Tecres (Italy)

At present a wide spectrum of cement types are available for cemented total hip arthroplasty (CTHA). All types have the same objective, i.e. to prolong the life of the implant for as long as possible. The purpose of this study was to compare the radiologic cement mantle of CTHA using cement with fast or standard setting characteristics. A prospective comparative study of patients who underwent CTHA was performed: the first group received fast setting cement (Cemex System Fast), the second group received standard setting cement (Cemex System). A radiologic evaluation of the cement mantle was done using Barrack's classification. In order to give the study clinical relevance we assembled Barrack's classification in two groups: 1) Low risk group (Types A and B); 2) High risk group (Types C and D). According to ISO 5833:2002, the international standard was used to perform physico-chemical (polymerization temperature, setting time) and mechanical testing (compression strength, bending strength and bending modulus). The fast setting cement showed a shorter setting time and a higher polymerization temperature. The mechanical performances of both cements met the ISO limits. At a mean follow-up of 23 months (11-37 months) no statistically significant radiological difference was found in the radiologic cement mantle between the two groups either in the post-operative X-ray evaluation (p=0.32) or in the last follow-up (p=0.72). Statistical evaluation was done comparing the two sub-groups, i.e. low risk and high risk. The use of fast or standard setting cement does not produce any difference in the quality of the radiologic cement mantle in the short-term. Both cements comply with ISO 5833 requirements.

At present a wide spectrum of cement types are available for cemented total hip arthroplasty (CTHA). All types have the same objective, i.e. to prolong the life of the implant for as long as possible. The purpose of this study was to compare the radiologic cement mantle of CTHA using cement with fast or standard setting characteristics. A prospective comparative study of patients who underwent CTHA was performed: the first group received fast setting cement (Cemex System Fast), the second group received standard setting cement (Cemex System). A radiologic evaluation of the cement mantle was done using Barrack's classification. In order to give the study clinical relevance we assembled Barrack's classification in two groups: 1) Low risk group (Types A and B); 2) High risk group (Types C and D). According to ISO 5833:2002, the international standard was used to perform physico-chemical (polymerization temperature, setting time) and mechanical testing (compression strength, bending strength and bending modulus). The fast setting cement showed a shorter setting time and a higher polymerization temperature. The mechanical performances of both cements met the ISO limits. At a mean follow-up of 23 months (11-37 months) no statistically significant radiological difference was found in the radiologic cement mantle between the two groups either in the post-operative X-ray evaluation (p=0.32) or in the last follow-up (p=0.72). Statistical evaluation was done comparing the two sub-groups, i.e. low risk and high risk. The use of fast or standard setting cement does not produce any difference in the quality of the radiologic cement mantle in the short-term. Both cements comply with ISO 5833 requirements.