ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
The economic and clinical impact of fast- versus slow-setting cement in primary total knee arthroplasty.
Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Fast-setting Bone Cement in Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Case Series Looking at Safety and Short-term Radiological Outcomes.Malaysian orthopaedic journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionNew bone cement products have been developed attempting to shorten their setting time and thus cut down time in the operating room. This study determines whether faster-setting bone cement shortens time in the operating room, and whether the quantity used compromises postoperative TKA outcomes. Additionally, this study looks at cost analyses of the quantity of bone cement used in TKA procedures. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne-hundred and sixty patients at a single institution with primary TKA surgeries between January 2019 and December 2021, and a clinic follow-up of at least one year, were identified. Five cement products used in this time period were identified and categorized by fast- or slow-setting products if their set times were marketed below or above six minutes, respectively.
resultsEstimated blood loss was higher in patients receiving fast-setting cements (160.0 vs 126.4 mL; p = 0.0009); however, operative time showed no difference between the cohorts (88.2 vs 89.2 min; p = 0.99). Fewer bags of cement were used for the fast cohort (1.3 vs 1.8 bags; p < 0.0001). The fast group was significantly cheaper on average per patient only when comparing between antibiotic bone cements (p = 0.007). No differences were found in postoperative outcomes between the two groups.
conclusionsNo differences were found in operative times between the fast and slow cemented groups. Fewer bags of faster-setting cement only proved cost saving relative to other antibiotic bone cements studied. Nonetheless, decreased usage of fast cement did not result in any different postoperative outcomes compared to slow cements. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37555978What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.