Cemented Versus Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty for Displaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures in the Elderly: Outcomes and Costings
- PMID: 38812858
- PMCID: PMC11130109
- DOI: 10.1007/s43465-024-01132-4
Cemented Versus Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty for Displaced Intracapsular Neck of Femur Fractures in the Elderly: Outcomes and Costings
Abstract
Background: Hemiarthroplasty (HA) is a common form of treatment for displaced neck of femur fractures. There is ongoing debate as to whether cemented or uncemented HA is a more superior treatment modality. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between patients that underwent cemented HA to uncemented HA. Secondarily, we analysed the costs associated of each treatment option.
Methods: This was a retrospective study conducted at a busy district general hospital. The study included 335 patients that were treated with either a cemented or uncemented HA for a displaced neck of femur fracture between January 2017 and December 2018. Data collected included age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) score, treatment modality, length of stay (LOS) and general costs.
Results: 197 (58.8%) of the cohort underwent cemented HA and 138 (41.2%) underwent uncemented HA. Mean age for the cemented cohort was 84.7 years and 85.9 years in the uncemented group (p = 0.31). There was no significant differences between the groups with regard to mean LOS and discharge disposition (p = 0.44). There were no significant difference in 30-day and 1-year mortality between the two groups (p = 0.2). We did find a statistically significant difference in the costings between the two procedures, with cemented HAs costing £66 more than uncemented HAs (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: We found that both cemented and uncemented HAs produced comparable results. We found a statistically significant reduction in operative time and costs associated with uncemented HA. Uncemented HA implants may be considered where a shorter operation duration is essential.
Keywords: Cemented stem; Healthcare economics; Uncemented stem; Hip hemiarthroplasty.
© Crown 2024.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of interestW. Wignadasan, A. Najefi, M. Dewhurst and M. A. Fazal did not receive any financial support and do not have any conflict of interest.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Cemented or Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty for Femoral Neck Fracture? Data from the Norwegian Hip Fracture Register.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020 Jan;478(1):90-100. doi: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000826. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020. PMID: 31855192 Free PMC article.
-
Cost-utility analysis of cemented hemiarthroplasty versus hydroxyapatite-coated uncemented hemiarthroplasty for the treatment of displaced intracapsular hip fractures : the World Hip Trauma Evaluation 5 (WHiTE 5) trial.Bone Joint J. 2022 Aug;104-B(8):922-928. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.104B8.BJJ-2022-0417.R1. Bone Joint J. 2022. PMID: 35909375 Clinical Trial.
-
Cemented or uncemented hemiarthroplasty for displaced intracapsular fractures of the hip: a randomized trial of 400 patients.Bone Joint J. 2020 Jan;102-B(1):11-16. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.102B1.BJJ-2019-1041.R1. Bone Joint J. 2020. PMID: 31888358 Clinical Trial.
-
Cemented versus uncemented hemiarthroplasty for displaced femoral neck fractures: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trails.Medicine (Baltimore). 2019 Feb;98(8):e14634. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000014634. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019. PMID: 30813202 Free PMC article.
-
[Aseptic revisions and pulmonary embolism after surgical treatment of femoral neck fractures with cemented and cementless hemiarthroplasty in Germany : An analysis from the Germany Arthroplasty Registry (EPRD)].Orthopadie (Heidelb). 2023 Aug;52(8):670-676. doi: 10.1007/s00132-023-04412-3. Epub 2023 Jul 8. Orthopadie (Heidelb). 2023. PMID: 37422578 Review. German.
References
-
- Physicians RCo. The national hip fracture database report on 2021.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources