Evidence Hub

Cemented versus Uncemented Hemiarthroplasty in Femoral Neck Fractures: A Comparative Case Series Using Singh Index for Surgical Decision-Making

S. Jawale, Santosh D Ghoti, S. G. Fate, Jaideep Das, Gyanprasad Yadav, Priyanka Meena

Journal of Orthopaedic Case Reports, 2026

18 participants

Abstract

Abstract Introduction: Femoral neck fractures in elderly patients require careful consideration of both bone quality and perioperative risk when selecting between cemented and uncemented hemiarthroplasty. Singh index provides a simple radiographic assessment of trabecular bone quality. This study evaluates its utility in guiding fixation type selection in high-risk patients. Materials and Methods: This retrospective comparative case series included 18 elderly patients with displaced femoral neck fractures treated with hemiarthroplasty. Patients were stratified based on Singh index, with those who had a score of ≥4 undergoing uncemented fixation and those with a score <4 undergoing cemented fixation. All patients were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists Grade III or IV. Functional outcomes were assessed using the Harris Hip Score at follow-up. Results: Pre-operative decision-making based on Singh index correlated with intraoperative findings in 16 out of 18 cases (88.9%). In two cases, intraoperative assessment necessitated a change from uncemented to cemented fixation due to poor bone quality. At a mean follow-up of 6 months, the mean Harris Hip Score was 82.4 in the uncemented group and 78.6 in the cemented group. No cases of bone cement implantation syndrome were observed in the uncemented group, supporting safer fixation selection in high-risk patients. Conclusion: Singh index is a useful and practical tool for guiding fixation choice in hemiarthroplasty.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health. Reported size: 18 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free