The association between cement type and the subsequent risk of revision surgery in primary total hip replacement

Bone Cement in Adult Hip and Knee Reconstruction: A Review of Commercially Available Options and Clinical Outcomes

Polymethyl-methacrylate (PMMA) bone cement is used extensively in hip and knee arthroplasty. A thorough understanding of the basic chemistry underlying PMMA is important for orthopaedic surgeons because this underscores the specific way bone cement is used during surgery. Recently, clinical research has shed light on the various types of PMMA regarding the viscosity of the mixture and the effect of cement additives. These variations in composition may alter the clinical efficacy of implanted bone cement in hip and knee arthroplasty. Understanding these key differences will allow the surgeon to tailor the PMMA composition as needed to maximize outcomes of hip and knee arthroplasty. This review will summarize the preclinical feature of PMMA, evaluate current and past commercially available bone cement options, analyze preclinical results and clinical outcomes of various bone cement types, and highlight future areas of research.

[The third-generation modern cementing technique in hip and knee arthroplasty]

BACKGROUND

Implant loosening is the most common reason for revision surgery.

OBJECTIVES

Contribution of modern cementing technique to the long-term stability of an implant.

METHODS

Evaluation of the available evidence on modern cementing technique.

RESULTS

Modern cementing technique in hip arthroplasty is considered established and leads to better cementing results. In knee arthroplasty, there are also specific recommendations, including intensive cleaning of the bone bed, mixing of bone cement under vacuum and application of bone cement to the implant and the bone.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of modern cementing technique in hip and knee arthroplasty facilitates cementing, increases safety, and minimizes the risk of mechanical loosening.

Femoral Stem Cementation in Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

➢

Femoral stem cementation has undergone considerable investigation since bone cement was first used in arthroplasty, leading to the evolution of modern femoral stem cementation techniques.

➢

Although there is a worldwide trend toward the use of cementless components, cemented femoral stems have shown superiority in some studies and have clear indications in specific populations.

➢

There is a large evidence base regarding cement properties, preparation, and application techniques that underlie current beliefs and practice, but considerable controversy still exists.

➢

Although the cementing process adds technical complexity to total hip arthroplasty, growing evidence supports its use in certain cohorts. As such, it is critical that orthopaedic surgeons and investigators have a thorough understanding of the fundamentals and evidence underlying modern cementation techniques.

Relationship between the Surface Roughness of Material and Bone Cement: An Increased "Polished" Stem May Result in the Excessive Taper-Slip

Although some reports suggest that taper-slip cemented stems may be associated with a higher periprosthetic femoral fractures rate than composite-beam cemented stems, few studies have focused on the biomaterial effect of the polished material on the stem–cement interface. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between surface roughness of materials and bone cement. Four types of metal discs—cobalt-chromium-molybdenum alloy (CoCr), stainless steel alloy 316 (SUS), and two titanium alloys (Ti-6Al-4V and Ti-15Mo-5Zr-3Al)—were prepared. Five discs of each material were produced with varying degrees of surface roughness. In order to evaluate surface wettability, the contact angle was measured using the sessile drop method. A pin was made using two bone cements and the frictional coefficient was assessed with a pin-on-disc test. The contact angle of each metal increased with decreasing surface roughness and the surface wettability of metal decreased with higher degrees of polishing. With a surface roughness of Ra = 0.06 μm and moderate viscosity bone cement, the frictional coefficient was significantly lower in CoCr than in SUS (p = 0.0073). In CoCr, the low adhesion effect with low frictional coefficient may result in excessive taper-slip, especially with the use of moderate viscosity bone cement.

The effect of antibiotic-loaded bone cement on risk of revision following hip and knee arthroplasty

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the effect of antibiotic-loaded bone cement (ALBC) versus plain bone cement (PBC) on revision rates for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and all-cause revisions following primary elective total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases were systematically searched for studies comparing ALBC versus PBC, reporting on revision rates for PJI or all-cause revision following primary elective THA or TKA. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed. The study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO ID CRD42018107691).

RESULTS

Nine studies and one registry report were identified, enabling the inclusion of 371,977 THA and 671,246 TKA. Pooled analysis for THA demonstrated ALBC was protective against revision for PJI compared with PBC (relative risk (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.77; p < 0.001), however, no differences were seen for all-cause revision rate (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.09; p = 0.100). For TKA, there were no significant differences in revision rates for PJI or all causes between ALBC and PBC (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.45; p = 0.730, and RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02; p = 0.060, respectively).

CONCLUSION

ALBC demonstrated a protective effect against revision for PJI compared with PBC in THA with no difference in all-cause revisions. No differences in revision rates for PJI and all-cause revision between ALBC and PBC for TKA were observed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):7-15.

Synergistic use of biomaterials and licensed therapeutics to manipulate bone remodelling and promote non-union fracture repair

Disrupted bone metabolism can lead to delayed fracture healing or non-union, often requiring intervention to correct. Although the current clinical gold standard bone graft implants and commercial bone graft substitutes are effective, they possess inherent drawbacks and are limited in their therapeutic capacity for delayed union and non-union repair. Research into advanced biomaterials and therapeutic biomolecules has shown great potential for driving bone regeneration, although few have achieved commercial success or clinical translation. There are a number of therapeutics, which influence bone remodelling, currently licensed for clinical use. Providing an alternative local delivery context for these therapies, can enhance their efficacy and is an emerging trend in bone regenerative therapeutic strategies. This review aims to provide an overview of how biomaterial design has advanced from currently available commercial bone graft substitutes to accommodate previously licensed therapeutics that target local bone restoration and healing in a synergistic manner, and the challenges faced in progressing this research towards clinical reality.

Is the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement associated with a lower risk of revision after primary total hip arthroplasty?

AIMS

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement influenced the risk of revision surgery after primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) for osteoarthritis.

METHODS

The study involved data collected by the National Joint Registry (NJR) for England and Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man between 1 September 2005 and 31 August 2017. Cox proportional hazards were used to investigate the association between use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement and the risk of revision due to prosthetic joint infection (PJI), with adjustments made for the year of the initial procedure, age at the time of surgery, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, head size, and body mass index (BMI). We looked also at the association between use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement and the risk of revision due to aseptic loosening or osteolysis.

RESULTS

The cohort included 418,857 THAs of whom 397,896 had received antibiotic-loaded bone cement and 20,961 plain cement. After adjusting for putative confounding factors, the risk of revision for PJI was lower in those in whom antibiotic-loaded bone cement was used (hazard ration (HR) 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 0.98). There was also a protective effect on the risk of revision due to aseptic loosening or osteolysis, in the period of > 4.1 years after primary THA, HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.45, 0.72.

CONCLUSION

Within the limits of registry analysis, this study showed an association between the use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement and lower rates of revision due to PJI. The findings support the continued use of antibiotic-loaded bone cement in cemented THA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):997-1002.

Current concepts and outcomes in cemented femoral stem design and cementation techniques: the argument for a new classification system

Cemented implant fixation design principles have evolved since the 1950s, and various femoral stem designs are currently in use to provide a stable construct between the implant-cement and cement-bone interfaces.Cemented stems have classically been classified into two broad categories: taper slip or force closed, and composite beams or shaped closed designs. While these simplifications are acceptable general categories, there are other important surgical details that need to be taken into consideration such as different broaching techniques, cementing techniques and mantle thickness.With the evolution of cemented implants, the introduction of newer implants which have hybrid properties, and the use of different broaching techniques, the classification of a very heterogenous group of implants into simple binary categories becomes increasingly difficult. A more comprehensive classification system would aid in comparison of results and better understanding of the implants' biomechanics.We review these differing stem designs, their respective cementing techniques and geometries. We then propose a simple four-part classification system and summarize the long-term outcomes and international registry data for each respective type of cemented prosthesis. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2020;5:241-252. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190034.

Implant Fixation and Risk of Prosthetic Joint Infection Following Primary Total Hip Replacement: Meta-Analysis of Observational Cohort and Randomised Intervention Studies

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI), although uncommon, is a dreaded and devastating complication of total hip replacement (THR). Whether implant-related factors, such as the fixation method, influences the risk of PJI following THR is contentious. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the body of evidence linking fixation methods (cemented, uncemented, hybrid, or reverse hybrid) with the risk of PJI following primary THR. Observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing fixation methods, and reporting PJI incidence following THR, were identified through MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and reference lists of relevant studies up to 24 April 2019. Summary measures were relative risks (RRs) (95% confidence intervals, CIs). We identified 22 eligible articles (based on 11 distinct observational cohort studies comprising 2,260,428 THRs and 4 RCTs comprising 945 THRs). In pooled analyses of observational studies, all cemented fixations (plain and antibiotic combined), plain cemented fixations, hybrid fixations, and reverse hybrid fixations were each associated with an increased overall PJI risk when compared with uncemented fixations: 1.10 (95% CI: 1.04–1.17), 1.50 (95% CI: 1.27–1.77), 1.49 (95% CI: 1.36–1.64), and 1.49 (95% CI: 1.14–1.95), respectively. However, in the first six months, uncemented fixations were associated with increased PJI risk when compared to all cemented fixations. Compared to antibiotic-loaded cemented fixations, plain cemented fixations were associated with an increased PJI risk (1.52; 95% CI: 1.36–1.70). One RCT showed an increased PJI risk comparing plain cemented fixations with antibiotic-loaded cemented fixations. Uncemented and antibiotic-loaded cemented fixations remain options for the prevention of PJI in primary THR.