肩关节置换术的国际趋势:来自 11 个公共关节登记处的荟萃分析。

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Neal Rupani, Christophe Combescure, Alan Silman, Anne Lübbeke, Jonathan Rees
{"title":"肩关节置换术的国际趋势:来自 11 个公共关节登记处的荟萃分析。","authors":"Neal Rupani, Christophe Combescure, Alan Silman, Anne Lübbeke, Jonathan Rees","doi":"10.2340/17453674.2024.40948","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>International variation exists in the types of shoulder replacement used for treatment of specific diseases. Implant choice continues to evolve without high-quality evidence. Our aim was to evaluate trends in incidence rates of shoulder replacement and assess any recent changes in practice between countries by using registry data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patient characteristics, indication and year of surgery, type of replacement, and collection methods of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) was extracted from 11 public joint registries. Meta-analyses examined use of reverse total shoulder replacement (RTSR) for osteoarthritis, cuff tear arthropathy, and acute fracture; use of anatomical total shoulder replacement (TSR) for osteoarthritis; and use of humeral hemiarthroplasty for fracture.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The annual growth rate of shoulder replacements performed is 6-15% (2011-2019). The use of RTSR has almost doubled (93%). RTSR is now universally performed for cuff tear arthropathy (97.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 96.0-98.1). Its use for avascular necrosis, trauma, and inflammatory arthropathy is increasing. The use of RTSR was similar (43.1%, CI 30.0-57.2) versus TSR (44.7%, CI 31.1-59.1) for osteoarthritis. The types of PROMs used, collection time points, and response rates lack standardization. COVID-19 had a varying inter-registry impact on incidence rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The incidence of shoulder replacements has grown. Use of RTSR has increased for all disease indications despite limited high-quality evidence driving this change in indications outside of cuff arthropathy. Consequently, less variation is observed in international practice. Existing differences now relate to use of newer implant types and methodology of PROMs collection, which prevents international comparison and outcome analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":6916,"journal":{"name":"Acta Orthopaedica","volume":"95 ","pages":"348-357"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11184711/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"International trends in shoulder replacement: a meta-analysis from 11 public joint registers.\",\"authors\":\"Neal Rupani, Christophe Combescure, Alan Silman, Anne Lübbeke, Jonathan Rees\",\"doi\":\"10.2340/17453674.2024.40948\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>International variation exists in the types of shoulder replacement used for treatment of specific diseases. Implant choice continues to evolve without high-quality evidence. Our aim was to evaluate trends in incidence rates of shoulder replacement and assess any recent changes in practice between countries by using registry data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patient characteristics, indication and year of surgery, type of replacement, and collection methods of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) was extracted from 11 public joint registries. Meta-analyses examined use of reverse total shoulder replacement (RTSR) for osteoarthritis, cuff tear arthropathy, and acute fracture; use of anatomical total shoulder replacement (TSR) for osteoarthritis; and use of humeral hemiarthroplasty for fracture.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The annual growth rate of shoulder replacements performed is 6-15% (2011-2019). The use of RTSR has almost doubled (93%). RTSR is now universally performed for cuff tear arthropathy (97.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 96.0-98.1). Its use for avascular necrosis, trauma, and inflammatory arthropathy is increasing. The use of RTSR was similar (43.1%, CI 30.0-57.2) versus TSR (44.7%, CI 31.1-59.1) for osteoarthritis. The types of PROMs used, collection time points, and response rates lack standardization. COVID-19 had a varying inter-registry impact on incidence rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The incidence of shoulder replacements has grown. Use of RTSR has increased for all disease indications despite limited high-quality evidence driving this change in indications outside of cuff arthropathy. Consequently, less variation is observed in international practice. Existing differences now relate to use of newer implant types and methodology of PROMs collection, which prevents international comparison and outcome analysis.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6916,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Orthopaedica\",\"volume\":\"95 \",\"pages\":\"348-357\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11184711/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Orthopaedica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.40948\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Orthopaedica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/17453674.2024.40948","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

摘要

背景和目的:国际上用于治疗特定疾病的肩关节置换类型存在差异。在没有高质量证据的情况下,植入物的选择仍在不断变化。我们的目的是评估肩关节置换术的发病率趋势,并通过登记数据评估各国近期在做法上的任何变化:方法:从 11 个公共关节登记处提取患者特征、手术适应症和年份、置换类型以及患者报告结果(PROMs)的收集方法。元分析研究了反向全肩关节置换术(RTSR)在骨关节炎、袖带撕裂关节病和急性骨折中的应用;解剖型全肩关节置换术(TSR)在骨关节炎中的应用;以及肱骨半关节成形术在骨折中的应用:肩关节置换术的年增长率为 6-15%(2011-2019 年)。RTSR的使用率几乎翻了一番(93%)。目前,RTSR已普遍用于治疗肩袖撕裂性关节病(97.3%,95%置信区间[CI] 96.0-98.1)。对血管性坏死、创伤和炎症性关节病的使用也在增加。在骨关节炎方面,RTSR(43.1%,CI 30.0-57.2)与 TSR(44.7%,CI 31.1-59.1)的使用情况相似。所使用的 PROMs 类型、收集时间点和响应率缺乏标准化。COVID-19对不同登记处的发病率有不同的影响:结论:肩关节置换术的发病率有所增长。结论:肩关节置换术的发病率有所增长,尽管在肩袖关节病以外的适应症中,推动这一变化的高质量证据有限,但在所有疾病适应症中,肩关节置换术的使用都有所增加。因此,在国际实践中观察到的差异较小。目前存在的差异与较新植入物类型的使用和PROMs收集方法有关,这妨碍了国际比较和结果分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
International trends in shoulder replacement: a meta-analysis from 11 public joint registers.

Background and purpose: International variation exists in the types of shoulder replacement used for treatment of specific diseases. Implant choice continues to evolve without high-quality evidence. Our aim was to evaluate trends in incidence rates of shoulder replacement and assess any recent changes in practice between countries by using registry data.

Methods: Patient characteristics, indication and year of surgery, type of replacement, and collection methods of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) was extracted from 11 public joint registries. Meta-analyses examined use of reverse total shoulder replacement (RTSR) for osteoarthritis, cuff tear arthropathy, and acute fracture; use of anatomical total shoulder replacement (TSR) for osteoarthritis; and use of humeral hemiarthroplasty for fracture.

Results: The annual growth rate of shoulder replacements performed is 6-15% (2011-2019). The use of RTSR has almost doubled (93%). RTSR is now universally performed for cuff tear arthropathy (97.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 96.0-98.1). Its use for avascular necrosis, trauma, and inflammatory arthropathy is increasing. The use of RTSR was similar (43.1%, CI 30.0-57.2) versus TSR (44.7%, CI 31.1-59.1) for osteoarthritis. The types of PROMs used, collection time points, and response rates lack standardization. COVID-19 had a varying inter-registry impact on incidence rates.

Conclusion: The incidence of shoulder replacements has grown. Use of RTSR has increased for all disease indications despite limited high-quality evidence driving this change in indications outside of cuff arthropathy. Consequently, less variation is observed in international practice. Existing differences now relate to use of newer implant types and methodology of PROMs collection, which prevents international comparison and outcome analysis.

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
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