Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty

J R Lieberman1, B H Moeckel, B G Evans

  • 1Hospital for Special Surgery, New York.

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. British Volume
|November 1, 1993
PubMed
Summary

This study examined 19 revision hip surgeries where the new femoral component was recemented into the old, intact cement mantle. The mean time between the first operation and revision was 64 months, with an average follow-up of 59 months. Clinical outcomes were categorized as excellent, good, or fair, with no cases requiring revision for loosening. All stems appeared stable on imaging. Complications included two femoral perforations and one dislocation. The technique requires the old cement surface to be dry and roughened to increase bonding surface area. Cement was injected in the liquid phase to prevent lamination. The authors suggest this method is suitable for specific indications, such as broken stems and malpositioned components. The study supports the use of this approach in selected cases.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

AOA Critical Issues Symposium: So, You Want to Be a Department Leader: Essentials for Success.

The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume·2024
Same author

Trends in the use of dual mobility bearings in hip arthroplasty.

The bone & joint journal·2020
Same author

Age affects the perception of limb length discrepancy in patients with and without a total hip arthroplasty.

Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy·2017
Same author

Total hip replacement in identical twins with Scheie Mucopolysaccharidosis.

Hip international : the journal of clinical and experimental research on hip pathology and therapy·2017
Same author

The modern, hybrid total hip arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis at the Hospital for Special Surgery.

The bone & joint journal·2016
Same author

The role of transduced bone marrow cells overexpressing BMP-2 in healing critical-sized defects in a mouse femur.

Gene therapy·2015

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic surgery techniques
  • Hip arthroplasty outcomes research

Background:

Hip arthroplasty revision is a complex procedure with multiple techniques available. Prior research has shown that cemented femoral components can remain stable for years. However, no prior work had resolved the long-term outcomes of recementing into an intact cement mantle. This gap motivated the need to evaluate the cement-within-cement technique. The technique is used when the original cement mantle remains intact. It was already known that cement mantle integrity is crucial for successful revision. The approach aims to avoid the risks of cement removal. This paper contributes by analyzing a specific subset of revision cases.

Purpose Of The Study:

The aim was to assess the clinical and radiographic outcomes of cement-within-cement revision hip arthroplasty. The specific problem addressed is the long-term stability of recemented femoral components. The motivation stems from the potential benefits of avoiding cement mantle removal. The study focused on patients with intact distal cement mantles. It aimed to determine the success rate of this technique. The researchers wanted to identify the indications and complications. They also sought to evaluate the radiographic stability of the components. This approach allows for a less invasive revision method.

Keywords:
hip arthroplasty revisionfemoral componentcement mantleorthopedic surgery techniques

Frequently Asked Questions

The primary outcome was radiographic stability of the recemented femoral component.

The old cement surface must be dry and roughened to increase surface area.

Injecting cement in the liquid phase prevents lamination and ensures proper bonding.

An intact distal cement mantle is necessary for the cement-within-cement technique to be applicable.

The average follow-up was 59 months after the revision procedure.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Methods:

The study reviewed 19 revision hip arthroplasties using the cement-within-cement technique. The new femoral component was recemented into the old, intact cement mantle. The mean time between the first operation and revision was 64 months. The average follow-up duration was 59 months. Clinical outcomes were categorized as excellent, good, or fair. Radiographic stability was assessed using imaging. The researchers documented any intraoperative or postoperative complications. The technique required the old cement surface to be dry and roughened.

Main Results:

Seven cases were classified as excellent, 11 as good, and one as fair. No femoral component was revised for loosening. All stems appeared radiographically stable. Two cases experienced intraoperative femoral perforation. One dislocation occurred postoperatively. The cement was injected in the liquid phase to prevent lamination. The old cement surface was roughened to increase surface area. The technique was used for various indications, including broken stems and malpositioned components.

Conclusions:

The cement-within-cement technique may provide stable and satisfactory outcomes in selected cases. The authors suggest that this method is suitable for intact distal cement mantles. They propose that the technique can be used to avoid cement removal risks. The study supports the use of this approach for specific indications. The researchers note that the technique requires careful execution. They suggest that dry and roughened cement surfaces are essential. The findings indicate that this method may be a viable option. The authors emphasize the need for proper patient selection.

The authors suggest it is suitable for broken stems and malpositioned components.