ACE Report Cover
Implant migration reduced in hydroxyapatite coated versus uncoated components
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Lingua
Download Download Download
Scaricare
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citare
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Preferiti
ARTHROPLASTY
Implant migration reduced in hydroxyapatite coated versus uncoated components .
Verified
This report has been verified by one or more authors of the original publication.

OrthoEvidence Journal (OE Journal) - ACE Report

OE Journal. 2013;1(1):6 Acta Orthop. 2012 Apr;83(2):135-41. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2012.665330. Epub 2012 Feb 13
Autori che hanno contribuito

BG Pijls ER Valstar BL Kaptein M Fiocco RG Nelissen

Exclusive Author Interview

Dr. B.G. Pijls speaks on the long term beneficial effect of hydroxyapatite in TKA.

48 patients (68 knees) scheduled for total knee arthroplasty were randomized to receive a cemented, cementless non-coated, or cementless hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated tibial component to determine the effect of HA on long-term migration of the prosthesis. Radiostereometric analyses (RSA), Knee Society Scores, Hospital for Special Surgery scores, and radiographic evaluation were recorded over 16 years. The results indicated that migration of HA-coated components was improved compared to non-coated components, but increased in comparison to cemented components.


Dettagli sul finanziamento della pubblicazione +
Finanziamento:
Non-Industry funded
Sponsor:
Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, Dutch Arthritis Association
Conflitti:
None disclosed

Rischio di pregiudizio

7/10

Criteri di segnalazione

15/20

Indice di fragilità

N/A

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)?

Sì = 1

Incerto = 0,5

Non rilevante = 0

No = 0

La valutazione dei criteri di segnalazione valuta la trasparenza con cui gli autori riportano le caratteristiche metodologiche e sperimentali dello studio all'interno della pubblicazione. La valutazione è suddivisa in cinque categorie che vengono presentate di seguito.

4/4

Randomization

4/4

Outcome Measurements

2/4

Inclusion / Exclusion

2/4

Therapy Description

3/4

Statistics

Detsky AS, Naylor CD, O'Rourke K, McGeer AJ, L'Abbé KA. J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45:255-65

L'Indice di Fragilità è uno strumento che aiuta l'interpretazione dei risultati significativi, fornendo una misura della forza di un risultato. L'Indice di Fragilità rappresenta il numero di eventi consecutivi che devono essere aggiunti a un risultato dicotomico per rendere il risultato non più significativo. Un numero piccolo rappresenta un risultato più debole, mentre un numero grande rappresenta un risultato più forte.

Perché questo studio era necessario ora?

Although the beneficial early fixation properties of hydroxyapatite (HA) coatings on cementless prosthetic components in total knee arthroplasty have been extensively studied and researched, reports of the long-term migration of HA-coated components are limited. Moreover, complications of delamination and third-body wear associated with the HA-coating have been reported in total hip arthroplasty, which could cause long-term problems.

Qual era la domanda di ricerca principale?

Does HA-coating maintain fixation properties and reduce migration of components in total knee arthroplasty over the long-term (11 to 16 years) when compared to uncoated components and cemented components?

Caratteristiche dello studio +
Population:
48 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty for treatment of osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. TKAs were performed with standard midline incision and medial parapatellar arthrotomy. Tantalum markers were inserted into components, and all inserts were made of ultra-high-molecular-weight-polyethylene, gamma radiation sterilized and machined from GUR 415 resin with calcium stearate. (n=68 total knees)
Intervention:
HA-coated Group: Patients received cementless, HA-coated tibial components. (n=24)
Comparison:
Uncoated Group: Patients received cementless uncoated tibial components. (n=20) Cemented Group: Patients received cemented tibial components. (n=24)
Outcomes:
Primary outcome was migration of component, assessed by RSA. Secondary outcome measurements were clinical assessments (KSS and HSS) and radiographic evaluation for component loosening (conventional weight-bearing radiographs of femoral-tibial alignment (FTA angle), frontal angle of femoral component (alpha), and frontal (beta) and sagittal (delta) angles of the tibial component)
Methods:
RCT, Double-/Single-Blind (assessors blinded for HA comparison in cementless components, but not for comparison between cemented and cementless components), Prospective
Time:
Follow-up of RSA and clinical outcomes was conducted at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and annually thereafter. Radiographic evaluation occurred 2, 5, 10 and 15 years postoperatively.
Quali erano i risultati importanti?
  • Migration of the HA-coated tibial components was less than the non-coated components (MD 0.39mm, 95%CI 0.16-0.62)
  • HA-coated components were observed to have significantly greater migration compared to cemented components (MD 0.61mm, 95%CI 0.42-0.80, p<0.001)
  • HA-coating decreased subsidence by 0.26mm (95%CI 0.10-0.42) and external rotation by 0.47 degrees (95%CI 0.27-0.67) when compared to non-coated components.
  • There was no significant difference observed between groups in clinical outcomes of KSS and HSS at 10 years postoperatively.
  • The groups did not significantly differ in radiographic assessments of FTA, alpha, beta, and delta angles of components.
  • 49 of the operated knees underwent TKA as a result of rheumatoid arthritis, 18 due to osteoarthritis, and 1 because of sequelae after septic arthritis.
  • Longitudinal follow-up of TKA with RSA allowed for early detection of secondary loosening.
Che cosa devo ricordare di più?

The use of HA-coating on cementless components for total knee arthroplasty decreased prosthesis migration significantly, when compared to non-coated cementless components. However, an increase in migration was observed when HA-coated components were compared to cemented components.

Come influenzerà l'assistenza ai miei pazienti?

HA-coating of cementless tibial components can reduce long-term migration compared to non-coated cementless components. However, cemented components appear to provide the greatest reduction in migration. Further research is required to confirm these findings in studies using larger sample sizes and a more balanced population (equal number of patients requiring treatment due to rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis and other disorders).

DISCLAIMER

Il contenuto di questa pagina è solo a scopo informativo e non intende sostituire la consulenza, la diagnosi o il trattamento medico professionale. Se ha bisogno di cure mediche, si rivolga sempre al suo medico o al pronto soccorso più vicino. Le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista espressi dalle persone sui contenuti presenti in questa pagina non riflettono le opinioni, le convinzioni e i punti di vista di OrthoEvidence.

0 di 4 articoli mensili GRATUITI sbloccati
Ha raggiunto il suo limite di 4 visualizzazioni di articoli gratuiti questo mese

Accesso a OrthoEvidence a soli 1,99 dollari a settimana.

Rimanga in contatto con le ultime prove. Può disdire in qualsiasi momento.
  • Valutazioni critiche dei più recenti studi randomizzati controllati ad alto impatto e delle revisioni sistematiche in ortopedia.
  • Accesso ai contenuti del podcast OrthoEvidence, tra cui collaborazioni con il Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, interviste con chirurghi di fama internazionale e tavole rotonde su notizie e argomenti ortopedici.
  • Abbonamento a The Pulse, una newsletter bisettimanale basata sulle evidenze scientifiche, progettata per aiutarla a prendere decisioni cliniche migliori.
Upgrade
Close Dialog
Bentornato!
Ha dimenticato la password?
Inizi la sua prova gratuita oggi stesso!

Il suo account sarà affiliato a
e includerà l'accesso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
Ha dimenticato la password?

O
Controlli la sua e-mail

Se esiste un account con l'indirizzo e-mail fornito, le verrà inviata un'e-mail di reimpostazione della password. Se non vede l'e-mail, controlli la cartella spam o posta indesiderata.

Per ulteriore assistenza, contatti il nostro team di supporto.

Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Tradurre il Rapporto ACE

OrthoEvidence utilizza un servizio di traduzione di terze parti per rendere i contenuti accessibili in più lingue. Si prega di notare che, sebbene venga fatto ogni sforzo per garantire l'accuratezza, le traduzioni potrebbero non essere sempre perfette.

Come citare questo documento ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Implant migration reduced in hydroxyapatite coated versus uncoated components. OE Journal. 2013;1(1):6. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/implant-migration-reduced-in-hydroxyapatite-coated-versus-uncoated-components

Copiare la citazione
Effettui il login per abilitare questa funzione

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence attivo. Effettui il login o crei un account di prova GRATUITO.

Funzionalità per i membri Premium

Per accedere a questa funzione, deve essere collegato ad un account OrthoEvidence Premium.

Condividi questo articolo ACE Report