Cemented versus uncemented

[jaz]

My gosh, I can't believe the difference, and the only change between this hip replacement and the one done ten weeks earlier is that this one was cemented into place.

I arrived home yesterday 36 hours after surgery, propped my crutchers up in the kitchen and without thinking walked into the lounge unaided. It was only when I went to sit down I realised this hip was only a few days old and I should be using crutchers.

 

[Josephine]

More because this one has no problems than because it's either cemented or not. Happy to hear it's been good. You'll soon shed those crutches!

 

[Traceyleth]

Glad everythings going well for you this time.
Best wishes for a speedy recovery
Tracey

 

[Bumpa]

This has just been published in the British Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - it gives a guide towards cemented and uncemented but specifically from the cost to the NHS.
Cost savings of using a cemented total hip replacement

An analysis of the National Joint Registry data

1. broken link removed: https://www.bjj.boneandjoint.org.uk/search?author1=E.+J.+Griffiths&sortspec=date&submit=Submit, MRCS, MSc, Orthopaedic Specialty Traineebroken link removed: https://www.bjj.boneandjoint.org.uk/content/94-B/8/1032.abstract#aff-1 broken link removed: https://orthodox.boneandjoint.org.uk/viewprofileinfo.aspx?authorid=1001459;
2. broken link removed: https://www.bjj.boneandjoint.org.uk/search?author1=D.+Stevenson&sortspec=date&submit=Submit, Purchasing Managerbroken link removed: https://www.bjj.boneandjoint.org.uk/content/94-B/8/1032.abstract#aff-1; and
3. broken link removed: https://www.bjj.boneandjoint.org.uk/search?author1=M.+J.+Porteous&sortspec=date&submit=Submit, FRCS, Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeonbroken link removed: https://www.bjj.boneandjoint.org.uk/content/94-B/8/1032.abstract#aff-1

Abstract

The debate whether to use cemented or uncemented components in primary total hip replacement (THR) has not yet been considered with reference to the cost implications to the National Health Service.
We obtained the number of cemented and uncemented components implanted in 2009 from the National Joint Registry for England and Wales. The cost of each component was established. The initial financial saving if all were cemented was then calculated. Subsequently the five-year rates of revision for each type of component were reviewed and the predicted number of revisions at five years for the actual components used was compared with the predicted number of revisions for a cemented THR. This was then multiplied by the mean cost of revision surgery to provide an indication of the savings over the first five years if all primary THRs were cemented.
The saving at primary THR was calculated to be £10 million with an additional saving during the first five years of between £5 million and £8.5 million. The use of cemented components in routine primary THR in the NHS as a whole can be justified on a financial level but we recognise individual patient factors must be considered when deciding which components to use.