Palacos compared to Palamed bone cement in total hip replacement: a randomized controlled trial

RSA migration similar at 10-year follow-up

Journal Article (2016)
Author(s)

J.E. Meinardi (Leiden University Medical Center)

ER Valstar (TU Delft - Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics, Leiden University Medical Center)

P Van Der Voort (Leiden University Medical Center)

Bart L. Kaptein (Leiden University Medical Center)

M. Fiocco (Leiden University Medical Center)

Rob Nelissen (Leiden University Medical Center)

Research Group
Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics
Copyright
© 2016 J.E. Meinardi, E.R. Valstar, P van der Voort, B.L. Kaptein, M. Fiocco, R.G.H.H. Nelissen
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1080/17453674.2016.1199146
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2016
Language
English
Copyright
© 2016 J.E. Meinardi, E.R. Valstar, P van der Voort, B.L. Kaptein, M. Fiocco, R.G.H.H. Nelissen
Research Group
Biomaterials & Tissue Biomechanics
Issue number
5
Volume number
87
Pages (from-to)
473-478
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Background and purpose — Stability and survival of cemented total hip prostheses is dependent on a multitude of factors, including the type of cement that is used. Bone cements vary in viscosity, from low to medium and high. There have been few clinical RSA studies comparing the performance of low- and high-viscosity bone cements. We compared the migration behavior of the Stanmore hip stem cemented using novel low-viscosity Palamed bone cement with that of the same stem cemented with conventional high-viscosity Palacos bone cement. Patients and methods — We performed a randomized controlled study involving 39 patients (40 hips) undergoing primary total hip replacement for primary or secondary osteoarthritis. 22 patients (22 hips) were randomized to Palacos and 17 patients (18 hips) were randomized to Palamed. Migration was determined by RSA. Results — None of these 40 hips had been revised at the 10-year follow-up mark. To our knowledge, the patients who died before they reached the 10-year endpoint still had the implant in situ. No statistically significant or clinically significant differences were found between the 2 groups for mean translations, rotations, and maximum total-point motion (MTPM). Interpretation — We found similar migration of the Stanmore stem in the high-viscosity Palacos cement group and the low-viscosity Palamed cement group. We therefore expect that the risk of aseptic loosening with the new Palamed cement would be comparable to that with the conventional Palacos cement. The choice of which type of bone cement to use is therefore up to the surgeon’s preference.