Smaller migration with monoblock versus modular tibial component in uncemented TKA .
OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report
OE Journal. 2017;5(15):5 Acta Orthop. 2016 Dec;87(6):607-61467 patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty were randomized to receive either a monoblock or modular tibial component. Patients were assessed for component migration over the first 24 months postoperatively, as well as clinical scores in the same time frame. Results demonstrated significantly lower maximum total point motion in the monoblock group compared to the modular group after 24 months. As well, single dimension migration demonstrated significantly lower subsidence in the monoblock group compared to the modular group. Clinical scores did not significantly differ between groups.
Was the allocation sequence adequately generated?
Was allocation adequately concealed?
Blinding Treatment Providers: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Outcome Assessors: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Blinding Patients: Was knowledge of the allocated interventions adequately prevented?
Was loss to follow-up (missing outcome data) infrequent?
Are reports of the study free of suggestion of selective outcome reporting?
Were outcomes objective, patient-important and assessed in a manner to limit bias (ie. duplicate assessors, Independent assessors)?
Was the sample size sufficiently large to assure a balance of prognosis and sufficiently large number of outcome events?
Was investigator expertise/experience with both treatment and control techniques likely the same (ie.were criteria for surgeon participation/expertise provided)?
Oui = 1
Incertain = 0,5
Non pertinent = 0
Non = 0
L'évaluation des critères de rapport permet d'évaluer la transparence avec laquelle les auteurs rapportent les caractéristiques méthodologiques et les caractéristiques de l'essai dans la publication. L'évaluation est divisée en cinq catégories qui sont présentées ci-dessous.
4/4
Randomization
3/4
Outcome Measurements
3/4
Inclusion / Exclusion
2/4
Therapy Description
4/4
Statistics
Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65
L'indice de fragilité est un outil qui aide à l'interprétation des résultats significatifs, en fournissant une mesure de la force d'un résultat. L'indice de fragilité représente le nombre d'événements consécutifs qui doivent être ajoutés à un résultat dichotomique pour que le résultat ne soit plus significatif. Un petit nombre représente un résultat plus faible et un grand nombre un résultat plus fort.
Pourquoi cette étude était-elle nécessaire maintenant ?
Aseptic loosening of tibial components remains a primary concern regarding the overall survivorship of total knee arthroplasty implants. Polyethylene wear has been identified as a potential contributor to aseptic loosening. Recently, there has been debate whether tibial component designs, specifically monoblock versus modular polyethylene components, may differ in their respective wear and migration profiles.
Quelle était la principale question de recherche ?
In total knee arthroplasty, does the use of a monoblock tibial component result in significantly lower component migration within the first 2 years postoperatively when compared to a modular polyethylene component?
- There was no significant difference in MTPM between the monoblock group and the modular group after 3 months (0.58mm [95%CI 0.43-0.72] vs. 0.85mm [0.65-1.09]; p=0.2) or 6 months (0.66mm [0.44-0.77] vs. 0.98mm [0.74-1.26];p=0.1); MTPM was significantly lower in the monoblock group compared to the modular group at 12 months (0.65mm [0.46-0.78] vs. 1.01mm [0.81-1.28]; p=0.02) and 24 months (0.72mm [0.53-0.82 vs. 1.15mm [0.90-1.37]; p=0.02).
- In individual axes for translation, no significant differences between groups in anterior-posterior translation or lateral-medial translation of the tibial component were noted at any follow-up. In contrast, beginning at 6 months, significantly smaller superior-inferior translation of the tibial component was observed in the monoblock group compared to the modular group, and significance was maintained after 24 months (-0.18mm [-0.24, -0.07] vs. -0.38mm [-0.54, -0.23]; p=0.02).
- In individual axes for rotation, no significant differences between groups were observed in either anterior-posterior tilt, varus-valgus tilt, or internal-external rotation of the component at any follow-up time point (all p>0.05).
- No significant differences between groups were observed in Knee Society Knee scores, Knee Society Function scores, or EQ-5D scores at any follow-up time point (all p>0.05).
De quoi dois-je me souvenir en priorité ?
In uncemented total knee arthroplasty, the use of a monoblock tibial component was associated with significantly smaller maximum total point motion after 24 months, and, specifically, significantly lower superior-inferior translation of the tibial component after 24 months when compared to a modular polyethylene tibial component. No significant between-group differences were noted in x- and z-axis translation of the component, x-, y, and z-axis rotation of the component, or clinical scores after 24 months.
Comment cela affectera-t-il les soins prodigués à mes patients ?
The results of this study suggest that monoblock tibial components may result in a statistically significantly smaller degree of migration, as assessed via maximum total point motion, from 12 to 24 months after uncemented total knee arthroplasty when compared to modular polyethylene tibial components. Nonetheless, there did not appear to be any clinical impact of the difference observed between groups within this time frame. Follow-up studies are needed to determine if the observed difference in migration has any implication on the incidence of aseptic loosening and component survivorship in the long-term.
AVIS DE NON-RESPONSABILITÉ
Le contenu de cette page est fourni à titre d'information uniquement et n'est pas destiné à remplacer un avis médical, un diagnostic ou un traitement professionnel. Si vous avez besoin d'un traitement médical, demandez toujours l'avis de votre médecin ou rendez-vous au service des urgences le plus proche. Les opinions, croyances et points de vue exprimés par les individus sur le contenu de cette page ne reflètent pas les opinions, croyances et points de vue d'OrthoEvidence.
0 de 4 articles mensuels GRATUITS débloqués
