Research Article

Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures

Volume: 71 Number: 3 December 31, 2018
EN TR

Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures

Abstract

Objectives: In this study, we aimed to compare effects of cementless and cemented calcar-replacement hemiarthroplasty used in the treatment of proximal femoral fractures in elderly patients, on mortality. Materials and Methods: A total of 167 patients with proximal femoral fractures between 2012 and 2015 were included in the study. Cemented hemiarthroplasty was performed in 64 (38.3%) (group1) and cementless hemiarthroplasty in 103 (61.7%) (group 2) patients. The patients were evaluated at postoperative week 3, then at 3rd, 5th and 12th months, and subsequently at yearly follow-ups. Results: During follow-ups, 26 patients in group 1, and 31 patients in group 2 died. The most common local complication was superficial infection. Conclusion: There was no significant difference in mortality during postoperative follow-up between the patients treated with cementless hemiarthroplasty and those treated with cemented hemiarthroplasty for proximal femoral fractures seen in elderly patients. Key Words: Cementles hemiarthroplasty, Advanced age, Intertrochanteric femoral fracture, Mortality

Keywords

Ethical Statement

Etik Kurul onayı alınmamıştır.

References

  1. 1. Larson S. Treatment of osteoporotic fractures. Scan J Surg. 2002;91:140-146.
  2. 2. Lee AY, Chua BS, Howe TS. One-year outcome of hip fracture patients admitted to a Singapore hospital: quality of life post-treatment. Singapore Med J. 2007;48:996-999.
  3. 3. Gjertsen JE, Vinje T, Engesaeter LB, et al. Internal screw fixation compared with bipolar hemiarthroplasty for treatment of displaced femoral neck fractures in elderly patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2010;92:619-628.
  4. 4. Orsini EC, Byrick RJ, Mullen JBM, et al. Cardiopulmonary function and pulmonary microemboli during arthroplasty using cemented or noncemented components the role of intramedullary pressure, J Bone Joint Surg. 1987;69:822-832.
  5. 5. Donaldson AJ, Thomson HE, Harper NJ, et al. Bone cement implantation syndrome. Br J Anaesth. 2009;102:12-22.
  6. 6. Hinton RY, Lennox DW, Ebert FR, et al. Relative rates of fracture of the hip in the United States. Geographic, sex, and age variations. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:695-702.
  7. 7. Parker MJ, Gurusamy K. Arthroplasties (with and without bone cement) for proximal femoral fractures in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;19:CD001706.
  8. 8. Lorich DG, Geller DS, Nielson JH. Osteoporotic pertrochanteric hip fractures. Management and current controversies. J Bone Joint Surg. 2004;86:398-410.

Details

Primary Language

English

Subjects

Orthopaedics

Journal Section

Research Article

Publication Date

December 31, 2018

Submission Date

December 3, 2018

Acceptance Date

December 4, 2018

Published in Issue

Year 2018 Volume: 71 Number: 3

APA
Öztürk, R., Arıkan, Ş. M., Atalay, İ. B., Özanlağan, E., Şimşek, M. A., Beltir, G., & Irak, Ö. (2018). Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası, 71(3), 256-259. https://doi.org/10.4274/atfm.44154
AMA
1.Öztürk R, Arıkan ŞM, Atalay İB, et al. Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası. 2018;71(3):256-259. doi:10.4274/atfm.44154
Chicago
Öztürk, Recep, Şefik Murat Arıkan, İsmail Burak Atalay, et al. 2018. “Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures”. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası 71 (3): 256-59. https://doi.org/10.4274/atfm.44154.
EndNote
Öztürk R, Arıkan ŞM, Atalay İB, Özanlağan E, Şimşek MA, Beltir G, Irak Ö (December 1, 2018) Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası 71 3 256–259.
IEEE
[1]R. Öztürk et al., “Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures”, Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası, vol. 71, no. 3, pp. 256–259, Dec. 2018, doi: 10.4274/atfm.44154.
ISNAD
Öztürk, Recep - Arıkan, Şefik Murat - Atalay, İsmail Burak - Özanlağan, Emre - Şimşek, Mehmet Akif - Beltir, Galip - Irak, Özgür. “Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures”. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası 71/3 (December 1, 2018): 256-259. https://doi.org/10.4274/atfm.44154.
JAMA
1.Öztürk R, Arıkan ŞM, Atalay İB, Özanlağan E, Şimşek MA, Beltir G, Irak Ö. Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası. 2018;71:256–259.
MLA
Öztürk, Recep, et al. “Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures”. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası, vol. 71, no. 3, Dec. 2018, pp. 256-9, doi:10.4274/atfm.44154.
Vancouver
1.Recep Öztürk, Şefik Murat Arıkan, İsmail Burak Atalay, Emre Özanlağan, Mehmet Akif Şimşek, Galip Beltir, Özgür Irak. Comparison of Cemented and Cementless Hemiarthroplasty in the Treatent of Proximal Femoral Fractures. Ankara Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Mecmuası. 2018 Dec. 1;71(3):256-9. doi:10.4274/atfm.44154