Nilsson K G, Dalén T
Department of Orthopedics, University Hospital of Umeå, Sweden.
Acta Orthop Scand. 1998 Oct;69(5):479-83. doi: 10.3109/17453679808997782.
We compared Boneloc bone cement with conventional cement (Palacos) in fixating the tibial component during 2-5 years in 19 patients with gonarthrosis undergoing total knee arthroplasty in a prospective randomized study. Boneloc displayed significantly larger migration, subsidence and lift-off than Palacos. The difference was identifiable already within 3 months postoperatively, but became significant at 12 months. In the Boneloc group, all components showed subsidence of the posterior part and lift-off of the anterior part of the tibial component, whereas in the Palacos group, the locations of subsidence and lift-off were evenly distributed about the edge of the implant. At 5 years, both Boneloc knees so far investigated were clinical failures with high migration rates. We conclude that, even in total knee arthroplasty, there is a substantial risk that Boneloc leads to inferior clinical results, but later than in hip replacements.
在一项前瞻性随机研究中，我们比较了Boneloc骨水泥与传统骨水泥（Palacos）在19例膝关节病患者行全膝关节置换术时固定胫骨部件2至5年的效果。Boneloc骨水泥显示出比Palacos骨水泥更大的移位、下沉和翘起。这种差异在术后3个月内即可识别，但在12个月时变得显著。在Boneloc组中，所有部件均显示胫骨部件后部下沉和前部翘起，而在Palacos组中，下沉和翘起的位置在植入物边缘均匀分布。到5年时，迄今为止所研究的两个使用Boneloc骨水泥的膝关节均出现临床失败且移位率很高。我们得出结论，即使在全膝关节置换术中，Boneloc骨水泥也有很大风险导致较差的临床结果，但比髋关节置换术出现得晚。
