6-month migration sufficient for evaluation of total knee replacements: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Raymond Puijk, Rowan H Puijk, Elise K Laende, Michael J Dunbar, José W M Plevier, Peter A Nolte, Bart G C W Pijls
{"title":"6-month migration sufficient for evaluation of total knee replacements: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Raymond Puijk, Rowan H Puijk, Elise K Laende, Michael J Dunbar, José W M Plevier, Peter A Nolte, Bart G C W Pijls","doi":"10.2340/17453674.2023.24579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>This updated meta-analysis evaluates the migration pattern of the tibial component of primary total knee replacements measured with radiostereometric analysis (RSA). We aimed to evaluate whether 6-month maximum total point motion (MTPM) values could be used instead of 1-year MTPM for RSA threshold testing and to present the pooled migration patterns for different implant designs that can be used as a benchmark.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>The search included all published RSA studies on migration patterns of tibial components until 2023. Study groups were classified according to their prosthesis brand, fixation, and insert (PFI). Sub-analyses were performed to compare the mean tibial component migration patterns of different implant variables, stratified according to fixation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>96 studies (43 new studies), including 197 study groups and 4,706 knees, were included. Most migration occurred within the first 6 postoperative months (126 study groups: mean 0.58 mm, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.65), followed by minimal migration between 6 and 12 months (197 study groups: mean 0.04 mm, CI 0.03-0.06), irrespective of the fixation method used. Distinct migration patterns were observed among the different fixation methods. No differences were found in migration patterns among cemented components in any of the sub-group analyses conducted. For uncemented implants, trabecular metal surfaced components seemed to migrate less than porous-coated or uncoated components Conclusion: Based on the small difference between MTPM values at 6 months and 1 year, MTPM at 6 months could be used instead of MTPM at 1 year for RSA threshold testing. The pooled migration patterns can be used as benchmark for evaluation of new implants by defining fixation-specific RSA thresholds when combined with implant survival.</p>","PeriodicalId":6916,"journal":{"name":"Acta Orthopaedica","volume":"94 ","pages":"577-587"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10690979/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Orthopaedica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2023.24579","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and purpose: This updated meta-analysis evaluates the migration pattern of the tibial component of primary total knee replacements measured with radiostereometric analysis (RSA). We aimed to evaluate whether 6-month maximum total point motion (MTPM) values could be used instead of 1-year MTPM for RSA threshold testing and to present the pooled migration patterns for different implant designs that can be used as a benchmark.

Patients and methods: The search included all published RSA studies on migration patterns of tibial components until 2023. Study groups were classified according to their prosthesis brand, fixation, and insert (PFI). Sub-analyses were performed to compare the mean tibial component migration patterns of different implant variables, stratified according to fixation.

Results: 96 studies (43 new studies), including 197 study groups and 4,706 knees, were included. Most migration occurred within the first 6 postoperative months (126 study groups: mean 0.58 mm, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50-0.65), followed by minimal migration between 6 and 12 months (197 study groups: mean 0.04 mm, CI 0.03-0.06), irrespective of the fixation method used. Distinct migration patterns were observed among the different fixation methods. No differences were found in migration patterns among cemented components in any of the sub-group analyses conducted. For uncemented implants, trabecular metal surfaced components seemed to migrate less than porous-coated or uncoated components Conclusion: Based on the small difference between MTPM values at 6 months and 1 year, MTPM at 6 months could be used instead of MTPM at 1 year for RSA threshold testing. The pooled migration patterns can be used as benchmark for evaluation of new implants by defining fixation-specific RSA thresholds when combined with implant survival.

6个月的迁移足以评估全膝关节置换术:一项系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景和目的:这一更新的荟萃分析评估了用放射立体分析(RSA)测量的原发性全膝关节置换术胫骨部分的移动模式。我们的目的是评估是否可以使用6个月的最大总点运动(MTPM)值代替1年的MTPM来进行RSA阈值测试,并提出不同种植体设计的汇总迁移模式,可作为基准。患者和方法:检索包括截至2023年所有已发表的关于胫骨构件迁移模式的RSA研究。根据假体品牌、固定物和插入物(PFI)对研究组进行分类。进行亚分析,比较不同种植体变量的平均胫骨构件迁移模式,并根据固定进行分层。结果:纳入96项研究(43项新研究),包括197个研究组,4706个膝关节。大多数移位发生在术后前6个月内(126个研究组:平均0.58 mm, 95%可信区间[CI] 0.50-0.65),其次是6 - 12个月之间的最小移位(197个研究组:平均0.04 mm, CI 0.03-0.06),与使用的固定方法无关。在不同的固定方法中观察到不同的迁移模式。在进行的任何亚组分析中,在胶结组件之间的迁移模式没有发现差异。结论:基于6个月和1年的MTPM值之间的微小差异,6个月的MTPM可以代替1年的MTPM用于RSA阈值测试。通过定义固定特异性RSA阈值,结合种植体存活,合并迁移模式可作为评估新种植体的基准。
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
Acta Orthopaedica
Acta Orthopaedica 医学-整形外科
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
8.10%
发文量
105
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Orthopaedica (previously Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica) presents original articles of basic research interest, as well as clinical studies in the field of orthopedics and related sub disciplines. Ever since the journal was founded in 1930, by a group of Scandinavian orthopedic surgeons, the journal has been published for an international audience. Acta Orthopaedica is owned by the Nordic Orthopaedic Federation and is the official publication of this federation.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信