Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Many scholars think that bone cement total hip arthroplasty is suitable for old aged patients with serious osteoporosis, while uncemented total hip arthroplasty is applicable to young patients.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effect of uncemented total hip arthroplasty and bone cement total hip arthroplasty on middle-aged patients.
METHODS: The limbs functional restoration, radiological evaluation and Harris score of 58 cases with bone cement total hip arthroplasty and 70 cases with uncemented total hip arthroplasty was detected at 6 months, 2 and 5 years, respectively. All these 128 patients were middle-aged patients (40-60 years old).
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Statistical data showed that the Harris score of uncemented prosthesis, as well as the 5-year survival rate after 6 months, 2 and 5 years was significantly better than cement type prosthesis (P < 0.05). Three cases had osteolysis at 6 months after cement type prosthesis arthroplasty, 3 cases had prosthesis loosing at 2 years after arthroplasty and 3 cases appeared linear permeability dissolvement at 5 years after arthroplasty. Two cases had osteolysis at 2 years after uncemented prosthesis arthroplasty and 1 case had prosthesis loosing at 5 years after arthroplasty. Uncemented prosthesis achieved a high rate of functional restoration and a low rate of complications. Uncemented total hip arthroplasty in middle-aged patients had a satisfactory clinical and radiographic outcome at a minimum of 5 years follow-up.