Comparison of Clinical and Functional Outcomes in One vs Two Component Revision for Total Knee Arthroplasty.

L. Howard, C. Day, B. Masri, D. Garbuz
{"title":"Comparison of Clinical and Functional Outcomes in One vs Two Component Revision for Total Knee Arthroplasty.","authors":"L. Howard, C. Day, B. Masri, D. Garbuz","doi":"10.1302/3114-220798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PURPOSE\nRevisions of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) may require revision of one or both tibial and femoral components. Our purpose was to examine the clinical and functional outcomes in 1- vs 2-component TKA revisions.\n\n\nMETHODS\nWe identified 92 1-component ( tibial or femoral) revisions at a single center. Our inclusion criteria were isolated revision of the tibial or femoral components with minimum 2-year follow-up. The included cases were matched 1:2 with a control group of 2-component revisions (tibial and femoral) by age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and indication for revision. We collected demographics, complications, operative times, any subsequent re-revisions, and functional outcome scores.\n\n\nRESULTS\nThe median follow-up time for the 1- and 2-component revision groups were 10 years (range, 3 to 17) and 8 years (range, 2 to 18), respectively. The most common complication after re-revision in both groups was stiffness at 9 of 92 (9.8%) and 9 of 170 (5.3%) in the 1- and 2-component groups, respectively (p=0.20). The overall complication prevalence in the 1- and 2- component revision groups was similar 20 of 92 (22%) and 35 of 170 (21%), respectively (p=0.87). Subsequent re-revisions for any indication were encountered in 12 of 92 (13.0%) of the 1-component and 18 of 170 (11%) in the 2-component groups (p=0.69). There was no statistical difference in survivorship or functional outcomes scores between the groups.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nOur results sho wed that isolated revision of a single TKA component is an acceptable option, with comparable functional outcomes, complications, and survivorships when compared with both-component revision. As such, 1-component revision should be considered where appropriate.","PeriodicalId":280050,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of arthroplasty","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/3114-220798","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PURPOSE Revisions of total knee arthroplasties (TKA) may require revision of one or both tibial and femoral components. Our purpose was to examine the clinical and functional outcomes in 1- vs 2-component TKA revisions. METHODS We identified 92 1-component ( tibial or femoral) revisions at a single center. Our inclusion criteria were isolated revision of the tibial or femoral components with minimum 2-year follow-up. The included cases were matched 1:2 with a control group of 2-component revisions (tibial and femoral) by age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, and indication for revision. We collected demographics, complications, operative times, any subsequent re-revisions, and functional outcome scores. RESULTS The median follow-up time for the 1- and 2-component revision groups were 10 years (range, 3 to 17) and 8 years (range, 2 to 18), respectively. The most common complication after re-revision in both groups was stiffness at 9 of 92 (9.8%) and 9 of 170 (5.3%) in the 1- and 2-component groups, respectively (p=0.20). The overall complication prevalence in the 1- and 2- component revision groups was similar 20 of 92 (22%) and 35 of 170 (21%), respectively (p=0.87). Subsequent re-revisions for any indication were encountered in 12 of 92 (13.0%) of the 1-component and 18 of 170 (11%) in the 2-component groups (p=0.69). There was no statistical difference in survivorship or functional outcomes scores between the groups. CONCLUSIONS Our results sho wed that isolated revision of a single TKA component is an acceptable option, with comparable functional outcomes, complications, and survivorships when compared with both-component revision. As such, 1-component revision should be considered where appropriate.
全膝关节置换术中单部件翻修与双部件翻修的临床和功能结果比较。
目的:全膝关节置换术(TKA)的复查可能需要一个或两个胫骨和股骨假体。我们的目的是检查1组分TKA与2组分TKA修订的临床和功能结果。方法我们在单一中心鉴定了92例单组份(胫骨或股骨)翻修。我们的纳入标准是胫骨或股骨假体的单独翻修,随访至少2年。根据年龄、体重指数(BMI)、美国麻醉学会(ASA)评分和翻修指征,将纳入的病例与双组份翻修(胫骨和股骨)的对照组进行1:2匹配。我们收集了人口统计数据、并发症、手术时间、任何后续的再手术和功能结果评分。结果1组和2组的中位随访时间分别为10年(范围3 ~ 17年)和8年(范围2 ~ 18年)。两组再次翻修后最常见的并发症是僵硬,1组和2组分别为92例中9例(9.8%)和170例中9例(5.3%)(p=0.20)。1组分和2组分翻修组的总并发症发生率相似,分别为92例中有20例(22%)和170例中有35例(21%)(p=0.87)。在92个单成分组中有12个(13.0%)和170个双成分组中有18个(11%)出现了任何适应症的后续重新修订(p=0.69)。两组患者的生存率和功能结局评分无统计学差异。结论:我们的研究结果表明,单独翻修单个TKA组件是一种可接受的选择,与双组件翻修相比,其功能结局、并发症和生存率相当。因此,应在适当的地方考虑单组分修订。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信