Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 26, 2025

The Use of Mixed Reality in Custom-Made Revision Hip Arthroplasty: A First Case Report
Published on: August 4, 2022
Outcomes of Cement in Cement Revision, in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty
Abhijeet Kumar1, Martyn Porter1, Nikhil Shah1
1Wrightington, Wigan and Leigh NHS Foundation Trust, Wigan, United Kingdom.
Background:
The cement-in-cement femoral revision technique involves removing a femoral component from a well-fixed femoral cement mantle and cementing a new stem into the original mantle. This technique, when carried out for the correct indications, is fast, relatively inexpensive and carries a reduced short-term risk for the patient compared with conventional way of removing well-fixed cement.
Aim:
To analyze the effectiveness of cement in cement revision of the femoral stem while performing a revision Total Hip Arthroplasty (THA).
Methods:
We analyzed a consecutive series of 79 patients who underwent a cement in cement revision THA between June-2015 to June-2018. All the patients were retrospectively analysed for operative time, complications, clinical and radiological outcomes.
Results:
Average age was 76 years (49-86). The mean follow-up was 16.2 months (12-45). The average operative time was 184.6 (90-290) minutes. Most common indication was cup loosening in 28 patients (42.4%), dislocation in 14 patients (21.2%) and stem loosening in 12 patients (18.2%) Nine patients (11%) had one or more complications. Pre-operatively, 10 patients (13%) had lucency at the cement bone interface. Recent review has shown that 8 of these patients' radiographs have remained unchanged, and in 2 of them there is a slight progression of lucency. Common post op clinical complaintswere persistent pain and abductor weakness. Five (6.3%) patients required a re-revision. Most of the patients had a good or satisfactory outcome.No stems showed radiological loosening.
Conclusion:
The cement-in-cement technique for revision of the femoral component gave promising results and had the advantages of speed, less blood or bone stock loss, less risk of femoral perforation or fracture, decreased financial costs and reduced post op morbidity.
More Related Videos
09:51The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve
Published on: September 7, 2022
05:30Surgical Approach and Complications of Stand-alone Lateral Trans-Psoas Interbody Fusion
Published on: February 14, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Types of Cement I
Type I (Ordinary Portland Cement) is widely used for general construction where special properties are not required. It has moderate sulfate resistance and heat of hydration.
Type II (Modified Cement) offers moderate resistance to sulfate attack and a lower rate of heat development compared to Type I. It is suitable for structures in...
Hydration of Cement
Soundness of Cement
Strength and Heat of Hydration
The heat of hydration for each cement compound is significant; for instance, tricalcium aluminate (C3A) and...