Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023
Tibial implant design in primary TKA: retrospective comparison of two designs for the occurrence of radiolucent lines and aseptic loosening.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wautier D, Thienpont E
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this retrospective study was to study the effect of tibial implant design on the occurrence of radiolucent lines (RLLs) and aseptic loosening (AL) by comparing two different total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two types of total knee arthroplasty, different for tibial shape, size and keel design were compared, 255 for the first and 774 for the second. The occurrence of RLLs and radiological signs of micro- and macro-mobility and aseptic loosening was analyzed. Demographic data were compared, as well as the type and rate of RLLs, occurrence of aseptic loosening and the presence of potential risk factors.
RESULTS: The first implant design is morphometric and has a squarer keel than the second implant TKA. The overall rate of RLLs was similar (21% vs 23%), despite of a significantly lower rates of radiological signs of macro-mobility of the tibial component with the first implant (2% vs 17%). Survivorship of both designs was overall comparable (99.6% vs 98.8 %) the first implant group had more potential risk factors for poor bone quality than the second group (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: A morphometric design is more anatomic and offers better bone coverage of the epiphyseal tibial surface. RLLs, as a sign of implant micro-mobility, were equally present in both designs. Radiological signs of macro-mobility at the metaphysis were less frequently observed in squared keel design. The morphometric implant did not show improved survivorship compared with a symmetric implant.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two types of total knee arthroplasty, different for tibial shape, size and keel design were compared, 255 for the first and 774 for the second. The occurrence of RLLs and radiological signs of micro- and macro-mobility and aseptic loosening was analyzed. Demographic data were compared, as well as the type and rate of RLLs, occurrence of aseptic loosening and the presence of potential risk factors.
RESULTS: The first implant design is morphometric and has a squarer keel than the second implant TKA. The overall rate of RLLs was similar (21% vs 23%), despite of a significantly lower rates of radiological signs of macro-mobility of the tibial component with the first implant (2% vs 17%). Survivorship of both designs was overall comparable (99.6% vs 98.8 %) the first implant group had more potential risk factors for poor bone quality than the second group (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: A morphometric design is more anatomic and offers better bone coverage of the epiphyseal tibial surface. RLLs, as a sign of implant micro-mobility, were equally present in both designs. Radiological signs of macro-mobility at the metaphysis were less frequently observed in squared keel design. The morphometric implant did not show improved survivorship compared with a symmetric implant.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.