This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) [Supplementary Material] Letters to the Editor: Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services E-mail this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My File Cabinet Download to citation manager Rights and Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Collis, D. K. Articles by Mohler, C. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Collis, D. K. Articles by Mohler, C. G. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes in Total Hip Arthroplasty Using Rough and Polished Cemented Stems with Essentially the Same Geometry

Investigation performed at Orthopedic Healthcare Northwest, Eugene, Oregon

Dennis K. Collis, MD
Craig G. Mohler, MD
Orthopedic Healthcare Northwest, 1200 Hilyard Street, Suite 600, Eugene, OR 97401

In support of their research or preparation of this manuscript, one or more of the authors received grants or outside funding from Zimmer. In addition, one or more of the authors received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity (Zimmer). No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, educational institution, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors are affiliated or associated.

A commentary is available with the electronic versions of this article, on our web site (www.jbjs.org) and on our quarterly CD-ROM (call our subscription department, at 781-449-9780, to order the CD-ROM).

Background: Aseptic loosening of the cemented stem is the most common cause of revision of total hip arthroplasties. The loosening is often associated with substantial lysis of the surrounding bone. The surface finish of femoral components is suspected as a contributing factor to this bone lysis. The purpose of this study was to compare the results associated with a rough surface and those associated with a polished surface in a consecutive series of cemented stems with essentially the same geometry.

Methods: The study included 244 consecutive total hip arthroplasties with a cemented femoral component performed by one surgeon. There was no difference in patient selection criteria or surgical techniques between the group treated with a polished stem and that treated with a grit-blasted stem. All arthroplasties were hybrid, with an uncemented acetabular component. Generally, patients were over the age of sixty years (mean age, 70.6 years). The stems inserted in the initial 122 hips had a grit-blasted surface with a roughness of 2.1 mm. The stem surface in the second 122 hips was polished (roughness, 0.1 mm). The results of clinical and radiographic assessments performed immediately after surgery were compared with those performed at the most recent visit. The average duration of clinical follow-up for the patients treated with the grit-blasted and polished stems was 5.98 years and 5.32 years, respectively.

Results: Four hips treated with the grit-blasted stem had aseptic loosening with substantial surrounding lysis and required revision. An additional two hips in this group had radiographic evidence of substantial lysis and were judged to have an impending need for revision. In contrast, no hip treated with the polished stem required revision, and only one had minimal lysis. This difference regarding failures and impending failures was significant (p = 0.05). The clinical results were comparable, with an Iowa hip rating of 98 points at the time of follow-up in both groups.

Conclusions: There was a significant difference between grit-blasted and polished stems with respect to the prevalence of revisions and impending revisions, all of which were identified in a relatively short follow-up period. The results in this series favor the use of a polished stem when cement is employed for fixation of the femoral component.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Facebook    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. F. Lachiewicz, S. S. Kelley, and E. S. Soileau Survival of Polished Compared with Precoated Roughened Cemented Femoral Components. A Prospective, Randomized Study J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., July 1, 2008; 90(7): 1457 - 1463. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. J. Callaghan, S. S. Liu, D. E. Firestone, T. M. Yehyawi, D. D. Goetz, J. Sullivan, D. A. Vittetoe, M. R. O'Rourke, and R. C. Johnston Total Hip Arthroplasty with Cement and Use of a Collared Matte-Finish Femoral Component. Nineteen to Twenty-Year Follow-up J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., February 1, 2008; 90(2): 299 - 306. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. E. Firestone, J. J. Callaghan, S. S. Liu, D. D. Goetz, P. M. Sullivan, D. A. Vittetoe, and R. C. Johnston Total Hip Arthroplasty with a Cemented, Polished, Collared Femoral Stem and a Cementless Acetabular Component. A Follow-up Study at a Minimum of Ten Years J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., January 1, 2007; 89(1): 126 - 132. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Ebramzadeh, S. N. Sangiorgio, D. B. Longjohn, C. F. Buhari, and L. D. Dorr Initial Stability of Cemented Femoral Stems as a Function of Surface Finish, Collar, and Stem Size J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., January 1, 2004; 86(1): 106 - 115. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press (TM) assists in the publication of JBJS Online.
Copyright © 2002 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. Online ISSN: 1535-1386.
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery®, JBJS®, JB&JS®, and eJBJS® are registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.