针对全膝关节置换术后不稳定性的孤立聚乙烯置换:无论过伸与否,存活率和活动范围相当,临床评分有所提高

IF 1.9 2区 医学 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2024-04-25 DOI:10.4055/cios23163
Byung Sun Choi, Du Hyun Ro, Myung Chul Lee, Hyuk-Soo Han
{"title":"针对全膝关节置换术后不稳定性的孤立聚乙烯置换:无论过伸与否,存活率和活动范围相当,临床评分有所提高","authors":"Byung Sun Choi, Du Hyun Ro, Myung Chul Lee, Hyuk-Soo Han","doi":"10.4055/cios23163","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Isolated polyethylene insert exchange (IPIE) has not been established as a treatment option for hyperextension instability after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the study was to evaluate the survival rate and clinical outcomes of IPIE for the treatment of instability with or without hyperextension after TKA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study retrospectively reviewed 46 patients who underwent IPIE for symptomatic prosthetic knee instability by dividing them into 2 groups based on the presence of hyperextension (without for group I and with for group IH). Patient demographics, clinical scores, radiographic data, range of motion (ROM), and surgical information were collected. Clinical failure was defined as a subsequent surgery following IPIE for any reason. The survival rate of IPIE and differences in demographics, clinical scores, and ROM were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 46 patients (91% were women) with an average age of 70.1 years and a mean follow-up of 44.8 months. The average time between primary TKA and IPIE surgery was 6.5 ± 4.2 years, and during IPIE, 2 out of the 8 cruciate-retaining inserts were converted to \"deep-dish\" ultracongruent inserts while the insert thickness increased from 11.9 ± 1.8 mm to 17.1 ± 3.1 mm. After IPIE surgery, a significantly thicker tibial insert was used in the group with hyperextension (15.39 ± 2.4 mm for group I, 18.3 ± 2.9 mm for group IH; <i>p</i> < 0.001 by independent <i>t</i>-test), and no significant differences were observed in the ROM and clinical scores before and after IPIE between the 2 groups. The overall survival rate for IPIE was 83% at 5 years and 57% at 10 years, and there were no statistically significant differences between the groups using the Cox proportional hazards regression model.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>IPIE demonstrated an overall survival rate of 83% at 5 years with no difference in the recurrence of instability regardless of hyperextension. This study highlighted the effectiveness of using thicker inserts to resolve instability without significant differences in the ROM or clinical scores between the groups, suggesting its potential as a decision-making reference for surgeons.</p>","PeriodicalId":47648,"journal":{"name":"Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery","volume":"16 4","pages":"550-558"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11262954/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Isolated Polyethylene Insert Exchange for Instability after Total Knee Arthroplasty: Comparable Survival Rates and Range of Motion and Improved Clinical Scores Regardless of Hyperextension.\",\"authors\":\"Byung Sun Choi, Du Hyun Ro, Myung Chul Lee, Hyuk-Soo Han\",\"doi\":\"10.4055/cios23163\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Isolated polyethylene insert exchange (IPIE) has not been established as a treatment option for hyperextension instability after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the study was to evaluate the survival rate and clinical outcomes of IPIE for the treatment of instability with or without hyperextension after TKA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study retrospectively reviewed 46 patients who underwent IPIE for symptomatic prosthetic knee instability by dividing them into 2 groups based on the presence of hyperextension (without for group I and with for group IH). Patient demographics, clinical scores, radiographic data, range of motion (ROM), and surgical information were collected. Clinical failure was defined as a subsequent surgery following IPIE for any reason. The survival rate of IPIE and differences in demographics, clinical scores, and ROM were compared.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 46 patients (91% were women) with an average age of 70.1 years and a mean follow-up of 44.8 months. The average time between primary TKA and IPIE surgery was 6.5 ± 4.2 years, and during IPIE, 2 out of the 8 cruciate-retaining inserts were converted to \\\"deep-dish\\\" ultracongruent inserts while the insert thickness increased from 11.9 ± 1.8 mm to 17.1 ± 3.1 mm. After IPIE surgery, a significantly thicker tibial insert was used in the group with hyperextension (15.39 ± 2.4 mm for group I, 18.3 ± 2.9 mm for group IH; <i>p</i> < 0.001 by independent <i>t</i>-test), and no significant differences were observed in the ROM and clinical scores before and after IPIE between the 2 groups. The overall survival rate for IPIE was 83% at 5 years and 57% at 10 years, and there were no statistically significant differences between the groups using the Cox proportional hazards regression model.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>IPIE demonstrated an overall survival rate of 83% at 5 years with no difference in the recurrence of instability regardless of hyperextension. This study highlighted the effectiveness of using thicker inserts to resolve instability without significant differences in the ROM or clinical scores between the groups, suggesting its potential as a decision-making reference for surgeons.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47648,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery\",\"volume\":\"16 4\",\"pages\":\"550-558\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11262954/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4055/cios23163\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/4/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinics in Orthopedic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4055/cios23163","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/4/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:孤立聚乙烯置换术(IPIE)尚未被确定为治疗原发性全膝关节置换术(TKA)后过度伸展不稳定性的一种方法。本研究旨在评估 IPIE 治疗 TKA 术后伴有或不伴有过度伸展的不稳定性的存活率和临床疗效:本研究回顾性分析了46例因症状性人工膝关节不稳定而接受IPIE治疗的患者,根据是否存在过度伸展将患者分为两组(无过度伸展为I组,有过度伸展为IH组)。研究人员收集了患者的人口统计学资料、临床评分、影像学数据、活动范围(ROM)和手术信息。临床失败的定义是在 IPIE 之后因任何原因进行的后续手术。比较了IPIE的存活率以及人口统计学、临床评分和ROM的差异:46名患者(91%为女性)的平均年龄为70.1岁,平均随访时间为44.8个月。从初次TKA手术到IPIE手术的平均时间为6.5±4.2年,在IPIE手术期间,8个十字韧带固定假体中有2个被转换成了 "深盘 "超融合假体,假体厚度从11.9±1.8毫米增加到17.1±3.1毫米。IPIE手术后,过度伸展组使用的胫骨假体明显更厚(I组为15.39 ± 2.4 mm,IH组为18.3 ± 2.9 mm;经独立t检验,P < 0.001),两组间IPIE前后的ROM和临床评分无明显差异。IPIE的5年总生存率为83%,10年总生存率为57%,采用Cox比例危险回归模型计算,两组间无明显统计学差异:IPIE的5年总存活率为83%,无论过度伸展与否,不稳定性的复发率均无差异。这项研究强调了使用较厚的假体解决不稳定性的有效性,且各组间的 ROM 或临床评分无显著差异,这表明该假体可作为外科医生的决策参考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Isolated Polyethylene Insert Exchange for Instability after Total Knee Arthroplasty: Comparable Survival Rates and Range of Motion and Improved Clinical Scores Regardless of Hyperextension.

Background: Isolated polyethylene insert exchange (IPIE) has not been established as a treatment option for hyperextension instability after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the study was to evaluate the survival rate and clinical outcomes of IPIE for the treatment of instability with or without hyperextension after TKA.

Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed 46 patients who underwent IPIE for symptomatic prosthetic knee instability by dividing them into 2 groups based on the presence of hyperextension (without for group I and with for group IH). Patient demographics, clinical scores, radiographic data, range of motion (ROM), and surgical information were collected. Clinical failure was defined as a subsequent surgery following IPIE for any reason. The survival rate of IPIE and differences in demographics, clinical scores, and ROM were compared.

Results: There were 46 patients (91% were women) with an average age of 70.1 years and a mean follow-up of 44.8 months. The average time between primary TKA and IPIE surgery was 6.5 ± 4.2 years, and during IPIE, 2 out of the 8 cruciate-retaining inserts were converted to "deep-dish" ultracongruent inserts while the insert thickness increased from 11.9 ± 1.8 mm to 17.1 ± 3.1 mm. After IPIE surgery, a significantly thicker tibial insert was used in the group with hyperextension (15.39 ± 2.4 mm for group I, 18.3 ± 2.9 mm for group IH; p < 0.001 by independent t-test), and no significant differences were observed in the ROM and clinical scores before and after IPIE between the 2 groups. The overall survival rate for IPIE was 83% at 5 years and 57% at 10 years, and there were no statistically significant differences between the groups using the Cox proportional hazards regression model.

Conclusions: IPIE demonstrated an overall survival rate of 83% at 5 years with no difference in the recurrence of instability regardless of hyperextension. This study highlighted the effectiveness of using thicker inserts to resolve instability without significant differences in the ROM or clinical scores between the groups, suggesting its potential as a decision-making reference for surgeons.

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
3.50
自引率
4.00%
发文量
85
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
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