Related Experiment Videos
Does Cement Viscosity Influence 10-year Outcomes in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Under Standardized Surgical
Won Seok Lee1, Heeyoon Chung1, Jisoo Lee1
1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.
Background:
Aseptic loosening remained a leading cause of failure following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Although cement viscosity was a potentially modifiable factor influencing fixation, prior clinical and registry studies have reported conflicting results regarding its association with aseptic loosening. This study evaluated whether cement viscosity independently influences the risk of revision for aseptic loosening and the occurrence of radiolucent lines (RLLs).
Methods:
We retrospectively reviewed 3,961 primary TKAs in 2,521 patients performed between 2003 and 2013 using a standardized cementation protocol. Knees were categorized by cement viscosity: low-viscosity (LV; n = 2,118), medium-viscosity (MV; n = 324), and high-viscosity (HV; n = 1,519). The primary end point was revision for aseptic loosening. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using cause-specific and Firth-penalized Cox regression models. The secondary outcomes included RLL presence analyzed via generalized estimating equations.
Results:
The overall revision rate for aseptic loosening was 0.43%. In the penalized Cox model, cement viscosity was not significantly associated with revision for aseptic loosening when comparing LV (HR, 0.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.12 to 1.50; P = 0.206) and MV (HR, 2.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 12.27; P = 0.129) groups to the HV group. Radiographically, no significant differences in RLLs were observed between LV and HV groups. However, the MV group demonstrated significantly higher odds of tibial RLLs at one year (odds ratio [OR], 3.14; P < 0.001), two years (OR, 3.12; P < 0.001), and 10 years (OR, 2.41; P = 0.005) compared with the HV group.
Conclusions:
Cement viscosity was not independently associated with revision for aseptic loosening or radiographic fixation when standardized contemporary techniques were applied. A favorable trend toward lower revision risk was observed with LV cement, while increased RLLs in the medium-viscosity group likely reflected formulation-specific characteristics rather than viscosity alone.
Level Of Evidence:
Level III, Therapeutic study.
Related Concept Videos
01:12Setting Time of Cement
01:21Types 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...
01:20Strength of Cement
For compressive strength tests, ASTM C 109-05 standards prescribe a cement-sand mix ratio of 1:2.75 and a water/cement ratio of 0.485 for making 2-inch cubes. These cubes are mixed, cast, and cured in saturated lime water at 23°C until testing. Flexural strength testing, outlined in ASTM C...
01:18Porosity in Cement Paste
The balance of water to cement in the mix is critical—it...