单室膝关节置换术与全膝关节置换术翻修率的相关性:临床研究和全球关节置换术登记的荟萃分析。

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-10-15 DOI:10.1007/s00402-024-05574-1
Stephan Obermayr, Antonio Klasan, Laura Rasic, Georg Hauer, Lukas Leitner, Andreas Leithner, Patrick Sadoghi
{"title":"单室膝关节置换术与全膝关节置换术翻修率的相关性:临床研究和全球关节置换术登记的荟萃分析。","authors":"Stephan Obermayr, Antonio Klasan, Laura Rasic, Georg Hauer, Lukas Leitner, Andreas Leithner, Patrick Sadoghi","doi":"10.1007/s00402-024-05574-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The purpose of this study was to elucidate differences and similarities in revision rates amongst studies and national registers featuring total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Thereby comparability and reproducibility between study and register findings should be created.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Clinical studies published between 2004 and September 2023 involving TKA or UKA were reviewed for total arthroplasty numbers, revision rates and demographic data. Findings were calculated as \"revisions per 100 component years (CY)\" and divided according to the nationality of the center. National arthroplasty registers were searched for numbers of arthroplasties and revisions alongside with demographic data. Revision rates in registers were compared to one another and comparison to revision rates from collected studies was drawn.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After evaluation, 98 studies and seven registers met our inclusion criteria and were included in this study. Cumulative percent revision rate in studies was 3.35% after a mean follow-up of 5.7 years, corresponding to 0.71 revisions per 100 CY for TKA and 7.67% after a mean follow-up of 4.9 years, corresponding to 1.3 revisions per 100 CY for UKA. Registers showed mean overall revision rates of 5.63% for TKA and 11.04% for UKA.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A positive correlation of revision rates of TKA and UKA in studies and registers was found, with overall revision rates of UKA comparted to TKA being 2.29 times higher in clinical studies and 1.96 times higher in registers. Revision rates in registers were 1.56 times higher than presented in clinical studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":8326,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"4873-4886"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11582169/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Correlation of revision rate of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of clinical studies and worldwide arthroplasty registers.\",\"authors\":\"Stephan Obermayr, Antonio Klasan, Laura Rasic, Georg Hauer, Lukas Leitner, Andreas Leithner, Patrick Sadoghi\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00402-024-05574-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The purpose of this study was to elucidate differences and similarities in revision rates amongst studies and national registers featuring total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Thereby comparability and reproducibility between study and register findings should be created.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Clinical studies published between 2004 and September 2023 involving TKA or UKA were reviewed for total arthroplasty numbers, revision rates and demographic data. Findings were calculated as \\\"revisions per 100 component years (CY)\\\" and divided according to the nationality of the center. National arthroplasty registers were searched for numbers of arthroplasties and revisions alongside with demographic data. Revision rates in registers were compared to one another and comparison to revision rates from collected studies was drawn.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After evaluation, 98 studies and seven registers met our inclusion criteria and were included in this study. Cumulative percent revision rate in studies was 3.35% after a mean follow-up of 5.7 years, corresponding to 0.71 revisions per 100 CY for TKA and 7.67% after a mean follow-up of 4.9 years, corresponding to 1.3 revisions per 100 CY for UKA. Registers showed mean overall revision rates of 5.63% for TKA and 11.04% for UKA.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A positive correlation of revision rates of TKA and UKA in studies and registers was found, with overall revision rates of UKA comparted to TKA being 2.29 times higher in clinical studies and 1.96 times higher in registers. Revision rates in registers were 1.56 times higher than presented in clinical studies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8326,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"4873-4886\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11582169/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-024-05574-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/15 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-024-05574-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/15 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:本研究的目的是阐明有关全膝关节置换术(TKA)和单髁膝关节置换术(UKA)的研究和国家登记册之间在翻修率方面的异同。材料和方法:对 2004 年至 2023 年 9 月间发表的涉及 TKA 或 UKA 的临床研究进行了回顾性分析,以了解总关节置换数量、翻修率和人口统计学数据。研究结果按 "每 100 个组件年 (CY) 的翻修率 "计算,并根据中心的国籍进行划分。在国家关节置换术登记册中搜索了关节置换术和翻修的数量以及人口统计学数据。将登记册中的翻修率相互比较,并与收集到的研究中的翻修率进行比较:经过评估,98 项研究和 7 个登记册符合我们的纳入标准,并被纳入本研究。在平均随访5.7年后,研究中的累计翻修率为3.35%,相当于TKA每100个CY有0.71次翻修;在平均随访4.9年后,UKA的累计翻修率为7.67%,相当于UKA每100个CY有1.3次翻修。登记册显示,TKA和UKA的平均总体翻修率分别为5.63%和11.04%:结论:研究和登记中发现TKA和UKA的翻修率呈正相关,临床研究中UKA的总体翻修率是TKA的2.29倍,是登记中的1.96倍。登记册中的翻修率是临床研究中的 1.56 倍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Correlation of revision rate of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty with total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of clinical studies and worldwide arthroplasty registers.

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to elucidate differences and similarities in revision rates amongst studies and national registers featuring total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). Thereby comparability and reproducibility between study and register findings should be created.

Materials and methods: Clinical studies published between 2004 and September 2023 involving TKA or UKA were reviewed for total arthroplasty numbers, revision rates and demographic data. Findings were calculated as "revisions per 100 component years (CY)" and divided according to the nationality of the center. National arthroplasty registers were searched for numbers of arthroplasties and revisions alongside with demographic data. Revision rates in registers were compared to one another and comparison to revision rates from collected studies was drawn.

Results: After evaluation, 98 studies and seven registers met our inclusion criteria and were included in this study. Cumulative percent revision rate in studies was 3.35% after a mean follow-up of 5.7 years, corresponding to 0.71 revisions per 100 CY for TKA and 7.67% after a mean follow-up of 4.9 years, corresponding to 1.3 revisions per 100 CY for UKA. Registers showed mean overall revision rates of 5.63% for TKA and 11.04% for UKA.

Conclusions: A positive correlation of revision rates of TKA and UKA in studies and registers was found, with overall revision rates of UKA comparted to TKA being 2.29 times higher in clinical studies and 1.96 times higher in registers. Revision rates in registers were 1.56 times higher than presented in clinical studies.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
13.00%
发文量
424
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is a rich source of instruction and information for physicians in clinical practice and research in the extensive field of orthopaedics and traumatology. The journal publishes papers that deal with diseases and injuries of the musculoskeletal system from all fields and aspects of medicine. The journal is particularly interested in papers that satisfy the information needs of orthopaedic clinicians and practitioners. The journal places special emphasis on clinical relevance. "Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery" is the official journal of the German Speaking Arthroscopy Association (AGA).
期刊最新文献
Epiphyseal fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty: a comparison between trabecular metal and titanium augments. Bicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty: a systematic review and Delphi consensus from the European Knee Society. Correction potential and outcome of various surgical procedures for hallux valgus surgery: a living systematic review and meta-analysis. Patient-reported outcome measures in studies on hallux valgus surgery: what should be assessed. Periprocedural clinical outcomes of revision hip arthroplasty: a multi-centric comparison of current strategies based on the NSQIP.
×
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