初级 NexGen 膝关节置换术的存活率:无骨水泥小梁金属与其他胫骨组件设计的比较。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Ayooluwa S Ayoola, Michael A Charters, Hamza M Raja, Luke Weseman, Peter L Lewis, Yi Peng, Wayne Trevor North
{"title":"初级 NexGen 膝关节置换术的存活率:无骨水泥小梁金属与其他胫骨组件设计的比较。","authors":"Ayooluwa S Ayoola, Michael A Charters, Hamza M Raja, Luke Weseman, Peter L Lewis, Yi Peng, Wayne Trevor North","doi":"10.1055/a-2376-6889","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The impact of cementless trabecular metal (TM) implants on implant survivorship are not well delineated. This study compares primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revision rates of cemented knee replacements with two cementless knee replacement designs-cementless TM and a non-TM cementless design. Data from a national registry queried TKA procedures performed for osteoarthritis from 1999 to 2020. The risk of revision of Zimmer NexGen TKA using cementless TM, cementless non-TM, and cemented non-TM were compared. Analyses included Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and Cox hazard ratios (HR), stratified by age and gender. Cementless TM components had higher risks of revision compared with cementless non-TM implants (HR = 1.49; <i>p</i> ≤ 0.001). Cementless TM implants showed higher risks of revision compared with cemented non-TM prostheses for the first 2 years (HR = 1.75, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Non-TM prostheses posed equal risk of revision for cementless and cemented fixations (HR = 0.95, <i>p</i> = 0.522). Patients aged 55 to 64 years and 65 to 74 years had a higher risk of revision for cementless TM compared with cementless non-TM (HR = 1.40, <i>p</i> = 0.033 and HR = 1.79, <i>p</i> < 0.001, respectively) and cemented non-TM implants (HR = 1.51, <i>p</i> < 0.001 and HR = 1.54, <i>p</i> < 0.001, respectively). The study shows there is an increased risk of revision with TM cementless implants for patients aged 55 to 74 years. These results do not support the use of TM tibial implants for patients of this age group for primary TKA.</p>","PeriodicalId":48798,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Knee Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Survivorship of Primary NexGen Knee Replacement: Comparing Cementless Trabecular Metal to Other Designs of Tibial Component.\",\"authors\":\"Ayooluwa S Ayoola, Michael A Charters, Hamza M Raja, Luke Weseman, Peter L Lewis, Yi Peng, Wayne Trevor North\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2376-6889\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The impact of cementless trabecular metal (TM) implants on implant survivorship are not well delineated. This study compares primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revision rates of cemented knee replacements with two cementless knee replacement designs-cementless TM and a non-TM cementless design. Data from a national registry queried TKA procedures performed for osteoarthritis from 1999 to 2020. The risk of revision of Zimmer NexGen TKA using cementless TM, cementless non-TM, and cemented non-TM were compared. Analyses included Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and Cox hazard ratios (HR), stratified by age and gender. Cementless TM components had higher risks of revision compared with cementless non-TM implants (HR = 1.49; <i>p</i> ≤ 0.001). Cementless TM implants showed higher risks of revision compared with cemented non-TM prostheses for the first 2 years (HR = 1.75, <i>p</i> < 0.001). Non-TM prostheses posed equal risk of revision for cementless and cemented fixations (HR = 0.95, <i>p</i> = 0.522). Patients aged 55 to 64 years and 65 to 74 years had a higher risk of revision for cementless TM compared with cementless non-TM (HR = 1.40, <i>p</i> = 0.033 and HR = 1.79, <i>p</i> < 0.001, respectively) and cemented non-TM implants (HR = 1.51, <i>p</i> < 0.001 and HR = 1.54, <i>p</i> < 0.001, respectively). The study shows there is an increased risk of revision with TM cementless implants for patients aged 55 to 74 years. These results do not support the use of TM tibial implants for patients of this age group for primary TKA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48798,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Knee Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Knee Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2376-6889\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Knee Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2376-6889","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:无骨水泥小梁金属(TM)植入物对植入物存活率的影响尚未明确。本研究比较了有骨水泥膝关节置换术和两种无骨水泥膝关节置换设计--无骨水泥 TM 和另一种无骨水泥设计--的初次全膝关节置换术(TKA)翻修率:方法:对 1999 年至 2020 年期间因骨关节炎而进行的 TKA 手术进行了全国性登记。比较了使用无骨水泥TM、无骨水泥非TM和有骨水泥非TM的Zimmer NexGen TKA的翻修风险。分析包括按年龄和性别分类的存活率 Kaplan-Meier 估计值和 Cox 危险比 (HR):与无骨水泥非 TM 植入体相比,无骨水泥 TM 组件的翻修风险更高(HR = 1.49;P = < 0.001)。与有骨水泥的非 TM 假体相比,无骨水泥 TM 假体在头两年的翻修风险更高(HR = 1.75,p < 0.001)。无骨水泥固定和有骨水泥固定的非TM假体的翻修风险相同(HR = 0.95,p = 0.522)。与无骨水泥非TM假体相比,年龄在55-64岁和65-74岁的患者接受无骨水泥TM假体的翻修风险更高(HR = 1.40,p = 0.033和HR = 1.79,p 结论:该研究表明,无骨水泥TM假体的翻修风险比无骨水泥非TM假体更高:研究表明,55-74 岁患者使用 TM 无骨水泥种植体的翻修风险增加。这些结果不支持该年龄组患者使用 TM 胫骨假体进行初次 TKA。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Survivorship of Primary NexGen Knee Replacement: Comparing Cementless Trabecular Metal to Other Designs of Tibial Component.

The impact of cementless trabecular metal (TM) implants on implant survivorship are not well delineated. This study compares primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revision rates of cemented knee replacements with two cementless knee replacement designs-cementless TM and a non-TM cementless design. Data from a national registry queried TKA procedures performed for osteoarthritis from 1999 to 2020. The risk of revision of Zimmer NexGen TKA using cementless TM, cementless non-TM, and cemented non-TM were compared. Analyses included Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and Cox hazard ratios (HR), stratified by age and gender. Cementless TM components had higher risks of revision compared with cementless non-TM implants (HR = 1.49; p ≤ 0.001). Cementless TM implants showed higher risks of revision compared with cemented non-TM prostheses for the first 2 years (HR = 1.75, p < 0.001). Non-TM prostheses posed equal risk of revision for cementless and cemented fixations (HR = 0.95, p = 0.522). Patients aged 55 to 64 years and 65 to 74 years had a higher risk of revision for cementless TM compared with cementless non-TM (HR = 1.40, p = 0.033 and HR = 1.79, p < 0.001, respectively) and cemented non-TM implants (HR = 1.51, p < 0.001 and HR = 1.54, p < 0.001, respectively). The study shows there is an increased risk of revision with TM cementless implants for patients aged 55 to 74 years. These results do not support the use of TM tibial implants for patients of this age group for primary TKA.

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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
139
期刊介绍: The Journal of Knee Surgery covers a range of issues relating to the orthopaedic techniques of arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and reconstructive surgery of the knee joint. In addition to original peer-review articles, this periodical provides details on emerging surgical techniques, as well as reviews and special focus sections. Topics of interest include cruciate ligament repair and reconstruction, bone grafting, cartilage regeneration, and magnetic resonance imaging.
×
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