Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Preparation of the Femoral Bone Cavity for Cementless Stems: Broaching vs Compaction. A Five-Year Randomized Radiostereometric Analysis and Dual Energy X-Ray Absorption Study.

BACKGROUND: Short-term experimental and animal studies have confirmed superior fixation of cementless implants inserted with compaction compared to broaching of the cancellous bone.

METHODS: Forty-four hips in 42 patients (19 men) were randomly operated using cementless hydroxyapatite-coated Bi-Metric stems. Patients were followed with radiostereometric analysis at baseline, 6 and 12 weeks, 1, 2, and 5 years, and measurements of periprosthetic bone mineral density at baseline, 1, 2, and 5 years. Complications during the study period and clinical outcome measures of Harris Hip Score were recorded at mean 7 years (5-8.8) after surgery.

RESULTS: Absolute migrations of medio/lateral translations between the broaching group and the compaction group of mean 0.14 mm (standard deviation [SD] 0.10) vs mean 0.30 mm (SD 0.27) (P = .01) at 1 year, and of mean 0.13 mm (SD 0.10) vs 0.34 mm (0.31) (P = .01) at 5 years were different. Absolute valgus/varus rotations of mean 0.12° (SD 0.13°) in the broaching group were less than mean 0.35° (0.45°) in the compaction group (P < .01) at 1 year, but at 5 years no difference was observed (P = .19). Subsidence and retroversion were similar between groups at all follow-ups (P > .13). The compaction group had significantly less bone loss than the broaching group in Gruen zone 3 (distal-lateral to the stem) at 1 and 5 years. No further differences in bone mineral density changes were found between groups up to 5 years after surgery. Complications throughout the period and clinical outcome measures of Harris Hip Score were similar at 7 years (5-8.8) after surgery.

CONCLUSION: We found increased migration when preparing the bone with compaction compared with broaching in cementless femoral stems.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app