Beaulé Paul E, Matar Wadih Y, Poitras Philippe, Smit Kevin, May Olivier
Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Head Adult Reconstruction Service, University of Ottawa, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009 Jan;467(1):84-93. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0541-8. Epub 2008 Oct 16.
Either excessive or insufficient cement penetration within the femoral head after hip resurfacing influences the risk of femoral failures. However, the factors controlling cement penetration are not yet fully understood. We determined the effect of femoral component design and cementation technique on cement penetration. Six retrieved femoral heads were resurfaced for each implant (BHR, ASR, Conserve Plus, DuROM, ReCAP) using the manufacturers' recommendations for implantation. In addition, the BHR was implanted using the Conserve Plus high-viscosity cementation technique, "BHR/hvt," and vice versa for the Conserve, "Conserve/lvt." The average cement penetration was highest with BHR (65.62% +/- 15.16%) compared with ASR (12.25% +/- 5.12%), Conserve Plus(R) (19.43% +/- 5.28%), DuROM (17.73% +/- 3.96%), and ReCAP (26.09% +/- 5.20%). Cement penetration in BHR/hvt remained higher than all other implants equaling 36.7% +/- 6.6%. Greater femoral component design clearance correlated with cement mantle thickness. Femoral component design in hip resurfacing plays a major role in cement penetration.
髋关节表面置换术后,股骨头内骨水泥渗透过多或不足都会影响股骨失效的风险。然而,控制骨水泥渗透的因素尚未完全明确。我们确定了股骨假体设计和骨水泥固定技术对骨水泥渗透的影响。按照制造商的植入建议,对每种植入物(BHR、ASR、Conserve Plus、DuROM、ReCAP)的六个回收股骨头进行表面置换。此外,采用Conserve Plus高粘度骨水泥固定技术植入BHR(“BHR/hvt”),反之,采用低粘度骨水泥固定技术植入Conserve(“Conserve/lvt”)。与ASR(12.25%±5.12%)、Conserve Plus(R)(19.43%±5.28%)、DuROM(17.73%±3.96%)和ReCAP(26.09%±5.20%)相比,BHR的平均骨水泥渗透最高(65.62%±15.16%)。BHR/hvt的骨水泥渗透仍高于所有其他植入物,为36.7%±6.6%。更大的股骨假体设计间隙与骨水泥壳厚度相关。髋关节表面置换术中的股骨假体设计对骨水泥渗透起主要作用。