versus 0.7%, OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.60 to 3.32, P < .001) at 90-days. At 1 and 2 years, the cemented cohort had higher rates of infection, aseptic revision, and aseptic loosening (all P < .001). Rates of periprosthetic fracture were similar at all time points (all P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Cemented fixation had higher rates of infection, aseptic loosening, and aseptic revision. This finding supports the current use of cementless fixation, but the ultimate decision regarding fixation type should be based on the proper optimization of the patient's comorbidities and bone quality.

Survivorship of Modern Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty: Analysis From the Canadian Joint Replacement Registry.

BACKGROUND: Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is rising in popularity. The literature supporting its use over cemented TKA remains sparse. Using the Canadian Joint Replacement Registry (CJRR), we sought to investigate cementless versus cemented fixation in modern primary TKA and (1) determine whether there is an overall difference in revision by fixation, (2) perform a subanalysis of the most-commonly used cementless TKA brand in Canada, and (3) identify the reasons for revision. METHODS: The CJRR data was used to analyze TKA designs with cemented and cementless versions. Revision risk is reported as all-cause cumulative percent revision (CPR). Reasons for revision were analyzed. Cox proportional hazards models were used to report adjusted hazard ratios (HR) controlling for age, sex, patella resurfacing, and bearing constraints. We included 202,880 primary TKAs performed between 2012 and 2021. Of those, 9,163 (4.5%) were cementless. RESULTS: The CPR at 8 years was 4.49% for cementless and 3.14% for cemented implants. After adjusting for confounders, we did not detect a difference in revision risk overall (HR 0.87 [95% CI (confidence interval) 0.73 to 1.04], P = 0.128). However, the most commonly used cementless TKA brand demonstrated a CPR of 1.95% compared to 2.19% for its cemented version at 4 years. Furthermore, we detected a significantly lower revision risk compared to its cemented version after adjusting for confounders (HR 0.66 [95% CI 0.51 to 0.85], P = 0.001). The 4 most common reasons for revision in both groups were the following: (1) infection, (2) instability, (3) aseptic loosening, and (4) pain of unknown origin. CONCLUSIONS: Using CJRR data adjusted for confounding factors, no difference in revision risk was detected between cemented and cementless implants overall. However, for the most common brand of cementless TKA used in Canada, there was a lower risk of revision than its corresponding cemented version. The reasons for revision were similar.

What Are the Differences in Hospital Cost Associated With the Use of Cemented Versus Cementless Femoral Stems in Hemiarthroplasty and Total Hip Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Femoral Neck Fracture?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to determine if there is a difference in hospital costs associated with the use of cemented versus cementless femoral stems in hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total hip arthroplasty (THA) for the treatment of femoral neck fracture (FNF). METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilizes the 2019 Medicare Provider Analysis and Review Limited Data Set. Patients undergoing arthroplasty for the treatment of FNF were identified. Patients were grouped by cemented or cementless femoral stem fixation. There were 16,148 patients who underwent arthroplasty for FNF available: 4,913 THAs (3,705 patients who had cementless femoral stems and 1,208 patients who had cemented femoral stems) and 11,235 HAs (6,099 patients who had cementless femoral stems and 5,136 who had cemented femoral stems). Index hospital costs were estimated by multiplying total charges by cost-to-charge ratios. Costs were analyzed using univariable and multivariable generalized linear models. RESULTS: Cemented femoral stem THA generated 1.080 times (95% confidence interval, 1.06 to 1.10; P < .001), or 8.0%, greater index hospital costs than cementless femoral stem THA, and cemented femoral stem HA generated 1.042 times (95% confidence interval, 1.03 to 1.05; P < .001), or 4.2%, greater index hospital costs than cementless femoral stem HA. CONCLUSIONS: Cemented femoral stems for FNF treated with either THA or HA are associated with only a small portion of increased cost compared to cementless femoral stems. Providers may choose the method of arthroplasty stem fixation for the treatment of FNF based on what they deem most appropriate for the specific patient.

Cementless and Cemented Total Knee Arthroplasties Have Similar Outcomes but Cementless Patellar Component Migration was Observed in a Paired Randomized Control Trial.

BACKGROUND: Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has become increasingly popular. Some surgeons are concerned about pain, implant stability, and metal-backed patellar component survivorship. This study investigated the outcomes of cementless compared with cemented TKA in bilateral cases. METHODS: We randomized 80 knees in 40 osteoarthritic knee patients who underwent bilateral TKA with patellar resurfacing under one anesthesia. All participants received cementless prostheses in one knee and cemented prostheses in the other. The outcomes were knee function measured by the forgotten joint scores, modified Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, knee ranges of motion, pain levels, operative times, radiographic outcomes, and complications. All knees were followed for a minimum of 2 years (2 to 3 years). RESULTS: Cementless and cemented TKA had similar functional outcomes in forgotten joint score (97 ± 5 versus 98 ± 3 points, P = .52), modified Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index score (3 ± 4 versus 3 ± 2 points, P = .96), and ranges of motion (134 ± 7° versus 134 ± 7°, P = .16). The postoperative pain was also similar (P > .05). There were 4 cementless patellar components had superior migration for an average of 3.5 mm (range, 1.77 to 4.16) without loosening. The mean time of migration was 4 (range, 2 to 6) weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Cementless TKA had similar functional outcomes and recovery patterns compared with cemented TKA. However, there was concern of cementless component migration at patellae.

Osteoporotic Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty Have a Similar 5-Year Cumulative Incidence Rate of Periprosthetic Fracture Regardless of Cemented Versus Cementless Femoral Stem Fixation.

BACKGROUND: In osteoporotic patients, surgeons may utilize cemented femoral fixation to minimize risk of fracture. The purpose of this study was to compare 5-year implant survivability in patients who have osteoporosis who underwent elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) with cementless versus cemented fixation. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients who have osteoporosis undergoing THA with either cemented or cementless femoral fixation was conducted using a national administrative claims database. Of the 18,431 identified THA patients who have osteoporosis, 15,867 (86.1%) underwent cementless fixation. The primary outcome was a comparison of the 5-year cumulative incidences of aseptic revision, mechanical loosening, and periprosthetic fracture (PPF). Kaplan-Meier and Multivariable Cox Proportional Hazard Ratio analyses were used, controlling for femoral fixation method, age, sex, a comorbidity scale, use of osteoporosis medication, and important comorbidity. RESULTS: There was no difference in aseptic revision (Hazard's Ratio (HR): 1.13; 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.79 to 1.62; P value: .500) and PPF (HR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.44; P value: .858) within 5 years of THA between fixation cohorts. However, patients who had cemented fixation were more likely to suffer mechanical loosening with 5 years post-THA (HR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.17 to 2.71; P-value: .007). CONCLUSIONS: We found a similar 5-year rate of PPF when comparing patients who underwent cementless versus cemented femoral fixation for elective THA regardless of preoperative diagnosis of osteoporosis. While existing registry data support the use of cemented fixation in elderly patients, a more thorough understanding of the interplay between age, osteoporosis, and implant design is needed to delineate in whom cemented fixation is most warranted for PPF prevention.

Short-Term (6 Months or Less) Pain in Cemented versus Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has increased in popularity to potentially improve survivorship. Radiostereometric studies demonstrate increased component migration during the first 3 to 6 months in cementless constructs, generating concern for increased postoperative pain during early osseointegration. The purpose of this study was to evaluate short-term (≤ 6 months) pain and function in cemented versus cementless TKA. We hypothesized that cementless TKA patients report increased pain during the short-term (≤ 6 months) postoperative period. METHODS: The MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane Libraries were searched for studies evaluating short-term (≤ 6 months) outcomes of cemented versus cementless primary TKA. Studies involving hybrid fixation were excluded. A meta-analysis was performed using standardized mean difference for primary outcomes (early postoperative pain) and weighted mean difference (WMD) for secondary outcomes (early postoperative function). RESULTS: There were eleven studies included. There was no significant difference in acute postoperative pain between cemented and cementless TKA within 6 months of index TKA (standardized mean difference 0.08 in favor of cemented TKA; P = .10). Early postoperative forgotten joint scores (WMD 0.81; P = .81) and knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome scores for joint replacement (WMD 0.80 in favor of cemented TKA; P = .14) were also similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: There is no difference in short-term (≤ 6 months) pain or early function between patients receiving cemented and cementless TKA. This suggests that surgeons may utilize cementless TKA without fear of increased pain due to micromotion within 6 months of index arthroplasty. However, additional studies with uniform assessment methods are needed to further inform differences in short-term pain and early functional outcomes between cemented and cementless TKA.

Mode of Fixation and Survivorship in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty in the American Joint Replacement Registry.

BACKGROUND: A recent rapid increase in cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been noted in the American Joint Replacement Registry (AJRR). The purpose of our study was to compare TKA survivorship based on the mode of fixation reported to the AJRR in the Medicare population. METHODS: Primary TKAs from Medicare patients submitted to AJRR from 2012 to 2022 were analyzed. The Medicare and AJRR databases were merged. Cox regression stratified by sex compared revision outcomes (all-cause, infection, mechanical loosening, and fracture) for cemented, cementless, and hybrid fixation, controlling for age and the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). RESULTS: A total of 634,470 primary TKAs were analyzed. Cementless TKAs were younger (71.8 versus 73.1 years, P < .001) than cemented TKAs and more frequently utilized in men (8.2 versus 5.8% women, P < .001). Regional differences were noted, with cementless fixation more common in the Northeast (10.5%) and South (9.2%) compared to the West (4.4%) and Midwest (4.3%) (P < .001). No significant differences were identified in all-cause revision rates in men or women ≥ 65 for cemented, cementless, or hybrid TKA after adjusting for age and CCI. Significantly lower revision for fracture was identified for cemented compared to cementless and hybrid fixation in women ≥ 65 after adjusting for age and CCI (P = .0169). CONCLUSIONS: No survivorship advantage for all-cause revision was noted based on the mode of fixation in men or women ≥ 65 after adjusting for age and CCI. A significantly lower revision rate for fractures was noted in women ≥ 65 utilizing cemented fixation. Cementless fixation in primary TKA should be used with caution in elderly women.

Impact of Intraoperative Femoral Fractures During Cemented Hemiarthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fractures.

BACKGROUND: There have been several studies on intraoperative femoral fractures (IFFs) during primary total hip arthroplasty, but it is not well understood how this complication affects the patient population undergoing cemented hemiarthroplasty. This study aimed to analyze the impact of IFFs sustained during cemented hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of femoral neck fractures. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all patients who were treated for Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Osteosynthesefragen/Orthopaedic Trauma Association 31B fractures with cemented hemiarthroplasty between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2021, at a single academic level 1 trauma center. An initial cohort was constructed of all patients who sustained an IFF during their surgery, yielding 31 patients after excluding those who sustained a pathologic fracture or had incomplete data. These patients were matched 1:2 on age, sex, and body mass index to patients in a control cohort. The primary outcome measure was implant failure. Secondary outcome measures included complications, all-cause mortality, and radiographic outcomes (subsidence, femoral component loosening, acetabular wear, and heterotopic ossification) postoperatively. RESULTS: Subsequent implant revision was required in 3.2% (n = 1) of patients who sustained an IFF and 1.6% (n = 1) of patients who did not. After adjusting for comorbidities, there was no observed excess risk of implant failure in the fracture cohort when compared to the control cohort (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.30, P = 0.740). There was no observed excess risk of morbidity (HR = 0.69, P = 0.621) or all-cause mortality (HR = 0.23, P = 0.330). Radiographic outcomes also did not significantly differ between the 2 cohorts (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative fractures during cemented hemiarthroplasty do not contribute to an increased risk of secondary surgery, morbidity, or mortality after surgery. They also do not adversely affect radiographic outcomes postoperatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Comparative Study.

Cemented Versus Cementless Femoral Fixation for Total Hip Arthroplasty Following Femoral Neck Fracture in Patients Aged 65 and Older.

BACKGROUND: Femoral neck fractures are common in individuals over 65, necessitating quick mobilization for the best outcomes. There's ongoing debate about the optimal femoral component fixation method in total hip arthroplasty (THA) for these fractures. Recent U.S. data shows a preference for cementless techniques in over 93% of primary THAs. Nonetheless, cemented fixation might offer advantages like fewer revisions, reduced periprosthetic fractures, lesser thigh pain, and enhanced long-term implant survival for those above 65. This study compares cementless and cemented fixation methods in THA, focusing on postoperative complications in patients aged 65 and older. METHODS: We analyzed a national database to identify patients aged 65+ who underwent primary THA for femoral neck fractures between 2016 and 2021, using either cementless (n = 2,842) or cemented (n = 1,124) techniques. A 1:1 propensity-matched analysis was conducted to balance variables such as age, sex, and comorbidities, resulting in two equally sized groups (n = 1,124 each). We evaluated outcomes like infection, venous thromboembolism (VTE), wound issues, dislocation, periprosthetic fracture, etc., at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years post-surgery. A P-value < 05 indicated statistical significance. RESULTS: The cemented group initially consisted of older individuals, more females, and higher comorbidity rates. Both groups had similar infection and wound complication rates, and aseptic loosening. The cemented group, however, had lower periprosthetic fracture rates (2.5 versus 4.4%, P = .02) and higher VTE rates (2.9 versus 1.2%, P = .01) at 90 days. After 1 and 2 years, the cementless group experienced more aseptic revision surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: This study, using a large, national database and propensity-matched cohorts, indicates that cemented femoral component fixation in THA leads to fewer periprosthetic fractures and aseptic revisions, but a higher VTE risk. Fixation type choice should consider various factors, including age, sex, comorbidities, bone quality, and surgical expertise. This data can inform surgeons in their decision-making process.

A Wireless Gamma-Ray Monitoring System for Cemented Radwaste Drums.

In the framework of the PREDIS EU project, a wireless battery-operated gamma-ray detection system was developed in order to provide a medium-to-long-term monitoring system for radioactive waste drums. It was initially proposed to monitor the gamma radioactivity outcoming from steel drums containing cemented radwaste, even though it could be usefully employed in a wider range of applications. Gamma rays are penetrating and convey information from the drum's internal structure, as the count rate measured on the surface depends on the thickness and density of the crossed materials. A number of sensors arranged around a drum, typically four units, provide indications of the emission anisotropy, and any sensitive change in the measured count rate would hint at some anomaly, thus triggering a suitable inspection by operators.