<- Back to digest

BJJ - 2026-03-13 - Journal Article

The association between type of bone cement and revision surgery after primary elective total hip arthroplasty : a population-based cohort study using data from the National Joint Registry.

Deere K, Valsamis EM, Sayers A, Howell E, Whitehouse MR, Evans JT

retrospective cohortLOE IIIn = 515,433April 2003 to December 2024 (registry period); individual follow-up duration not reported as a mean.

Topics

arthroplastytrauma
PMID: 41823624DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.108B.BJJ-2025-1782.R1View on PubMed ->

Key Takeaway

Five of 21 cement formulations used in primary THA were associated with significantly higher revision rates compared to Palacos R+G high-viscosity, with DePuy CMW3 medium-viscosity with gentamicin carrying the highest risk (IRR 2.21).

Summary Depth

Choose how much analysis to show on this article page.

Summary

This NJR-based cohort study compared revision rates across 21 bone cement formulations in cemented, hybrid, and reverse-hybrid primary THA for OA, using Palacos R+G high-viscosity as the reference (68.2% of procedures). Multilevel Poisson models adjusted for implant type, age, sex, and ASA grade identified five cements with significantly elevated revision IRRs: CMW3 medium-viscosity with gentamicin (IRR 2.21), HMP low-viscosity with gentamicin (IRR 1.78), CMW1 high-viscosity with gentamicin (IRR 1.27), Optipac Refobacin R medium-viscosity (IRR 1.36), and Simplex medium-viscosity (IRR 1.24). The majority of contemporaneous cement formulations showed no significant difference from the reference.

Key Limitation

Cement generation and mixing technique are not recorded in the NJR, meaning differences in surgical technique rather than cement material properties may account for some of the observed revision rate differences.

Original Abstract

AIMS

Bone cement continues to be part of the fixation strategy for a large proportion of all total hip arthroplasties (THAs) in the UK and other countries. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between specific commercially available bone cement formulations and the risk of revision surgery after primary elective THA.

METHODS

This was a population-based cohort study using data from the National Joint Registry from 1 April 2003 to 31 December 2024. All consenting patients having a cemented, hybrid, or reverse hybrid primary THA for osteoarthritis were included. Multilevel over-dispersed piecewise Poisson models were used to compare the rate of revision surgery by cement type adjusted for implant type, age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists grade.

RESULTS

A total of 515,433 procedures were included, mean patient age was 71.31 years (SD 9.5), and 63% (n = 324,962) were female. In total, 21 different cement types were used. Compared to Heraeus Medical Palacos R+G high-viscosity (68.2% of all procedures), we did not observe a different incidence rate ratio for most cement types commonly used in contemporaneous practice. However, DePuy CMW3 medium viscosity with gentamicin (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 2.21 (95% CI 1.75 to 2.75)), DePuy CMW1 high viscosity with gentamicin (IRR 1.27 (95% CI 1.08 to 1.49)), Schering-Plough HMP low viscosity with gentamicin (IRR 1.78 (95% CI 1.06 to 2.96)), Biomet Optipac Refobacin R medium viscosity with gentamicin (IRR 1.36 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.72)), and Stryker Simplex medium viscosity (IRR 1.24 (95% CI 1.04 to 1.47)) were associated with a significantly increased rate of revision surgery.

CONCLUSION

Most cement types in contemporaneous practice have similar incidence rate ratios of revision to the reference cement (Heraeus Medical Palacos R+G high viscosity), but five cement types were associated with a significantly higher rate of revision. Vigilance is required as new cements are introduced into the market.