Femoral cement pressurization in hip arthroplasty: A laboratory comparison of three techniques

Several cementing techniques are used for the proximal femur. We evaluated 3 femoral cement pressurization techniques (standard, pressurizer in situ, and thumb pressurization) in 12 plastic femurs, with 4 sets of observations for each technique. Intramedullary pressure readings were obtained using p...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica 2004-12, Vol.75 (6), p.708-712
Hauptverfasser: KAPOOR, Birender, DATIR, Sandeep P, DAVIS, Benjamin, WYNN-JONES, Charles H, MAFFULLI, Nicola
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 712
container_issue 6
container_start_page 708
container_title Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica
container_volume 75
creator KAPOOR, Birender
DATIR, Sandeep P
DAVIS, Benjamin
WYNN-JONES, Charles H
MAFFULLI, Nicola
description Several cementing techniques are used for the proximal femur. We evaluated 3 femoral cement pressurization techniques (standard, pressurizer in situ, and thumb pressurization) in 12 plastic femurs, with 4 sets of observations for each technique. Intramedullary pressure readings were obtained using proximal and distal pressure monitoring transducers. The peak pressure and the length of time for which the pressure was above a particular cutoff level (5 KPa and 100 KPa) were compared for the different techniques. We found significant differences between the 3 cementing techniques in the peak pressure and the length of time for which the pressure was above 100 KPa. The pressurizer in situ technique gave higher peak pressure (p < 0.001), both proximally (398) and distally (597). The standard technique produced a pressure of 100 KPa for a longer duration, both proximally and distally (mean 67 sec and 45 sec, p < 0.001) compared to the other two techniques (less than 5 and 17 sec for the thumb pressurization technique and the pressurizer in situ technique, respectively, both proximally and distally). Although the pressurizer in situ technique produced the highest peak pressure, the standard technique produced an optimum pressure of longer duration. The standard technique appears to be adequate for achievement of optimum pressurization during femoral cementing without increased risk of embolization.
doi_str_mv 10.1080/00016470410004076
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67278052</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>67278052</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p239t-b1c702ea0196f182b2f86e95b8391d987d867bc9023c1054d9e97d299b2e78273</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpF0DtPwzAQAGAPIFoKP4AFeYEtYDuOH2xVRQGpEgusRI5zUY2SONjOUH49iShiuoe-u5MOoStK7ihR5J4QQgWXhNMp40SKE7Sce9ncXKDzGD_nkgp5hha0kIIxQZboYwudD6bFFjroEx4CxDgG922S8z12Pd67AZuQ9sEPrYnp8IDXuDXVNJR8OGDru8EEFyfsGzwxAJzA7nv3NUK8QKeNaSNcHuMKvW8f3zbP2e716WWz3mUDy3XKKmolYWAI1aKhilWsUQJ0Ualc01orWSshK6sJyy0lBa81aFkzrSsGUjGZr9Dt794h-PluKjsXLbSt6cGPsRSSSUUKNsHrIxyrDupyCK4z4VD-fWQCN0dgojVtE0xvXfx3IueSc57_AKUGbno</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67278052</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Femoral cement pressurization in hip arthroplasty: A laboratory comparison of three techniques</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>KAPOOR, Birender ; DATIR, Sandeep P ; DAVIS, Benjamin ; WYNN-JONES, Charles H ; MAFFULLI, Nicola</creator><creatorcontrib>KAPOOR, Birender ; DATIR, Sandeep P ; DAVIS, Benjamin ; WYNN-JONES, Charles H ; MAFFULLI, Nicola</creatorcontrib><description>Several cementing techniques are used for the proximal femur. We evaluated 3 femoral cement pressurization techniques (standard, pressurizer in situ, and thumb pressurization) in 12 plastic femurs, with 4 sets of observations for each technique. Intramedullary pressure readings were obtained using proximal and distal pressure monitoring transducers. The peak pressure and the length of time for which the pressure was above a particular cutoff level (5 KPa and 100 KPa) were compared for the different techniques. We found significant differences between the 3 cementing techniques in the peak pressure and the length of time for which the pressure was above 100 KPa. The pressurizer in situ technique gave higher peak pressure (p &lt; 0.001), both proximally (398) and distally (597). The standard technique produced a pressure of 100 KPa for a longer duration, both proximally and distally (mean 67 sec and 45 sec, p &lt; 0.001) compared to the other two techniques (less than 5 and 17 sec for the thumb pressurization technique and the pressurizer in situ technique, respectively, both proximally and distally). Although the pressurizer in situ technique produced the highest peak pressure, the standard technique produced an optimum pressure of longer duration. The standard technique appears to be adequate for achievement of optimum pressurization during femoral cementing without increased risk of embolization.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-6470</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/00016470410004076</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15762260</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AOSAAK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basingstoke: Taylor &amp; Francis</publisher><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods ; Biological and medical sciences ; Bone Cements ; Cementation - methods ; Femur - surgery ; Medical sciences ; Models, Biological ; Orthopedic surgery ; Pressure ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><ispartof>Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica, 2004-12, Vol.75 (6), p.708-712</ispartof><rights>2005 INIST-CNRS</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=16347444$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15762260$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>KAPOOR, Birender</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DATIR, Sandeep P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DAVIS, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WYNN-JONES, Charles H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MAFFULLI, Nicola</creatorcontrib><title>Femoral cement pressurization in hip arthroplasty: A laboratory comparison of three techniques</title><title>Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica</title><addtitle>Acta Orthop Scand</addtitle><description>Several cementing techniques are used for the proximal femur. We evaluated 3 femoral cement pressurization techniques (standard, pressurizer in situ, and thumb pressurization) in 12 plastic femurs, with 4 sets of observations for each technique. Intramedullary pressure readings were obtained using proximal and distal pressure monitoring transducers. The peak pressure and the length of time for which the pressure was above a particular cutoff level (5 KPa and 100 KPa) were compared for the different techniques. We found significant differences between the 3 cementing techniques in the peak pressure and the length of time for which the pressure was above 100 KPa. The pressurizer in situ technique gave higher peak pressure (p &lt; 0.001), both proximally (398) and distally (597). The standard technique produced a pressure of 100 KPa for a longer duration, both proximally and distally (mean 67 sec and 45 sec, p &lt; 0.001) compared to the other two techniques (less than 5 and 17 sec for the thumb pressurization technique and the pressurizer in situ technique, respectively, both proximally and distally). Although the pressurizer in situ technique produced the highest peak pressure, the standard technique produced an optimum pressure of longer duration. The standard technique appears to be adequate for achievement of optimum pressurization during femoral cementing without increased risk of embolization.</description><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bone Cements</subject><subject>Cementation - methods</subject><subject>Femur - surgery</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Models, Biological</subject><subject>Orthopedic surgery</subject><subject>Pressure</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><issn>0001-6470</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpF0DtPwzAQAGAPIFoKP4AFeYEtYDuOH2xVRQGpEgusRI5zUY2SONjOUH49iShiuoe-u5MOoStK7ihR5J4QQgWXhNMp40SKE7Sce9ncXKDzGD_nkgp5hha0kIIxQZboYwudD6bFFjroEx4CxDgG922S8z12Pd67AZuQ9sEPrYnp8IDXuDXVNJR8OGDru8EEFyfsGzwxAJzA7nv3NUK8QKeNaSNcHuMKvW8f3zbP2e716WWz3mUDy3XKKmolYWAI1aKhilWsUQJ0Ualc01orWSshK6sJyy0lBa81aFkzrSsGUjGZr9Dt794h-PluKjsXLbSt6cGPsRSSSUUKNsHrIxyrDupyCK4z4VD-fWQCN0dgojVtE0xvXfx3IueSc57_AKUGbno</recordid><startdate>20041201</startdate><enddate>20041201</enddate><creator>KAPOOR, Birender</creator><creator>DATIR, Sandeep P</creator><creator>DAVIS, Benjamin</creator><creator>WYNN-JONES, Charles H</creator><creator>MAFFULLI, Nicola</creator><general>Taylor &amp; Francis</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20041201</creationdate><title>Femoral cement pressurization in hip arthroplasty: A laboratory comparison of three techniques</title><author>KAPOOR, Birender ; DATIR, Sandeep P ; DAVIS, Benjamin ; WYNN-JONES, Charles H ; MAFFULLI, Nicola</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p239t-b1c702ea0196f182b2f86e95b8391d987d867bc9023c1054d9e97d299b2e78273</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bone Cements</topic><topic>Cementation - methods</topic><topic>Femur - surgery</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Models, Biological</topic><topic>Orthopedic surgery</topic><topic>Pressure</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>KAPOOR, Birender</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DATIR, Sandeep P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DAVIS, Benjamin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>WYNN-JONES, Charles H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MAFFULLI, Nicola</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>KAPOOR, Birender</au><au>DATIR, Sandeep P</au><au>DAVIS, Benjamin</au><au>WYNN-JONES, Charles H</au><au>MAFFULLI, Nicola</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Femoral cement pressurization in hip arthroplasty: A laboratory comparison of three techniques</atitle><jtitle>Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Orthop Scand</addtitle><date>2004-12-01</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>75</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>708</spage><epage>712</epage><pages>708-712</pages><issn>0001-6470</issn><coden>AOSAAK</coden><abstract>Several cementing techniques are used for the proximal femur. We evaluated 3 femoral cement pressurization techniques (standard, pressurizer in situ, and thumb pressurization) in 12 plastic femurs, with 4 sets of observations for each technique. Intramedullary pressure readings were obtained using proximal and distal pressure monitoring transducers. The peak pressure and the length of time for which the pressure was above a particular cutoff level (5 KPa and 100 KPa) were compared for the different techniques. We found significant differences between the 3 cementing techniques in the peak pressure and the length of time for which the pressure was above 100 KPa. The pressurizer in situ technique gave higher peak pressure (p &lt; 0.001), both proximally (398) and distally (597). The standard technique produced a pressure of 100 KPa for a longer duration, both proximally and distally (mean 67 sec and 45 sec, p &lt; 0.001) compared to the other two techniques (less than 5 and 17 sec for the thumb pressurization technique and the pressurizer in situ technique, respectively, both proximally and distally). Although the pressurizer in situ technique produced the highest peak pressure, the standard technique produced an optimum pressure of longer duration. The standard technique appears to be adequate for achievement of optimum pressurization during femoral cementing without increased risk of embolization.</abstract><cop>Basingstoke</cop><pub>Taylor &amp; Francis</pub><pmid>15762260</pmid><doi>10.1080/00016470410004076</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0001-6470
ispartof Acta orthopaedica Scandinavica, 2004-12, Vol.75 (6), p.708-712
issn 0001-6470
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67278052
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip - methods
Biological and medical sciences
Bone Cements
Cementation - methods
Femur - surgery
Medical sciences
Models, Biological
Orthopedic surgery
Pressure
Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases
title Femoral cement pressurization in hip arthroplasty: A laboratory comparison of three techniques
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-17T23%3A14%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Femoral%20cement%20pressurization%20in%20hip%20arthroplasty:%20A%20laboratory%20comparison%20of%20three%20techniques&rft.jtitle=Acta%20orthopaedica%20Scandinavica&rft.au=KAPOOR,%20Birender&rft.date=2004-12-01&rft.volume=75&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=708&rft.epage=712&rft.pages=708-712&rft.issn=0001-6470&rft.coden=AOSAAK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/00016470410004076&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E67278052%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67278052&rft_id=info:pmid/15762260&rfr_iscdi=true