ACE Report Cover
Trabecular metal tibial monoblock stable at 5 years despite high initial migration
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Idioma
Download Download Download
Descargar
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citar
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoritos
Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report Translate this  ACE Report
Idioma
Download Download Download
Descargar
Cite this Report Cite this Report Cite this Report
Citar
Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Add to Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites Remove from Favorites
+ Favoritos
ARTHROPLASTY
Trabecular metal tibial monoblock stable at 5 years despite high initial migration .
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(9):16 Acta Orthop. 2012 Feb;83(1):36-40. doi: 10.3109/17453674.2011.645196. Epub 2011 Dec 29

This study was conducted to examine the 5-year radiostereometric (RSA) results of the trabecular metal (TM) tibial monoblock component, based on a previous study with a follow-up time of 2 years. 70 patients with osteoarthritis were randomized and received either the trabecular metal tibial implant or the cemented component. Results indicated that stability was observed in the trabecular metal tibial implant up to 5 years despite high levels of initial migration observed in the previous study.


Detalles de la financiación de la publicación +
Financiación:
Industry funded
Patrocinador:
Zimmer Inc. and Dalhousie Medical Research Foundation
Conflicts:
None disclosed

Riesgo de sesgo

6/10

Criterios de información

11/20

Índice de fragilidad

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)?

Sí = 1

Incierto = 0,5

No relevante = 0

No = 0

La evaluación de los criterios de información evalúa la transparencia con la que los autores informan de las características metodológicas y del ensayo dentro de la publicación. La evaluación se divide en cinco categorías que se presentan a continuación.

2/4

Randomization

2/4

Outcome Measurements

1/4

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

El Índice de Fragilidad es una herramienta que ayuda en la interpretación de hallazgos significativos, proporcionando una medida de fuerza para un resultado. El Índice de Fragilidad representa el número de eventos consecutivos que es necesario añadir a un resultado dicotómico para que el hallazgo deje de ser significativo. Un número pequeño representa un hallazgo más débil y un número grande un hallazgo más fuerte.

¿Por qué se necesitaba ahora este estudio?

The potential for improved longevity from the use of uncemented implants have been explored due to recent improvement in biomaterials. In a previous paper by the same authors, the 2-year implant migration results of the trabecular metal tibial monoblock component were presented. However, a longer follow-up was necessary to determine whether the early stability of these implants was sustained. Thus, this study presented the 5-year longitudinal radiostereometric (RSA) results from the original cohort of patients randomized to receive either the uncemented Nexgen LPS TM monoblock tibial component or the cemented NexGen Option Stemmed tibial component.

¿Cuál era la pregunta principal de la investigación?

Did the trabecular metal tibial implant achieve solid fixation (despite high levels of initial migration) in comparison to the cemented component, assessed at 5 years?

Características del estudio +
Population:
70 patients with severe osteoarthritis (n = 45 at follow-up).
Intervention:
Trabecular metal group: Patients received Nexgen LPS monoblock trabecular metal tibial component (TM) (Mean age: 60) (n = 37; n = 27 at follow-up).
Comparison:
Cemented group: Patients received cemented NexGen Option Stemmed tibial component (Mean age: 61) (n = 33; n = 18 at follow-up).
Outcomes:
The radiostereometric analysis (RSA) was performed through the use of commercial software. The maximum total point motion (MTPM) was calculated through the use of fictive markers in order to standardize the calculations in cases where the prosthesis bead placement was not uniform for all patients. Knee implant was characterized as either “stable” (<0.2 mm maximum total point motion between 1 and 2 years’ follow-up) or as being “at risk” or early aseptic loosening (>0.2 mm maximum total point motion between 1 and 2 years’ follow-up). The Western Ontario and McMaster University Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score was also recorded.
Methods:
RCT
Time:
5 years (assessed at 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years).
¿Cuáles fueron los hallazgos importantes?
  • No differences were observed in the WOMAC scores between the groups at any follow-up point (P > 0.006).
  • In the cemented group, the proportion of “at risk” components at 5 years was 2 of 18 (0.11, 95% CI: 0.03-0.33) and for the trabecular metal group it was 0 of 27 (95% CI: 0.0-0.13) (P = 0.2).
  • There was no difference in maximum total point motion at the 5-year follow-up between both groups (P = 0.9); compared to the cemented group, the trabecular metal group had more subsidence (P = 0.001).
  • 9 subjects in the trabecular metal group displayed very high migration in the first 6 months postoperatively (> 1.0 mm) at the 2-year follow-up; at 5 years, stability was still seen in all of these implants with an average change in maximum total point motion of 0.10 mm over the 3 years between follow-ups.
¿Qué es lo que más debo recordar?

In the previous 2-year report by the authors, uncertainty was expressed concerning the long-term stability of the trabecular metal tibial implant because of the high initial migration seen in some cases. This study revealed that stability was observed in the trabecular metal tibial implant up to 5 years despite high levels of initial migration.

¿Cómo afectará esto al cuidado de mis pacientes?

The trabecular metal tibial implant appears to achieve solid fixation even though there were high levels of initial migration. However, continued implant surveillance data is required to evaluate the long-term stability of this implant for patients with osteoarthritis.

DESCARGO DE RESPONSABILIDAD

El contenido de esta página tiene únicamente fines informativos y no pretende sustituir el consejo, diagnóstico o tratamiento médico profesional. Si necesita tratamiento médico, busque siempre el consejo de su médico o acuda al servicio de urgencias más cercano. Las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista expresados por las personas sobre el contenido que se encuentra en esta página no reflejan las opiniones, creencias y puntos de vista de OrthoEvidence.

0 de 4 artículos mensuales GRATIS desbloqueados
Ha alcanzado su límite de vistas de 4 artículos gratuitos este mes

Acceda a OrtoEvidencia por tan sólo 1,99 $ a la semana.

Manténgase conectado con las últimas pruebas. Cancele en cualquier momento.
  • Valoraciones críticas de los últimos ensayos controlados aleatorizados de gran impacto y revisiones sistemáticas en ortopedia
  • Acceso al contenido del podcast OrthoEvidence, que incluye colaboraciones con el Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, entrevistas con cirujanos reconocidos internacionalmente y mesas redondas sobre noticias y temas ortopédicos
  • Suscripción a The Pulse, un boletín quincenal basado en la evidencia y diseñado para ayudarle a tomar mejores decisiones clínicas
Upgrade
Bienvenido
¿Ha olvidado su contraseña?
Comience hoy mismo su prueba GRATUITA

Su cuenta estará afiliada a
e incluye acceso gratuito a OrthoEvidence


O
¿Olvidó su contraseña?

O
Compruebe su correo electrónico

Si existe una cuenta con la dirección de correo electrónico proporcionada, se le enviará un correo electrónico para restablecer la contraseña. Si no ve el correo electrónico, compruebe su carpeta de correo no deseado o spam.

Si necesita más ayuda póngase en contacto con nuestro equipo de asistencia.

Inicie sesión para activar esta función

Para acceder a esta función, debe iniciar sesión en una cuenta activa de OrthoEvidence. Por favor, inicie sesión o cree una cuenta de prueba GRATUITA.

Traducir Informe ACE

OrthoEvidence utiliza un servicio de traducción de terceros para que el contenido sea accesible en varios idiomas. Tenga en cuenta que, aunque se hace todo lo posible para garantizar la exactitud, las traducciones no siempre son perfectas.

Cómo citar esto ACE Report

OrthoEvidence. Trabecular metal tibial monoblock stable at 5 years despite high initial migration. OE Journal. 2013;1(9):16. Available from: https://myorthoevidence.com/AceReport/Show/trabecular-metal-tibial-monoblock-stable-at-5-years-despite-high-initial-migration

Copiar cita
Inicie sesión para activar esta función

Para acceder a esta función, debe iniciar sesión en una cuenta activa de OrthoEvidence. Por favor, inicie sesión o cree una cuenta de prueba GRATUITA.

Función de miembro Premium

Para acceder a esta función, debe iniciar sesión en una cuenta Premium de OrthoEvidence.

Compartir ACE Report