No difference between Cemex Rx and Palacos R for THR .
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2013;1(6):15 Acta Orthop. 2012 Dec;83(6):604-8. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2012.742392. Epub 2012 Nov 1.44 patients undergoing total hip replacement were randomized to receive a Lubinus SPII titanium-aluminum-vanadium stem cemented either with the new Cemex Rx bone cement or with Palacos R bone cement. The 10 year results of the study indicated that Cemex bone cement performs just as well as Palacos R bone cement.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
نعم = 1
غير مؤكد = 0.5
غير ذي صلة = 0
لا = 0
يقيّم تقييم معايير الإبلاغ الشفافية التي يبلغ بها المؤلفون عن الخصائص المنهجية والتجريبية للتجربة في المنشور. ينقسم التقييم إلى خمس فئات معروضة أدناه.
2/4
Randomization
3/4
Outcome Measurements
1/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
4/4
Therapy Description
4/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
مؤشر الهشاشة هو أداة تساعد في تفسير النتائج المهمة، وتوفر مقياسًا لقوة النتيجة. ويمثل مؤشر الهشاشة عدد الأحداث المتتالية التي يجب إضافتها إلى نتيجة ثنائية التفرع لجعل النتيجة غير مهمة. يمثل الرقم الصغير نتيجة أضعف ويمثل الرقم الكبير نتيجة أقوى.
لماذا كانت هناك حاجة لهذه الدراسة الآن؟
Enhancements in cementing techniques during cemented total hip arthroplasty have reduced the incidence of early loosening and delayed revision time. However, the curing temperature during the cementing process is believed to cause bone and cell necrosis, which leads to membrane formation and aseptic loosening, a cause for revision. Cemex was designed to reduce the curing temperature by removing the smallest sizes of particles in the polymer powder, which would lead to a smaller surface area reacting with monomers. But, laboratory tests have shown that the curing temperature of Cemex is no different that the curing temperature of conventional Palacos R. This study aimed to determine aimed to examine the clinical properties of Cemex and compare the results with those of Palacos R.
ما هو سؤال البحث الرئيسي؟
Does Cemex Rx bone cement reduce femoral stem migration and rotation while improving hip pain and function when compared to Palacos R bone cement among total hip replacement patients, 10 years after surgery?
- The magnitudes of rotation into flexion/extension and retroversion were significantly larger among the patients that received Palacos bone cement (p=0.005 and 0.01, respectively) but there was no significant difference in rotation around the sagittal axis as most implants were tilted into varus (p=0.7).
- The magnitude of subsidence was similar among the patients that received Palacos bone cement and the patients that received Cemex bone cement (p=0.7).
- There was no significant differences in migration of the femoral component in relation to the cement mantle between the treatment groups. Most migration occurred between the stem and cement mantle in both groups.
- Radiolucent lines along the stem were found in Gruen zones 2 and 6 in 22 cases. The proportion of radiolucent lines in the total interface was 40% for the patients that received Palacos and 50% for the patients that received Cemex.
- There was no significant difference in Harris hip scores and pain scores between the patients that received Cemex bone cement and Palacos bone cement.
ما الذي يجب أن أتذكره أكثر؟
There was no significant difference in rotation around the sagital axis, the magnitude of subsidence, migration of the femoral component, radiolucent lines, hip function, and pain between the two treatment groups.
كيف سيؤثر ذلك على رعاية مرضاي؟
The study suggests that Cemex Rx bone cement will preform similarly to Palacos R bone cement when used for total hip replacements. Further research trials are needed to confirm these findings.
تنويه
هذا المحتوى الموجود في هذه الصفحة هو لأغراض إعلامية فقط وليس الغرض منه أن يكون بديلاً عن المشورة الطبية المتخصصة أو التشخيص أو العلاج. إذا كنت بحاجة إلى علاج طبي، اطلب دائمًا مشورة طبيبك أو اذهب إلى أقرب قسم طوارئ إليك. الآراء والمعتقدات ووجهات النظر التي يعبر عنها الأفراد في المحتوى الموجود في هذه الصفحة لا تعكس آراء ومعتقدات ووجهات نظر أورثوإيفيدنس.
0 من 4 مقالات مجانية شهرية غير مقفلة
