PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 12, 2026Hip International0 citationsOpen Access

Is there a place for routine use of cemented acetabular fixation in primary total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis? Equivalence demonstrated in an analysis of 96,574 cases from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

View Full Paper
RHRichard J. HanlySWSarah L. WhitehouseCHCarl Holder

Key Points

  • The study investigates whether cemented acetabular fixation offers advantages in primary total hip arthroplasty for osteoarthritis.
  • Analysis of 96,574 cases from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.
  • Comparison of revision rates between cemented and cementless fixation methods.
  • Focus on surgeries utilizing polished stems and modern bearing surfaces.
  • No significant difference in revision rates between cemented and cementless acetabular fixation.
  • Cemented fixation is proposed as a viable alternative in hip arthroplasty.
  • Emphasis on training surgeons to preserve essential surgical techniques.

Abstract

For patients undergoing a primary THA for osteoarthritis there is no difference in the rate of revision between cemented or cementless acetabular fixation when utilising a cemented polished stem with modern bearing surfaces. The authors advocate the use of cemented acetabular fixation as a viable alternative and emphasise the need for continued teaching of the skills required to ensure the technique is not lost for future generations of orthopaedic surgeons.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Hanly et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69db36e64fe01fead37c4dfbhttps://doi.org/10.1177/11207000261430706
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper