Survivorship of Cemented Versus Cementless Metal on Metal Hip Resurfacing: A Match-Cohort Analysis at Minimum 5 Years.

IF 3.8 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
JBJS Open Access Pub Date : 2025-09-19 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.2106/JBJS.OA.25.00180
Edoardo Viglietta, Simone Fenucci, Ariane Parisien, Andrew Tucker, George Grammatopoulos, Paul E Beaulé
{"title":"Survivorship of Cemented Versus Cementless Metal on Metal Hip Resurfacing: A Match-Cohort Analysis at Minimum 5 Years.","authors":"Edoardo Viglietta, Simone Fenucci, Ariane Parisien, Andrew Tucker, George Grammatopoulos, Paul E Beaulé","doi":"10.2106/JBJS.OA.25.00180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>One of the most common causes of failure after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MoM HR) remains femoral neck fracture and aseptic loosening of the femoral component. The purpose of this study was to compare the survivorship of cemented and cementless femoral fixation metal on metal hip resurfacing.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five-hundred ninety patients' MoM HR performed through the Hueter-anterior approach with a minimum 5-year (mean age 50 years, body mass index (BMI) 29, 555 men and 35 women) follow-up were reviewed. One hundred and forty-three cementless (mean age 50 years, mean BMI 29, 136 men and 7 women) and 143 cemented MoM HR (mean age 52 years, mean BMI 29, 136 men and 7 women) were matched on age, sex, and BMI. Overall failures, femoral failures, adverse events, and complications were assessed. Acetabular cup inclination, neck-shaft angle (NSA), stem-shaft angles (SSA), Δ NSA-SSA, and neck narrowing were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Survivorship was 91% at a mean follow-up of 8.2 years (range 5-19). There were 14 failures (10% rate) in the cemented group and 12 failures (8% failure rate) in the cementless group (p > 0.05) with men at 92.7% and women at 74.9% (p = 0.019). In the male group, using isolated femoral reasons for revision survivorship was 96.5% for the cemented group and 98% for the cementless group (p > 0.05). Neck narrowing more than 10% was present in 11 patients (8%) in the cemented group and in 3 patients (2%) in the cementless group (p < 0.01). No significant correlation was found between any radiological parameter and the risk of failure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both cementless and cemented MoM HR are associated with excellent survivorship, especially in men with cementless fixation having a lower incident of neck narrowing.</p>","PeriodicalId":36492,"journal":{"name":"JBJS Open Access","volume":"10 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12443159/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JBJS Open Access","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.OA.25.00180","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: One of the most common causes of failure after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing (MoM HR) remains femoral neck fracture and aseptic loosening of the femoral component. The purpose of this study was to compare the survivorship of cemented and cementless femoral fixation metal on metal hip resurfacing.

Methods: Five-hundred ninety patients' MoM HR performed through the Hueter-anterior approach with a minimum 5-year (mean age 50 years, body mass index (BMI) 29, 555 men and 35 women) follow-up were reviewed. One hundred and forty-three cementless (mean age 50 years, mean BMI 29, 136 men and 7 women) and 143 cemented MoM HR (mean age 52 years, mean BMI 29, 136 men and 7 women) were matched on age, sex, and BMI. Overall failures, femoral failures, adverse events, and complications were assessed. Acetabular cup inclination, neck-shaft angle (NSA), stem-shaft angles (SSA), Δ NSA-SSA, and neck narrowing were recorded.

Results: Survivorship was 91% at a mean follow-up of 8.2 years (range 5-19). There were 14 failures (10% rate) in the cemented group and 12 failures (8% failure rate) in the cementless group (p > 0.05) with men at 92.7% and women at 74.9% (p = 0.019). In the male group, using isolated femoral reasons for revision survivorship was 96.5% for the cemented group and 98% for the cementless group (p > 0.05). Neck narrowing more than 10% was present in 11 patients (8%) in the cemented group and in 3 patients (2%) in the cementless group (p < 0.01). No significant correlation was found between any radiological parameter and the risk of failure.

Conclusion: Both cementless and cemented MoM HR are associated with excellent survivorship, especially in men with cementless fixation having a lower incident of neck narrowing.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

金属髋关节表面置换术中骨水泥与非骨水泥金属的生存率:至少5年的匹配队列分析。
背景:金属对金属髋关节置换术(MoM HR)后最常见的失败原因之一是股骨颈骨折和股骨假体无菌性松动。本研究的目的是比较金属髋关节置换术中骨水泥和非骨水泥股骨固定金属的生存率。方法:对590例经Hueter-anterior入路行MoM HR的患者进行至少5年(平均年龄50岁,体重指数(BMI) 29,男性555例,女性35例)随访。143名无骨水泥(平均年龄50岁,平均BMI为29,136名男性和7名女性)和143名骨水泥MoM HR(平均年龄52岁,平均BMI为29,136名男性和7名女性)在年龄、性别和BMI上匹配。评估总体衰竭、股衰竭、不良事件和并发症。记录髋臼杯倾角、颈轴角(NSA)、茎轴角(SSA)、Δ NSA-SSA、颈部变窄。结果:平均随访8.2年(5-19年),生存率为91%。骨水泥组14例(失败率10%),无骨水泥组12例(失败率8%)(p < 0.05),其中男性为92.7%,女性为74.9% (p = 0.019)。在男性组中,骨水泥组和非骨水泥组分别为96.5%和98% (p < 0.05)。骨水泥组11例(8%)颈狭窄超过10%,无骨水泥组3例(2%)颈狭窄超过10% (p < 0.01)。没有发现任何放射学参数与失败风险之间的显著相关性。结论:无骨水泥和骨水泥的MoM HR都有很好的生存率,特别是在无骨水泥固定的男性中,颈部狭窄的发生率较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
JBJS Open Access
JBJS Open Access Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
77
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信