6 research outputs found

    All-polyethylene tibial components in TKA in rheumatoid arthritis: a 25-year follow-up study

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE: There is renewed interest in the all-polyethylene tibial component in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Long-term results of this prosthesis in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, however, are limited. Therefore, we studied 104 primary cemented all-polyethylene tibial TKA in 80 consecutive RA patients for up to 25 years to determine the long-term survival of all-polyethylene tibial components in patients suffering from end stage RA. METHODS: We estimated revision rates according the revision rate per 100 observed component years used in national joint registries. Kaplan-Meier was used to estimate survival curves. RESULTS: During the 25-year follow-up, three revisions for tibial component loosening were performed. The mean revision rate of all-polyethylene tibial components with revision for aseptic loosening as the endpoint was 0.09 per 100 observed component years. This corresponds to a revision rate of 0.9% after ten years and 2.25% after 25 years. Survivorship according to Kaplan-Meier was 100% at ten years and 87.5% at 25 years [95% confidence interval (CI) 64.6-100)]. CONCLUSION: This study shows good long-term results of all-polyethylene tibial TKA in patients with RA. RA patients with multiple-joint inflammation may be less physically active than osteoarthritis patients, resulting in a lower demand on the prosthesis, and these patients may, indeed, be good candidates for all-polyethylene tibial TKA. Our results suggest that all-polyethylene tibial TKA could be a successful and cost-saving treatment for end-stage knee arthritis in RA patients.Optimising joint reconstruction management in arthritis and bone tumour patient

    All-polyethylene Tibial Components are Equal to Metal-backed Components: Systematic Review and Meta-regression

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Less than 1% of all primary TKAs are performed with an all-polyethylene tibial component, although recent studies indicate all-polyethylene tibial components are equal to or better than metal-backed ones. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked whether the metal-backed tibial component was clinically superior to the all-polyethylene tibial component in primary TKAs regarding revision rates and clinical functioning, and which modifying variables affected the revision rate. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the literature for clinical studies comparing all-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components used in primary TKAs in terms of revision rates, clinical scores, and radiologic parameters including radiostereometric analysis (RSA). Meta-regression techniques were used to explore factors modifying the observed effect. Our search yielded 1557 unique references of which 26 articles were included, comprising more than 12,500 TKAs with 231 revisions for any reason. RESULTS: Meta-analysis showed no differences between the all-polyethylene and metal-backed components except for higher migration of the metal-backed components. Meta-regression showed strong evidence that the all-polyethylene design has improved with time compared with the metal-backed design. CONCLUSIONS: The all-polyethylene components were equivalent to metal-backed components regarding revision rates and clinical scores. The all-polyethylene components had better fixation (RSA) than the metal-backed components. The belief that metal-backed components are better than all-polyethylene ones seems to be based on studies from earlier TKAs. This might no longer be true for modern TKAs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence

    Early migration of tibial components is associated with late revision

    No full text
    PURPOSE: We performed two parallel systematic reviews and meta-analyses to determine the association between early migration of tibial components and late aseptic revision. METHODS: One review comprised early migration data from radiostereometric analysis (RSA) studies, while the other focused on revision rates for aseptic loosening from long-term survival studies. Thresholds for acceptable and unacceptable migration were determined according to that of several national joint registries: < 5% revision at 10 years. RESULTS: Following an elaborate literature search, 50 studies (involving 847 total knee prostheses (TKPs)) were included in the RSA review and 56 studies (20,599 TKPs) were included in the survival review. The results showed that for every mm increase in migration there was an 8% increase in revision rate, which remained after correction for age, sex, diagnosis, hospital type, continent, and study quality. Consequently, migration up to 0.5 mm was considered acceptable during the first postoperative year, while migration of 1.6 mm or more was unacceptable. TKPs with migration of between 0.5 and 1.6 mm were considered to be at risk of having revision rates higher than 5% at 10 years. INTERPRETATION: There was a clinically relevant association between early migration of TKPs and late revision for loosening. The proposed migration thresholds can be implemented in a phased, evidence-based introduction of new types of knee prostheses, since they allow early detection of high-risk TKPs while exposing only a small number of patients
    corecore