Cemented versus uncemented hip replacement for fracture of the hip

Michael Hay, Frank Gottschalk

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

7 Scopus citations


Purpose: Review cemented versus uncemented hemi-arthroplasty hip replacement regarding morbidity and long term results. Methods: A literature review searching PubMed and Medline was done. Publications applicable to hip fractures treated by hip replacement or hemi-arthroplasty replacement were reviewed. Results: Several articles compared cemented femoral stems to fracture fixation. There were few articles comparing cemented and uncemented stems. Some noted increased problems with uncemented stems but did consider design factors. Unreamed tapered stems may have may have fewer problems Conclusions: Prospective studies comparing cemented and uncemented femoral stems are needed to determine the best form of fixation for patients having hip surgery following hip fracture. Tapered uncemented stems may offer as good a result as cemented stems, with less morbidity.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1151-1155
Number of pages5
JournalDisability and Rehabilitation
Issue number18-19
StatePublished - Sep 30 2005


  • Cemented
  • Hip fracture
  • Hip replacement
  • Uncemented

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Rehabilitation


Dive into the research topics of 'Cemented versus uncemented hip replacement for fracture of the hip'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this