Survivorship, clinical outcomes and indications for revision in uncemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: systematic review.

IF 0.6 4区 医学 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS Acta orthopaedica Belgica Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.52628/89.1.9873
A Puvanendran, M Jaibaji, A Volpin, S Konan
{"title":"Survivorship, clinical outcomes and indications for revision in uncemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: systematic review.","authors":"A Puvanendran,&nbsp;M Jaibaji,&nbsp;A Volpin,&nbsp;S Konan","doi":"10.52628/89.1.9873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Modern uncemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) relies on the mechanics of the implant design and a biological bond at the bone-implant interface to create a secure fixation of its components. The aim of this systematic review was to determine implant survivorship, clinical outcomes and indications for revision in uncemented UKAs. A search strategy was employed using keywords related to UKAs and uncemented fixation to identify suitable studies. Both prospective and retrospective studies with a minimum of two year mean follow-up were included. Data was gathered on study design, implant type, patient demographics, survivorship, clinical outcome scores and the indications for revision. Methodological quality was assessed using a ten-point risk of bias scoring tool. Eighteen studies were included in the final review. The mean follow-up of studies ranged between 2-11 years. The primary outcome of survival demonstrated 5 year survivorship ranged between 91.7-100.0% and 10-year survivorship between 91.0-97.5%. Clinical and functional outcome scores were found to be excellent in the majority of studies with the remaining reporting good results. Revisions represented 2.7% of the total operations performed. There were 145 revisions with an overall revision rate of 0.8 per 100 observed component years. Osteoarthritis disease progression (30.2%) and bearing dislocations (23.8%) were the most common causes of implant failure. This review finds uncemented UKAs demonstrate comparable survivorship, clinical outcomes and safety profile to cemented UKAs to consider this fixation a suitable alternative in clinical use.</p>","PeriodicalId":7018,"journal":{"name":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","volume":"89 1","pages":"83-95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta orthopaedica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52628/89.1.9873","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Modern uncemented unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) relies on the mechanics of the implant design and a biological bond at the bone-implant interface to create a secure fixation of its components. The aim of this systematic review was to determine implant survivorship, clinical outcomes and indications for revision in uncemented UKAs. A search strategy was employed using keywords related to UKAs and uncemented fixation to identify suitable studies. Both prospective and retrospective studies with a minimum of two year mean follow-up were included. Data was gathered on study design, implant type, patient demographics, survivorship, clinical outcome scores and the indications for revision. Methodological quality was assessed using a ten-point risk of bias scoring tool. Eighteen studies were included in the final review. The mean follow-up of studies ranged between 2-11 years. The primary outcome of survival demonstrated 5 year survivorship ranged between 91.7-100.0% and 10-year survivorship between 91.0-97.5%. Clinical and functional outcome scores were found to be excellent in the majority of studies with the remaining reporting good results. Revisions represented 2.7% of the total operations performed. There were 145 revisions with an overall revision rate of 0.8 per 100 observed component years. Osteoarthritis disease progression (30.2%) and bearing dislocations (23.8%) were the most common causes of implant failure. This review finds uncemented UKAs demonstrate comparable survivorship, clinical outcomes and safety profile to cemented UKAs to consider this fixation a suitable alternative in clinical use.

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
非骨水泥单室膝关节置换术的生存率、临床结果和适应症:系统回顾。
现代无骨水泥单腔膝关节置换术(UKA)依赖于植入物设计的力学原理和骨-植入物界面的生物结合来创建其组件的安全固定。本系统综述的目的是确定未胶结uka的种植体存活、临床结果和翻修指征。采用与UKAs和非骨水泥固定相关的关键词搜索策略来确定合适的研究。前瞻性研究和回顾性研究均纳入,平均随访时间至少为两年。收集了有关研究设计、植入物类型、患者人口统计学、生存率、临床结果评分和修改指征的数据。采用10分偏倚风险评分工具评估方法学质量。18项研究被纳入最终综述。研究的平均随访时间为2-11年。主要生存指标显示5年生存率在91.7-100.0%之间,10年生存率在91.0-97.5%之间。在大多数研究中,临床和功能结果评分都很好,其余研究报告的结果也很好。修正占总手术量的2.7%。共修订145次,总修订率为每100个观测组成年0.8次。骨关节炎疾病进展(30.2%)和轴承脱位(23.8%)是种植体失败的最常见原因。本综述发现,与骨水泥UKAs相比,未骨水泥UKAs具有相当的生存期、临床结果和安全性,因此认为这种固定方法在临床应用中是一种合适的选择。
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
Acta orthopaedica Belgica
Acta orthopaedica Belgica 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
58
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Information not localized
期刊最新文献
Comparison of surgical treatment for Carpal Tunnel Syndrome with corticosteroid injection and platelet-rich plasma injection. Association Between Vitamin D Deficiency and the Development of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A Retrospective Case-Control Study. Assessment of the Outcomes of the Intra-articular Abdominal Adipose- Derived Mesenchymal Stem Cell Therapy in Knee Osteoarthritis Patients. Clinical evaluation of occlusive dressing in fingertip reconstruction. Reliability and Validity Study of the Turkish Version of the Goodman Arthroplasty Satisfaction Score.
×
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:604180095
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