In a single-blind, randomised series of knee replacements in 116 patients, we used radiostereometric analysis (RSA) to measure micromotion in three types of tibial implant fixation for two years after knee replacement. We compared hydroxyapatite-augmented porous coating, porous coating, and cemented fixation of the same design of tibial component. At one to two years, porous-coated implants migrated at a statistically significantly higher rate than hydroxyapatite-augmented or cemented implants. There was no significant difference between hydroxyapatite-coated and cemented implants. We conclude that hydroxyapatite augmentation may offer a clinically relevant advantage over a simple porous coating for tibial component fixation, but is no better than cemented fixation.
|Journal||Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery: British Volume|
|Publication status||Published - 1998|
Bibliographical noteThe information about affiliations in this record was updated in December 2015.
The record was previously connected to the following departments: Medical Radiology Unit (013241410), Reconstructive Surgery (013240300)
Subject classification (UKÄ)
- Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Medical Imaging