We have located links that may give you full text access.
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Non-Database Comparative Studies on Cemented Versus Uncemented Femoral Stem in Primary Elective Total Hip Arthroplasty.
Journal of Arthroplasty 2022 April 7
BACKGROUND: Cemented and uncemented femoral stems have shown excellent survivorship and outcomes in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Cementless stems have become increasingly common in the United States; however, multiple large database studies have suggested that elderly patients may have fewer complications with a cemented stem. As conclusions from large databases may be limited due to variations in data collection, this study investigated femoral stem survivorship and complication rates based on cement status in non-database studies.
METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were utilized to identify articles for inclusion up until June 2021. Included articles directly compared outcomes and complications between patients undergoing primary THA without femoral stem cementing to those with cementing. Studies were excluded if they utilized large databases or consisted of patients with a preoperative diagnosis of trauma.
RESULTS: Of 1700 studies, 309 were selected for abstract review and nineteen for full-text review. A total of seven studies were selected. Meta-analyses indicated significant heterogeneity between studies. There were no differences in revision rates (cementless: 5.53% vs. cemented 8.91%, p=0.543), infection rates (cementless: 0.60% vs. cemented: 0.90%, p=0.692), or periprosthetic fracture rates (cementless: 0.52% vs. cemented: 0.51%, p=0.973) between groups.
CONCLUSION: There is scarce literature comparing outcomes and complications between cemented and cementless femoral stems in primary elective THA without utilizing database methodology. In our study, there were no differences in complications detected on meta-analyses. Given previous findings in database studies, additional high-quality cohort studies are required to determine if select patients may benefit from a cemented femoral stem.
METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were utilized to identify articles for inclusion up until June 2021. Included articles directly compared outcomes and complications between patients undergoing primary THA without femoral stem cementing to those with cementing. Studies were excluded if they utilized large databases or consisted of patients with a preoperative diagnosis of trauma.
RESULTS: Of 1700 studies, 309 were selected for abstract review and nineteen for full-text review. A total of seven studies were selected. Meta-analyses indicated significant heterogeneity between studies. There were no differences in revision rates (cementless: 5.53% vs. cemented 8.91%, p=0.543), infection rates (cementless: 0.60% vs. cemented: 0.90%, p=0.692), or periprosthetic fracture rates (cementless: 0.52% vs. cemented: 0.51%, p=0.973) between groups.
CONCLUSION: There is scarce literature comparing outcomes and complications between cemented and cementless femoral stems in primary elective THA without utilizing database methodology. In our study, there were no differences in complications detected on meta-analyses. Given previous findings in database studies, additional high-quality cohort studies are required to determine if select patients may benefit from a cemented femoral stem.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
British Society for Rheumatology guideline on management of adult and juvenile onset Sjögren disease.Rheumatology 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Albumin: a comprehensive review and practical guideline for clinical use.European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 2024 April 13
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
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
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