The field of total knee replacement (TKR) is undergoing a transformation. Techniques and materials that have long been standard are being reassessed for effectiveness and patient outcomes. Among them, cemented and cementless fixation stand out as two primary options for fixation in knee replacement surgery. Cemented fixation has been the traditional choice for years, but cementless fixation is gaining traction, especially in the United States. In this post, Dr. Atul Kamath examines both fixation methods, highlights their pros and cons, and explores recent advancements that might favor the use of cementless technology.
What is Cemented Fixation?
Cemented fixation is the classic method used in total knee replacements. It involves utilizing polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) bone cement, which acts as a glue to bond the prosthesis to the patient’s bone. This cement fills the gap between the implant and bone, creating a durable bond. Cemented fixation has also been described (perhaps more appropriately) as a 'grout' to bond the implant to the patient's bone.
The benefits of cemented fixation include its load-bearing capacity right after surgery. Research shows that over 90% of patients who receive cemented implants report satisfactory results well after 10 years. This option is particularly reliable for older patients or those with compromised bone quality, and in some surgeon experience is considered the benchmark for knee replacement prosthesis fixation.
The Appeal of Cementless Fixation in Total Knee Replacement
Cementless fixation is grounded in the principle of biological fixation, where the patient's bone grows into the prosthetic surface, a process termed "osteointegration." This technique often employs specialized surface coatings and designs that enhance bone in-growth.
One of the standout features of cementless fixation is its potential to encourage natural healing and integration with the body. Studies indicate that cementless implants can maintain stability over time, which may offer the potential to reduce complications related to loosening if there is successful and long-term osteointegration. This method is especially appealing for younger, more active patients who might potentially experience better long-term outcomes.
Increasing Popularity of Cementless Fixation
The surge in cementless fixation popularity can be attributed to technological advancements. Innovations in materials and designs now allow for implants that closely resemble the natural structure of bone. For example, 3D printing technology has made it possible to create implant surfaces that precisely fit an individual's anatomy and integrate into bony structures.
A notable statistic highlights this trend: recent studies show an increase in the use of cementless fixation, particularly in younger patients. This increasing success has correlated with an increase in cementless techniques among knee surgeons.
Factors Influencing the Choice of Fixation Method
Several factors influence the choice between cemented and cementless fixation. Key patient characteristics such as age, gender, obesity, and bone density may all play a significant role.
Younger, active patients tend to be ideal candidates for cementless fixation due to their superior bone quality and potential for better integration. A study showed that 80% of patients under 65 experienced fewer complications with cementless fixation than their older counterparts. Conversely, older patients may prefer cemented fixation for its immediate stability and proven track record.
The surgeon's skill level and experience are also crucial. A surgeon's familiarity with the techniques can impact the surgery's efficiency and outcomes. This expertise can determine whether cementless techniques achieve their full potential.
Robotic Technology's Role in the Surgical Landscape
Robotic technology is revolutionizing knee replacement surgeries and influencing fixation choices. Robotic-assisted systems enable precise bone cuts and surface preparations essential for successful cementless integration.
Surgeons equipped with robotic assistance can customize their approach based on each patient's unique anatomy, significantly enhancing the success rates for both fixation types. Research indicates that robotic-assisted surgeries can improve accuracy by up to 30%, making cementless techniques a viable option even for patients traditionally viewed as better suited for cemented fixation.
Final Thoughts
Choosing between cemented and cementless fixation in total knee replacement surgery is a complex process influenced by patient characteristics, surgeon expertise, and advances in medical technology. While cemented fixation remains widely used, the rise of cementless fixation is compelling due to its focus on biological fixation and improved implant technology.
As further research emerges, the orthopedic landscape will continue to evolve, providing patients with tailored options that meet their specific needs. The ultimate aim is to ensure patients regain functional, pain-free knees, enhancing their quality of life and enabling them to return to their daily activities.
Understanding these aspects of knee replacement reveals how both fixation methods can coexist and thrive, driven by ongoing innovations and a deeper comprehension of patient requirements. Dr. Atul Kamath is a knee specialist with expertise in both cemented and cementless fixation options, as well as advanced technologies like robotic knee replacement. Visit Kamath Orthopedics to further explore what options are best suited for you!
Comments