Uso del cemento en la artroplastia de cadera

Eduardo Álvarez; Eduardo Villanueva

doi:10.17533/udea.rcm.n17a02

Authors

Eduardo Álvarez University Hospital Dr. José E. González; Autonomous University of Nuevo Leon
Eduardo Villanueva University Hospital Dr. José E. González; Autonomous University of Nuevo Leon

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.rcm.n17a02

Keywords:

arthroplasty, hip, cement, polymethylmethacrylate, prosthesis

Abstract

The successful use of acrylic cement in joint replacement was one of Sir John Charnley's contributions in 1958. Polymethylmethacrylate is part of a group of polymers which have a carbon base in common, with different lengths in their chain. There are generations of polymethylmethacrylate going from the first, in which the cement was mixed and packed manually in the medullary canal and the acetabulum without rhyming, to the third in which aspiration and pressurization of the femoral canal, mixing and centrifugation techniques, and implant modifications. The use of cement was an important advance in hip arthroplasty, however, as its history and use progressed, the failures of the prostheses were attributed to what is known as “cement disease”. Taking into account this and the complications that its use could cause, the safety and operation of this technique began to be questioned. However, the cemented components show good long- term results, making it clear that there is no basis for ceasing the use of cement in arthroplasties. Likewise, it was observed that cemented implants have better results in terms of review rate and periprosthetic fractures. This concludes that the use of cement, under certain indications and appropriate techniques, represents an excellent option for the fixation of implants used in joint replacemen.

|Abstract

= 544 veces | PDF (ESPAÑOL (ESPAÑA))

= 1058 veces|

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alvarez Lozano E, Ramos Morales T, Abrego Treviño A. El uso del cemento en la artroplastia total de cadera. Rev mex ortop traumatol. Published online 1999:592-596.

Callaghan JJ, Rosenberg AG, Rubash HE. The Adult Hip. Vol 1. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2007.

Steinberg ME. La Cadera: Diagnostico y Tratamiento de Su Patologia. Medica Panamericana; 1993.

Troelsen A, Malchau E, Sillesen N, Malchau H. A review of current fixation use and registry outcomes in total hip arthroplasty: the uncemented paradox. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(7):2052-2059.

Tanzer M, Graves SE, Peng A, Shimmin AJ. Is cemented or cementless femoral stem fixation more durable in patients older than75 years of age? A comparison of the best-performing stems. ClinOrthop Relat Res. 2018;476(7):1428.

Kim Y-H, Oh S-W, Kim J-S. Prevalence of fat embolism following bilateral simultaneous and unilateral total hip arthroplasty performed with or without cement: a prospective, randomized clinical study. JBJS. 2002;84(8):1372-1379.

Clement ND, Biant LC, Breusch SJ. Total hip arthroplasty: to cement or not to cement the acetabular socket? A critical review of the literature. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2012;132(3):411-427.

van der Veen HC, van Jonbergen H-PW, Poolman RW, Bulstra SK, van Raay JJAM. Is there evidence for accelerated polyethylene wear in uncemented compared to cemented acetabular components? A systematic review of the literature.Int Orthop. 2013;37(1):9-14.

Toossi N, Adeli B, Timperley AJ, Haddad FS, Maltenfort M, Parvizi J. Acetabular components in total hip arthroplasty: is there evidence that cementless fixation is better?JBJS. 2013;95(2):168-174.

Bedard NA, Callaghan JJ, Stefl MD, Liu SS. Systematic review of literature of cemented femoral components: what is the durability at minimum 20 years followup Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473(2):563-571.

Jain S, Magra M, Dube B, et al. Reverse hybrid total hip arthroplasty: a survival analysis of 1082 consecutive cases with minimumfive-year follow-up. Bone Jt J. 2018;100(8):1010-1017.

Wangen H, Havelin LI, Fenstad AM, et al. Reverse hybrid total hip arthroplasty: Results from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA). Acta Orthop. 2017;88(3):248-254.

Pennington M, Grieve R, Sekhon JS, Gregg P, Black N, van der Meulen JH. Cemented, cementless, and hybrid prostheses for total hip replacement: cost effectiveness analysis. Bmj. 2013;346.

Blankstein M, Lentine B, Nelms NJ. The Use of Cement in Hip Arthroplasty: A Contemporary Perspective. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2020;28(14):e586-e594. doi:10.5435/JAAOS-D-19-00604.

Hoskins W, van Bavel D, Lorimer M, de Steiger RN. Polished cemented femoral stems have a lower rate of revision than matt finished cemented stems in total hip arthroplasty: an analysis of 96,315 cemented femoral stems.J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(5):1472-1476.

Scott T, Salvatore A, Woo P, Lee Y, Salvati EA, Della Valle AG. Polished, collarless, tapered, cemented stems for primary hip arthroplasty may exhibit high rate of periprosthetic fracture at short-term follow-up.J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(4):1120-1125.

Acharya A, Petheram T, Hubble M, Howell J. Sealing the acetabular notch in cemented total hip arthroplasty. A radiological review of 380 cases. Acta Orthopædica Belgica. 2010;76(2):199.

Crites BM, Berend ME, Ritter MA. Technical considerations of cemented acetabular components: a 30-year evaluation.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;381:114-119.

Vaishya R, Chauhan M, Vaish A. Bone cement. J Clin Orthop trauma. 2013;4(4):157-163.

Gromov K, Bersang A, Nielsen CS, Kallemose T, Husted H, Troelsen A. Risk factors for post-operative periprosthetic fractures following primary total hip arthroplasty with a proximally coated double-tapered cementless femoral component. Bone Joint J. 2017;99(4):451-457.

Haas SS, Brauer GM, Dickson G. A characterization of polymethylmethacrylate bone cement. JBJS. 1975;57(3):380-391.

Kuehn K-D, Ege W, Gopp U. Acrylic bone cements: mechanical and physical properties. Orthop Clin. 2005;36(1):29-39.

Dunne N, Hill J, Mcafee P, et al. In vitro study of the efficacy of acrylic bone cement loaded with supplementary amounts of gentamicin: effect on mechanical properties, antibiotic release, and biofilm formation. Acta Orthop. 2007;78(6):774-785.

Lewis G. Properties of antibiotic‐loaded acrylic bone cements for use in cemented arthroplasties: A state‐of‐the‐art review. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater An Off J Soc Biomater Japanese Soc Biomater Aust Soc Biomater Korean Soc Biomater.2009;89(2):558-574.

Kurtz SM, Villarraga ML, Zhao K, Edidin AA. Static and fatigue mechanical behavior of bone cement with elevated barium sulfate content for treatment of vertebral compression fractures. Biomaterials. 2005;26(17):3699-3712.

Jaeblon T. Polymethylmethacrylate: properties and contemporary uses in orthopaedics. JAAOS-Journal Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2010;18(5):297-305.

Saha S, Pal S. Mechanical properties of bone cement: a review. J Biomed Mater Res. 1984;18(4):435-462.

Harper EJ, Braden M, Bonfield W, Dingeldein E, Wahlig H. Influence of sterilization upon a range of properties of experimental bone cements. J Mater Sci Mater Med.1997;8(12):849-853.

Lee, A.J.C., Ling, R.S.M. & Vangala, S.S. Some clinically relevant variables affecting the mechanical behaviour of bone cement. Arch. Orth. Traum. Surg. 92, 1–18 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00381635.