Cargando…

Charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement: Clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years

Introduction: In 1979, in his first book dealing with low-friction arthroplasty (LFA), Charnley highlighted the use of a cement restrictor. Breusch and Malchau described in 2005 the “second-generation cementing technique.” The main objective of this study was to report on the clinical survival of 10...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Prudhon, Jean-Louis, Caton, Jacques H., Aslanian, Thierry
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: EDP Sciences 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6824441/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31674903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2019034
_version_ 1783464737111015424
author Prudhon, Jean-Louis
Caton, Jacques H.
Aslanian, Thierry
author_facet Prudhon, Jean-Louis
Caton, Jacques H.
Aslanian, Thierry
author_sort Prudhon, Jean-Louis
collection PubMed
description Introduction: In 1979, in his first book dealing with low-friction arthroplasty (LFA), Charnley highlighted the use of a cement restrictor. Breusch and Malchau described in 2005 the “second-generation cementing technique.” The main objective of this study was to report on the clinical survival of 100 cases of Charnley femoral component implanted in 2007 and 2008 using a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and a low-viscosity antibiotic-loaded cement. The secondary objectives were to analyze the complications and side effects and the accuracy of the device positioning. Material and methods: This was a monocentric retrospective review of a prospectively compiled database. Diaphyseal restrictor was biodegradable and permeable to gas, blood, and fluids to avoid intramedullary over pression during cementation. The cement was a low-viscosity antibiotic-loaded cement. Among 3555 patients, we selected the first continuous 100 cases of patients where we implanted the device. Survival probability was computed according to Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Mean follow-up was 6.55 ± 2.6 (range 1–11). Considering femoral component revision as the endpoint, survival rate was 100%. No patients died intraoperatively, none in the first month and the first year after surgery. No early periprosthetic fractures have been reported. Discussion: As described initially by Charnley, the use of a cement restrictor was highly recommended through the different generations of cementing techniques. Hypotensive episodes and cardiac arrest have been reported during cement insertion. In our series, we did not deplore any adverse effect related to the cementation. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates a 100% survival rate of a cemented femoral component without adverse effects when using routinely a resorbable and permeable cement restrictor and a low-viscosity cement. Bone cement is still a fantastic ally for the surgeon and the patients.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6824441
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher EDP Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68244412019-11-13 Charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement: Clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years Prudhon, Jean-Louis Caton, Jacques H. Aslanian, Thierry SICOT J Original Article Introduction: In 1979, in his first book dealing with low-friction arthroplasty (LFA), Charnley highlighted the use of a cement restrictor. Breusch and Malchau described in 2005 the “second-generation cementing technique.” The main objective of this study was to report on the clinical survival of 100 cases of Charnley femoral component implanted in 2007 and 2008 using a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and a low-viscosity antibiotic-loaded cement. The secondary objectives were to analyze the complications and side effects and the accuracy of the device positioning. Material and methods: This was a monocentric retrospective review of a prospectively compiled database. Diaphyseal restrictor was biodegradable and permeable to gas, blood, and fluids to avoid intramedullary over pression during cementation. The cement was a low-viscosity antibiotic-loaded cement. Among 3555 patients, we selected the first continuous 100 cases of patients where we implanted the device. Survival probability was computed according to Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Mean follow-up was 6.55 ± 2.6 (range 1–11). Considering femoral component revision as the endpoint, survival rate was 100%. No patients died intraoperatively, none in the first month and the first year after surgery. No early periprosthetic fractures have been reported. Discussion: As described initially by Charnley, the use of a cement restrictor was highly recommended through the different generations of cementing techniques. Hypotensive episodes and cardiac arrest have been reported during cement insertion. In our series, we did not deplore any adverse effect related to the cementation. Conclusion: Our study demonstrates a 100% survival rate of a cemented femoral component without adverse effects when using routinely a resorbable and permeable cement restrictor and a low-viscosity cement. Bone cement is still a fantastic ally for the surgeon and the patients. EDP Sciences 2019-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6824441/ /pubmed/31674903 http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2019034 Text en © The Authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2019 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Prudhon, Jean-Louis
Caton, Jacques H.
Aslanian, Thierry
Charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement: Clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years
title Charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement: Clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years
title_full Charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement: Clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years
title_fullStr Charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement: Clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years
title_full_unstemmed Charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement: Clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years
title_short Charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement: Clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years
title_sort charnley femoral cemented stem with a permeable and resorbable cement restrictor and low-viscosity cement: clinical and radiographical evaluation of 100 cases at a mean follow-up of 6.55 years
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6824441/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31674903
http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/sicotj/2019034
work_keys_str_mv AT prudhonjeanlouis charnleyfemoralcementedstemwithapermeableandresorbablecementrestrictorandlowviscositycementclinicalandradiographicalevaluationof100casesatameanfollowupof655years
AT catonjacquesh charnleyfemoralcementedstemwithapermeableandresorbablecementrestrictorandlowviscositycementclinicalandradiographicalevaluationof100casesatameanfollowupof655years
AT aslanianthierry charnleyfemoralcementedstemwithapermeableandresorbablecementrestrictorandlowviscositycementclinicalandradiographicalevaluationof100casesatameanfollowupof655years