Aims: We aimed to examine the long-term mechanical survivorship, describe the modes of all-cause failure, and identify risk factors for mechanical failure of all-polyethylene tibial components in endoprosthetic reconstruction.
Methods: This is a retrospective database review of consecutive endoprosthetic reconstructions performed for oncological indications between 1980 and 2019. Patients with all-polyethylene tibial components were isolated and analyzed for revision for mechanical failure. Outcomes included survival of the all-polyethylene tibial component, revision surgery categorized according to the Henderson Failure Mode Classification, and complications and functional outcome, as assessed by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) score at the final follow-up.
Results: A total of 278 patients were identified with 289 all-polyethylene tibial components. Mechanical survival was 98.4%, 91.1%, and 85.2% at five, ten and 15 years, respectively. A total of 15 mechanical failures were identified at the final follow-up. Of the 13 all-polyethylene tibial components used for revision of a previous tibial component, five (38.5%) failed mechanically. Younger patients (< 18 years vs > 18 years; p = 0.005) and those used as revision components (p < 0.001) had significantly increased rates of failure. Multivariate logistic regression modelling showed revision status to be a positive risk factor for failure (odds ratio (OR) 19.498, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.598 to 82.676) and increasing age was a negative risk factor for failure (OR 0.927, 95% CI 0.872 to 0.987). Age-stratified risk analysis showed that age > 24 years was no longer a statistically significant risk factor for failure. The final mean MSTS score for all patients was 89% (8.5% to 100.0%).
Conclusion: The long-term mechanical survivorship of all-polyethylene tibial components when used for tumour endoprostheses was excellent. Tumour surgeons should consider using these components for their durability and the secondary benefits of reduced cost and ease of removal and revision. However, caution should be taken when using all-polyethylene tibial components in the revision setting as a significantly higher rate of mechanical failure was seen in this group of patients. Cite this article: 2020;102-B(2):170-176.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.102B2.BJJ-2019-0535.R1 | DOI Listing |
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg
December 2024
Sezione di Chirurgia Protesica ad Indirizzo Robotico Unità di Traumatologia dello Sport, Fondazione Poliambulanza Istituto Ospedaliero, Brescia, Italy.
Purpose: Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is a viable option for localized osteoarthritis (OA) or avascular osteonecrosis with several advantages over total knee arthroplasty (TKA). UKA implants may feature a tibial component either all-polyethylene (AP) or metal-backed (MB). This study aims to retrospectively compare the clinical outcomes and survivorship of 74 UKAs over 16 years, focusing on comparing the results and survivorship of MB versus AP tibial tray.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Long Term Eff Med Implants
December 2024
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY 11203, USA.
We sought to conduct a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis of post-operative outcomes following TKA with an all-polyethylene tibial (APT) or a metal-backed tibial component (MBT). A systematic review of the literature was conducted to identify all studies comparing APT and MBT for TKA based upon rates of complications, revisions, reoperation, and patient-reported outcomes. Data was pooled and relative risk of each outcome measure at short (< 5 year), mid (5-10 year), and long (> 10 year) follow-up was calculated.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Arthroplasty
October 2024
Knee and Hip Surgery Centro Medico, Teknon Barcelon, Barcelona, Spain.
J ISAKOS
December 2024
Edinburgh Orthopaedics, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH16 4SA, UK; University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, EH164SA, UK.
The utilization of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) has increased worldwide and has become a favourable alternative to total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with isolated single-compartment knee osteoarthritis. With the increase in UKA utilization, there has been an increase in the number of revisions. The two most common causes of revision are the progression of osteoarthritis in other compartments and aseptic loosening with polyethylene wear, with other common causes for revision including periprosthetic fracture, bearing dislocation, infection, instability and unexplained pain.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Orthop Surg Res
October 2024
Department of Orthopaedics, IRCCS Ospedale Sacro Cuore Don Calabria, Negrar di Valpolicella, Italy.
Background: This retrospective study compares the outcomes of unicompartmental medial fixed-bearing knee arthroplasty (mUKA), involving a cemented metal-backed (MB) or an all-polyethylene (AP) tibial component, performed in obese patients with a body mass index (BMI) > 30 with a follow-up of at least 5 years.
Methods: The institutional database was mined for primary mUKAs involving an MB or an AP tibial component (MB-UKA and AP-UKA groups, respectively) performed from January 2015 to August 2019. Patient demographics and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were compared and a propensity score matching (PSM) analysis (1:1) using multiple variables was conducted.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!