Freeman M A, Samuelson K M, Bertin K C
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1985 Jan-Feb(192):46-58.
Experience with cementless fixation over the last six years indicates that the technique offers greater opportunities for bone conservation. Thus, when cement is used, and especially if it is forced into the skeleton under pressure, the amount of bone incorporated into the implant is considerable. Conversely, if no cement is used, grafting techniques to fill defects are becoming increasingly routine, so that today no bone may be removed from the replaced knee or hip--all fragments that are excised are repositioned as grafts in defects. Thus, cementless fixation meets the fundamental orthopedic maxim of the conservation of bone stock. Given that an implant can be fixed with satisfactory clinical results without cement and without bone ingrowth, it becomes difficult to demonstrate a clinical advantage for the latter. Nevertheless, bone ingrowth is possible both experimentally and (with less confidence) in man. Thus, it is clearly a technique that should be evaluated. However, it is not, in the senior author's view, a technique that should as yet be generally used. Hopefully, investigations of this problem will take place in a restrained scientific way rather than by the current method, which is in response to the dictates of fashion and commerce.
过去六年中使用非骨水泥固定的经验表明,该技术为保留骨质提供了更多机会。因此,当使用骨水泥时,尤其是在压力下将其强行注入骨骼时,植入物中结合的骨量相当可观。相反,如果不使用骨水泥,填充缺损的植骨技术已越来越常规化,以至于如今在置换膝关节或髋关节时无需去除任何骨质——所有切除的碎骨片都作为植骨重新植入缺损处。因此,非骨水泥固定符合骨科保留骨量的基本准则。鉴于植入物在不使用骨水泥且无骨长入的情况下也能获得令人满意的临床固定效果,很难证明骨长入具有临床优势。然而,无论是在实验中还是(可信度稍低)在人体中,骨长入都是有可能的。因此,这显然是一种值得评估的技术。然而,在资深作者看来,这并非一种目前应普遍使用的技术。希望对这个问题的研究将以严谨科学的方式进行,而不是采用当前那种迎合时尚和商业需求的方式。