RESULTS The meta- analysis did not reveal any effect of the type of acetabular component fixation on either survivorship or revision rate .
The preference for cementless acetabular components on the basis of improved survivorship is not supported by the published evidence .
Although concerns regarding aseptic loosening of cemented acetabular components may have led North American surgeons toward the nearly exclusive use of cementless acetabular components , the available literature suggests that the fixation of cemented acetabular components is more reliable than that of cementless components beyond the first postoperative decade
BACKGROUND The use of cementless acetabular components in total hip arthroplasty has gained popularity over the past decade .
Most total hip arthroplasties being performed in North America currently use cementless acetabular components .
The objective of this systematic review and meta- analysis was to compare the survivorship and revision rate of cemented and cementless acetabular components utilized in total hip arthroplasty .
Long-term clinical and radiological results of the Lord total hip prosthesis. A prospective study.
We enrolled 98 patients ( 107 hips ) with a mean age of 47 years ( SD 8.6 ) into a prospect i ve study of the Madreporic Lord THR ; 34 hips had primary and 73 secondary osteoarthritis . After ten years , the survival rate using revision as the endpoint for failure was 70 % ( + /-9 ) for the cup and 98 % ( + /-0.3 ) for the stem . The combined clinical and radiological survival rates were 46 % ( + /-11 ) and 81 % ( + /-10 ) , respectively . Osteoporosis due to stress-shielding was observed in the proximal femur . Hips with radiologically dense bone postoperatively showed the most pronounced bone loss . We recommend continued radiological follow-up of patients with this type of implant to allow revision to be performed before there is severe bony destruction of the pelvis
RESULTS The meta- analysis did not reveal any effect of the type of acetabular component fixation on either survivorship or revision rate .
The preference for cementless acetabular components on the basis of improved survivorship is not supported by the published evidence .
Although concerns regarding aseptic loosening of cemented acetabular components may have led North American surgeons toward the nearly exclusive use of cementless acetabular components , the available literature suggests that the fixation of cemented acetabular components is more reliable than that of cementless components beyond the first postoperative decade
BACKGROUND The use of cementless acetabular components in total hip arthroplasty has gained popularity over the past decade .
Most total hip arthroplasties being performed in North America currently use cementless acetabular components .
The objective of this systematic review and meta- analysis was to compare the survivorship and revision rate of cemented and cementless acetabular components utilized in total hip arthroplasty .