ACE Report Cover
No difference between Cemex Rx and Palacos R for THR
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
ARTHROPLASTY
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.


Dettagli sul finanziamento della pubblicazione +
Finanziamento:
Non-Industry funded
Sponsor:
IngaBritt and Arne Lundberg Research Foundation, the Doctor Felix Neubergh Foundation, the Swedish Medical Research Foundation
Conflitti:
None disclosed

Rischio di pregiudizio

5,5/10

Criteri di segnalazione

14/20

Indice di fragilità

N/A

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)?

Sì = 1

Incerto = 0,5

Non rilevante = 0

No = 0

La valutazione dei criteri di segnalazione valuta la trasparenza con cui gli autori riportano le caratteristiche metodologiche e sperimentali dello studio all'interno della pubblicazione. La valutazione è suddivisa in cinque categorie che vengono presentate di seguito.

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

L'Indice di Fragilità è uno strumento che aiuta l'interpretazione dei risultati significativi, fornendo una misura della forza di un risultato. L'Indice di Fragilità rappresenta il numero di eventi consecutivi che devono essere aggiunti a un risultato dicotomico per rendere il risultato non più significativo. Un numero piccolo rappresenta un risultato più debole, mentre un numero grande rappresenta un risultato più forte.

Perché questo studio era necessario ora?

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.

Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?

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?

Caratteristiche dello studio +
Population:
44 patients undergoing total hip replacement with a Lubinus SPII titanium-aluminum-vanadium stem.
Intervention:
Cemex Rx bone cement.
Comparison:
Palacos R bone cement.
Outcomes:
Femoral stem migration and rotation were assessed using radiostereometric analysis, hip function was assessed using the Harris hip score, pain was assessed using a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and radiolucent lines were assessed using radiographic evaluation.
Methods:
RCT: prospective.
Time:
10 years (outcomes assessed 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 5 years, and 10 years after surgery).
Quali erano i risultati importanti?
  • 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.
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?

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.

Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?

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.

DISCLAIMER

Il contenuto di questa pagina è solo a scopo informativo e non intende sostituire la consulenza, la diagnosi o il trattamento medico professionale. Se ha bisogno di cure mediche, si rivolga sempre al suo medico o al pronto soccorso più vicino. Le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista espressi dalle persone sui contenuti presenti in questa pagina non riflettono le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista di OrthoEvidence.

0 di 4 articoli mensili GRATUITI sbloccati
Ha raggiunto il suo limite di 4 visualizzazioni di articoli gratuiti questo mese

Accesso a OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99 dollari a settimana.

Rimanga in contatto con le ultime prove. Può disdire in qualsiasi momento.
  • Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e delle revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
  • Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, tra cui collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e tavole rotonde su notizie e argomenti ortopedici.
  • Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Upgrade
Close Dialog
Bentornato!
Ha dimenticato la password?
Inizi la sua prova gratuita oggi stesso!

Il suo account sarà affiliato a
e includerà l'accesso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
Ha dimenticato la password?

O
Controlli la sua e-mail

Se esiste un account con l'indirizzo e-mail fornito, le verrà inviata un'e-mail di reimpostazione della password. Se non vede l'e-mail, controlli la cartella spam o posta indesiderata.

Per ulteriore assistenza, contatti il nostro team di supporto.

Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Tradurre il Rapporto ACE

OrthoEvidence utilizza un servizio di traduzione di terze parti per rendere i contenuti accessibili in più lingue. Si prega di notare che, sebbene venga fatto ogni sforzo per garantire l'accuratezza, le traduzioni potrebbero non essere sempre perfette.

Come citare questo documento ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. No difference between Cemex Rx and Palacos R for THR. OE Journal. 2013;1(6):15. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/no-difference-between-cemex-rx-and-palacos-r-for-thr

Copiare la citazione
Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Funzionalità per i membri Premium

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence Premium.

Condividi questo articolo ACE Report