Background: Worldwide, the majority of total hip arthroplasties (THAs) placed in patients <55 years are uncemented. However, little is known about the preferred method of fixation in revision hip arthroplasty in young patients. The aim of this study was to assess potential differences in the method of fixation used between primary and revision THA in young patients using data from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. Methods: All primary THA placed in patients younger than 55 years, registered in the LROI between 2007 and 2019 were included n = 28,516). Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used to estimate the survival of primary THA by method of fixation. Additionally, survival of revision procedures that changed or did not change in method of fixation were estimated. McNemar’s test was used to assess differences in the proportion of cemented and uncemented fixation between primary and revision THA. Results: In all acetabular revisions, the use of cemented fixation increased statistically significant with 39% (95% CI, 34–45, p < 0.001) from 23% in primary THA to 62% in revision procedures. In all femoral revisions, the increase of cemented fixation was also statistically significant with 25% (95% CI, 19–31, p < 0.001), from 11% in primary THA to 36% in revision surgery. For both revised acetabular and femoral components, we found no statistically significant difference in the 5-year survival between revision procedures that changed or did not change in method of fixation. Conclusions: There was a significant change towards cemented fixation between primary and revision THA in young patients in the Netherlands, which was especially pronounced in acetabular revisions. No significant difference in short-term survival was found between revision procedures that changed or did not change in method of fixation. Long-term follow-up data are needed to evaluate the effect of this change in fixation method on the outcome of revision procedures in young patients.