A comparison of 2 cementing techniques in hip resurfacing using human femoral heads.

INTRODUCTION

Hip resurfacing remains a valid option in young male patients. The creation of the optimum cement mantle aids fixation of the femoral component. If the cement mantle is too thick the prosthesis can remain proud leading to early failure or if it penetrates too far into the femoral head, it may cause osteonecrosis.

METHOD: 18 of 96 femoral heads collected from patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty were matched for their surface porosity. They were randomly allocated into 2 different cementing groups. Group 1 had the traditional bolus of cement technique, while group 2 had a modified cementing technique (swirl) where the inside of the femoral component was lined with an even layer of low viscosity cement.

RESULTS

The traditional bolus technique had significantly greater cement mantle thickness in 3 of 4 zones of penetration (p = 0.002), greater and larger air bubble formation (6 of 9 in bolus technique vs. 1 in 9 in swirl technique, p = 0.05) and more incomplete cement mantles compared with the swirl technique. There was no relationship to femoral head porosity.

CONCLUSION

The swirl technique should be used to cement the femoral component in hip resurfacing. Long-term clinical studies would conform if this translates into increased survivorship of the femoral component.