Tony Gaidici BS , David G. Deckey MD , Thorsten M. Seyler MD, PhD , Michael P. Bolognesi MD , Mark J. Spangehl MD , Joshua S. Bingham MD
{"title":"Femoral Fixation for Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty—An International Registry Perspective","authors":"Tony Gaidici BS , David G. Deckey MD , Thorsten M. Seyler MD, PhD , Michael P. Bolognesi MD , Mark J. Spangehl MD , Joshua S. Bingham MD","doi":"10.1016/j.artd.2025.101755","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The preferred method for femoral fixation (FF) during total hip arthroplasty (THA) has varied internationally. While prior studies explored trends within single countries or small international cohorts, there’s a paucity of studies comparing international trends of FF for primary THA patients. This study analyzed global trends in FF methods, survival by fixation type, and periprosthetic fractures as a reason for revision.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Data were extracted from 2000 to the present from 16 national joint replacement registries. Data were collected on the number of cemented and uncemented primary THA cases each year. Revision and survival data were analyzed by fixation method. Aggregate data on periprosthetic fractures as a reason for revision and specific data on periprosthetic fractures by fixation method were included when available.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A global shift from cemented to uncemented FF was observed over the past two decades, except in the Netherlands. Even in countries favoring cementation, such as Sweden, uncemented techniques are gaining popularity. Survival rates for cemented and uncemented methods were comparable, but periprosthetic fracture rates varied regionally. Preferences reflected both clinical practice differences and patient needs.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Most countries investigated show a preference for uncemented fixation. However, the popularity of cemented fixation in certain countries reflects its continued relevance, especially in populations with different clinical needs. Survival by fixation method was similar among countries, but periprosthetic fracture as reason for revision varied widely.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":37940,"journal":{"name":"Arthroplasty Today","volume":"34 ","pages":"Article 101755"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroplasty Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352344125001426","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
The preferred method for femoral fixation (FF) during total hip arthroplasty (THA) has varied internationally. While prior studies explored trends within single countries or small international cohorts, there’s a paucity of studies comparing international trends of FF for primary THA patients. This study analyzed global trends in FF methods, survival by fixation type, and periprosthetic fractures as a reason for revision.
Methods
Data were extracted from 2000 to the present from 16 national joint replacement registries. Data were collected on the number of cemented and uncemented primary THA cases each year. Revision and survival data were analyzed by fixation method. Aggregate data on periprosthetic fractures as a reason for revision and specific data on periprosthetic fractures by fixation method were included when available.
Results
A global shift from cemented to uncemented FF was observed over the past two decades, except in the Netherlands. Even in countries favoring cementation, such as Sweden, uncemented techniques are gaining popularity. Survival rates for cemented and uncemented methods were comparable, but periprosthetic fracture rates varied regionally. Preferences reflected both clinical practice differences and patient needs.
Conclusions
Most countries investigated show a preference for uncemented fixation. However, the popularity of cemented fixation in certain countries reflects its continued relevance, especially in populations with different clinical needs. Survival by fixation method was similar among countries, but periprosthetic fracture as reason for revision varied widely.
期刊介绍:
Arthroplasty Today is a companion journal to the Journal of Arthroplasty. The journal Arthroplasty Today brings together the clinical and scientific foundations for joint replacement of the hip and knee in an open-access, online format. Arthroplasty Today solicits manuscripts of the highest quality from all areas of scientific endeavor that relate to joint replacement or the treatment of its complications, including those dealing with patient outcomes, economic and policy issues, prosthetic design, biomechanics, biomaterials, and biologic response to arthroplasty. The journal focuses on case reports. It is the purpose of Arthroplasty Today to present material to practicing orthopaedic surgeons that will keep them abreast of developments in the field, prove useful in the care of patients, and aid in understanding the scientific foundation of this subspecialty area of joint replacement. The international members of the Editorial Board provide a worldwide perspective for the journal''s area of interest. Their participation ensures that each issue of Arthroplasty Today provides the reader with timely, peer-reviewed articles of the highest quality.