SHORT-TERM EVALUATION BETWEEN POLYETHYLENE THICKNESS IN PRIMARY TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY.

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Acta Ortopedica Brasileira Pub Date : 2024-07-22 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1590/1413-785220243203e276755
Rodrigo Sattamini Pires E Albuquerque, Thales Ramos Pizziolo, Octavio Augusto Tome da Silva, Marcelo Alfredo Guerra Monteiro, Sandra Tie Nishibe Minamoto, Alan de Paula Mozella
{"title":"SHORT-TERM EVALUATION BETWEEN POLYETHYLENE THICKNESS IN PRIMARY TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY.","authors":"Rodrigo Sattamini Pires E Albuquerque, Thales Ramos Pizziolo, Octavio Augusto Tome da Silva, Marcelo Alfredo Guerra Monteiro, Sandra Tie Nishibe Minamoto, Alan de Paula Mozella","doi":"10.1590/1413-785220243203e276755","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The objective of the research was to carry out a comparative study between Smith & Nephew ® or Zimmer ® prostheses with thick versus thin polyethylene, in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty, during a short-term follow-up. Thus, the objective was to analyze the survival of the implants in question under the clinical and radiographic aspect.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The sample was divided into two groups: Group 1 with thick polyethylene and group 2 with thin polyethylene. A clinical analysis of the patients was carried out and the implants were checked for loosening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The groups were similar when compared. According to the Ahlbäck classification, 83% of the patients were in groups IV and V. The median functional score in the postoperative period was similar between the two groups. Postoperatively, the tibiofemoral angle fluctuated between 5 and 6 <sup>0</sup> valgus on average. Two complications were observed in each group. None of the evaluated patients presented implant loosening.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients treated with thick polyethylene had the same functional score as the control group, as well as the absence of radiographic changes in this short-term follow-up, with implant survival and a similar rate of complications between both groups. <i>Level of evidence III, Retrospective study.</i></p>","PeriodicalId":55563,"journal":{"name":"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira","volume":"32 3","pages":"e276755"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11288312/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Ortopedica Brasileira","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-785220243203e276755","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The objective of the research was to carry out a comparative study between Smith & Nephew ® or Zimmer ® prostheses with thick versus thin polyethylene, in patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty, during a short-term follow-up. Thus, the objective was to analyze the survival of the implants in question under the clinical and radiographic aspect.

Methods: The sample was divided into two groups: Group 1 with thick polyethylene and group 2 with thin polyethylene. A clinical analysis of the patients was carried out and the implants were checked for loosening.

Results: The groups were similar when compared. According to the Ahlbäck classification, 83% of the patients were in groups IV and V. The median functional score in the postoperative period was similar between the two groups. Postoperatively, the tibiofemoral angle fluctuated between 5 and 6 0 valgus on average. Two complications were observed in each group. None of the evaluated patients presented implant loosening.

Conclusion: Patients treated with thick polyethylene had the same functional score as the control group, as well as the absence of radiographic changes in this short-term follow-up, with implant survival and a similar rate of complications between both groups. Level of evidence III, Retrospective study.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
初级全膝关节置换术中聚乙烯厚度的短期评估。
研究目的该研究旨在对接受初级全膝关节置换术的患者进行短期随访,比较 Smith & Nephew ® 或 Zimmer ® 假体的聚乙烯材质厚薄。因此,我们的目的是从临床和放射学角度分析相关假体的存活率:方法:样本分为两组:方法:样本分为两组:第一组使用厚聚乙烯,第二组使用薄聚乙烯。对患者进行了临床分析,并检查了种植体的松动情况:结果:两组比较结果相似。根据 Ahlbäck 分级法,83% 的患者属于 IV 组和 V 组。术后,胫骨与股骨的夹角平均在外翻 5 至 6 0 之间波动。两组患者均出现了两种并发症。结论:结论:使用厚聚乙烯材料治疗的患者与对照组患者的功能评分相同,在短期随访中也没有出现影像学变化,两组患者的植入物存活率和并发症发生率相似。证据等级 III,回顾性研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
67
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: A Revista Acta Ortopédica Brasileira, órgão oficial do Departamento de Ortopedia e Traumatologia da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (DOT/FMUSP), é publicada bimestralmente em seis edições ao ano (jan/fev, mar/abr, maio/jun, jul/ago, set/out e nov/dez) com versão em inglês disponível nos principais indexadores nacionais e internacionais e instituições de ensino do Brasil. Sendo hoje reconhecidamente uma importante contribuição para os especialistas da área com sua seriedade e árduo trabalho para as indexações já conquistadas.
期刊最新文献
OUTCOMES OF SURGICAL TREATMENT OF DIAPHYSEAL FEMUR FRACTURES IN POLYTRAUMATIZED CHILDREN. COMBINED TECHNIQUES OF CAUDAL EPIDURAL BLOCK AND TRANSFORAMINAL NERVE ROOT BLOCK IN THE TREATMENT OF DEGENERATIVE DISEASES OF THE LUMBAR SPINE: A COST-EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS. DECREASED SURGICAL DURATION, LESS COMPLICATIONS, AND FASTER RETURN TO ACTIVITIES ACROSS THE LEARNING CURVE FOR THE ARTHROSCOPIC LATARJET TECHNIQUE. EPIDEMIOLOGICAL PROFILE OF PATIENTS WITH TIBIA DIAPHYSIS FRACTURE TREATED AT A TERTIARY LEVEL HOSPITAL. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE IN ONCOLOGIC-ORTHOPEDIC STUDIES - ACTA ORTOP BRAS (1993-2022).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1