Is cement mantle thickness a primary cause of aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee arthroplasty?
Aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee replacement is one of the leading causes of long-term failure. Cement mantle thickness has been implicated as a source of aseptic tibial loosening. Therefore, the following study was designed to determine (1) what is the cement mantle thickness i...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The knee 2023-01, Vol.40, p.305-312 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 312 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | |
| container_start_page | 305 |
| container_title | The knee |
| container_volume | 40 |
| creator | Cox, Zach C. Engstrom, Stephen M. Shinar, Andrew A. Polkowski, Gregory G. Mason, J. Bohannon Martin, J. Ryan |
| description | Aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee replacement is one of the leading causes of long-term failure. Cement mantle thickness has been implicated as a source of aseptic tibial loosening. Therefore, the following study was designed to determine (1) what is the cement mantle thickness in patients that develop aseptic tibial loosening, and (2) is there a difference in cement mantle thickness based on the interface of failure?
This retrospective cohort included 216 patients revised for aseptic tibial loosening. Patient demographics, operative data, and clinical outcomes were recorded. A preoperative radiographic assessment was performed to determine the interface of failure and the thickness of the cement mantle using the Knee Society Radiographic Evaluation System zones.
The average patient age was 65 years and body mass index was 33.7 kg/m2. 203 patients demonstrated radiographic failure at the implant-cement interface and 13 patients demonstrated failure at the cement-bone interface. The average cement mantle thickness of each radiographic zone for the entire cohort on the AP and lateral views was 4.4 and 4.5 mm, respectively. The average cement mantle thickness of patients that developed failure at the implant-cement interface was significantly greater than patients that failed at the cement-bone interface in each radiographic zone (p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.knee.2022.12.003 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2760547558</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0968016022002137</els_id><sourcerecordid>2760547558</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-97756542f3503cf58b0a3405e2ac1852ce838b3283251a1d1a780f33bdcfa3ab3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMFq3DAURUVoSKbT_kAXRctu7D5Jli1DoZQhaQKBbJK1kOXnjqayNZE0Cfn72Myky670FudedA8hXxiUDFj9fVf-nRBLDpyXjJcA4oysmGpEIRXAB7KCtlbFTMIl-ZjSDgDqtpIX5FLUsuVV267I022iFkecMh3NlD3SvHV27k2JGrqPbjTxlVpzSEjDQE3CfXaWZtc546kPIeHkpj90CN6Hl-V6z-SQZ2L5ITUxb2PYe5Py689P5HwwPuHn07smj9dXD5ub4u7-9-3m111hBTS5aJtG1rLig5Ag7CBVB0ZUIJEby5TkFpVQneBKcMkM65lpFAxCdL0djDCdWJNvx959DE8HTFmPLln03kwYDknzpgZZNVKqGeVH1MaQUsRBn0ZoBnpRrXd6GaIX1ZpxPaueQ19P_YduxP5f5N3tDPw4AjivfHYYdbIOJ4u9i2iz7oP7X_8btouRNw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2760547558</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Is cement mantle thickness a primary cause of aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee arthroplasty?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Cox, Zach C. ; Engstrom, Stephen M. ; Shinar, Andrew A. ; Polkowski, Gregory G. ; Mason, J. Bohannon ; Martin, J. Ryan</creator><creatorcontrib>Cox, Zach C. ; Engstrom, Stephen M. ; Shinar, Andrew A. ; Polkowski, Gregory G. ; Mason, J. Bohannon ; Martin, J. Ryan</creatorcontrib><description>Aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee replacement is one of the leading causes of long-term failure. Cement mantle thickness has been implicated as a source of aseptic tibial loosening. Therefore, the following study was designed to determine (1) what is the cement mantle thickness in patients that develop aseptic tibial loosening, and (2) is there a difference in cement mantle thickness based on the interface of failure?
This retrospective cohort included 216 patients revised for aseptic tibial loosening. Patient demographics, operative data, and clinical outcomes were recorded. A preoperative radiographic assessment was performed to determine the interface of failure and the thickness of the cement mantle using the Knee Society Radiographic Evaluation System zones.
The average patient age was 65 years and body mass index was 33.7 kg/m2. 203 patients demonstrated radiographic failure at the implant-cement interface and 13 patients demonstrated failure at the cement-bone interface. The average cement mantle thickness of each radiographic zone for the entire cohort on the AP and lateral views was 4.4 and 4.5 mm, respectively. The average cement mantle thickness of patients that developed failure at the implant-cement interface was significantly greater than patients that failed at the cement-bone interface in each radiographic zone (p < 0.001).
Patients that develop implant loosening at the cement-bone interface were noted to have a significantly decreased cement mantle compared to patients that failed at the implant-cement interface. Methods for decreasing tibial implant loosening should likely focus on improving the fixation at the implant-cement interface.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0968-0160</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5800</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.knee.2022.12.003</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36592499</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Netherlands: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Aged ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects ; Aseptic failure ; Aseptic tibial loosening ; Bone Cements ; Humans ; Implant fixation ; Knee Joint - diagnostic imaging ; Knee Joint - surgery ; Knee Prosthesis ; Prosthesis Failure ; Retrospective Studies ; Tibia - diagnostic imaging ; Tibia - surgery</subject><ispartof>The knee, 2023-01, Vol.40, p.305-312</ispartof><rights>2022 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-97756542f3503cf58b0a3405e2ac1852ce838b3283251a1d1a780f33bdcfa3ab3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0968016022002137$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36592499$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cox, Zach C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Engstrom, Stephen M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shinar, Andrew A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polkowski, Gregory G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mason, J. Bohannon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, J. Ryan</creatorcontrib><title>Is cement mantle thickness a primary cause of aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee arthroplasty?</title><title>The knee</title><addtitle>Knee</addtitle><description>Aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee replacement is one of the leading causes of long-term failure. Cement mantle thickness has been implicated as a source of aseptic tibial loosening. Therefore, the following study was designed to determine (1) what is the cement mantle thickness in patients that develop aseptic tibial loosening, and (2) is there a difference in cement mantle thickness based on the interface of failure?
This retrospective cohort included 216 patients revised for aseptic tibial loosening. Patient demographics, operative data, and clinical outcomes were recorded. A preoperative radiographic assessment was performed to determine the interface of failure and the thickness of the cement mantle using the Knee Society Radiographic Evaluation System zones.
The average patient age was 65 years and body mass index was 33.7 kg/m2. 203 patients demonstrated radiographic failure at the implant-cement interface and 13 patients demonstrated failure at the cement-bone interface. The average cement mantle thickness of each radiographic zone for the entire cohort on the AP and lateral views was 4.4 and 4.5 mm, respectively. The average cement mantle thickness of patients that developed failure at the implant-cement interface was significantly greater than patients that failed at the cement-bone interface in each radiographic zone (p < 0.001).
Patients that develop implant loosening at the cement-bone interface were noted to have a significantly decreased cement mantle compared to patients that failed at the implant-cement interface. Methods for decreasing tibial implant loosening should likely focus on improving the fixation at the implant-cement interface.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects</subject><subject>Aseptic failure</subject><subject>Aseptic tibial loosening</subject><subject>Bone Cements</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implant fixation</subject><subject>Knee Joint - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Knee Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Knee Prosthesis</subject><subject>Prosthesis Failure</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Tibia - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Tibia - surgery</subject><issn>0968-0160</issn><issn>1873-5800</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kMFq3DAURUVoSKbT_kAXRctu7D5Jli1DoZQhaQKBbJK1kOXnjqayNZE0Cfn72Myky670FudedA8hXxiUDFj9fVf-nRBLDpyXjJcA4oysmGpEIRXAB7KCtlbFTMIl-ZjSDgDqtpIX5FLUsuVV267I022iFkecMh3NlD3SvHV27k2JGrqPbjTxlVpzSEjDQE3CfXaWZtc546kPIeHkpj90CN6Hl-V6z-SQZ2L5ITUxb2PYe5Py689P5HwwPuHn07smj9dXD5ub4u7-9-3m111hBTS5aJtG1rLig5Ag7CBVB0ZUIJEby5TkFpVQneBKcMkM65lpFAxCdL0djDCdWJNvx959DE8HTFmPLln03kwYDknzpgZZNVKqGeVH1MaQUsRBn0ZoBnpRrXd6GaIX1ZpxPaueQ19P_YduxP5f5N3tDPw4AjivfHYYdbIOJ4u9i2iz7oP7X_8btouRNw</recordid><startdate>202301</startdate><enddate>202301</enddate><creator>Cox, Zach C.</creator><creator>Engstrom, Stephen M.</creator><creator>Shinar, Andrew A.</creator><creator>Polkowski, Gregory G.</creator><creator>Mason, J. Bohannon</creator><creator>Martin, J. Ryan</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>202301</creationdate><title>Is cement mantle thickness a primary cause of aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee arthroplasty?</title><author>Cox, Zach C. ; Engstrom, Stephen M. ; Shinar, Andrew A. ; Polkowski, Gregory G. ; Mason, J. Bohannon ; Martin, J. Ryan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c307t-97756542f3503cf58b0a3405e2ac1852ce838b3283251a1d1a780f33bdcfa3ab3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects</topic><topic>Aseptic failure</topic><topic>Aseptic tibial loosening</topic><topic>Bone Cements</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implant fixation</topic><topic>Knee Joint - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Knee Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Knee Prosthesis</topic><topic>Prosthesis Failure</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Tibia - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Tibia - surgery</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cox, Zach C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Engstrom, Stephen M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shinar, Andrew A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polkowski, Gregory G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mason, J. Bohannon</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martin, J. Ryan</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The knee</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cox, Zach C.</au><au>Engstrom, Stephen M.</au><au>Shinar, Andrew A.</au><au>Polkowski, Gregory G.</au><au>Mason, J. Bohannon</au><au>Martin, J. Ryan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Is cement mantle thickness a primary cause of aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee arthroplasty?</atitle><jtitle>The knee</jtitle><addtitle>Knee</addtitle><date>2023-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>40</volume><spage>305</spage><epage>312</epage><pages>305-312</pages><issn>0968-0160</issn><eissn>1873-5800</eissn><abstract>Aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee replacement is one of the leading causes of long-term failure. Cement mantle thickness has been implicated as a source of aseptic tibial loosening. Therefore, the following study was designed to determine (1) what is the cement mantle thickness in patients that develop aseptic tibial loosening, and (2) is there a difference in cement mantle thickness based on the interface of failure?
This retrospective cohort included 216 patients revised for aseptic tibial loosening. Patient demographics, operative data, and clinical outcomes were recorded. A preoperative radiographic assessment was performed to determine the interface of failure and the thickness of the cement mantle using the Knee Society Radiographic Evaluation System zones.
The average patient age was 65 years and body mass index was 33.7 kg/m2. 203 patients demonstrated radiographic failure at the implant-cement interface and 13 patients demonstrated failure at the cement-bone interface. The average cement mantle thickness of each radiographic zone for the entire cohort on the AP and lateral views was 4.4 and 4.5 mm, respectively. The average cement mantle thickness of patients that developed failure at the implant-cement interface was significantly greater than patients that failed at the cement-bone interface in each radiographic zone (p < 0.001).
Patients that develop implant loosening at the cement-bone interface were noted to have a significantly decreased cement mantle compared to patients that failed at the implant-cement interface. Methods for decreasing tibial implant loosening should likely focus on improving the fixation at the implant-cement interface.</abstract><cop>Netherlands</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><pmid>36592499</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.knee.2022.12.003</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0968-0160 |
| ispartof | The knee, 2023-01, Vol.40, p.305-312 |
| issn | 0968-0160 1873-5800 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2760547558 |
| source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals |
| subjects | Aged Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects Aseptic failure Aseptic tibial loosening Bone Cements Humans Implant fixation Knee Joint - diagnostic imaging Knee Joint - surgery Knee Prosthesis Prosthesis Failure Retrospective Studies Tibia - diagnostic imaging Tibia - surgery |
| title | Is cement mantle thickness a primary cause of aseptic tibial loosening following primary total knee arthroplasty? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T22%3A04%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Is%20cement%20mantle%20thickness%20a%20primary%20cause%20of%20aseptic%20tibial%20loosening%20following%20primary%20total%20knee%20arthroplasty?&rft.jtitle=The%20knee&rft.au=Cox,%20Zach%20C.&rft.date=2023-01&rft.volume=40&rft.spage=305&rft.epage=312&rft.pages=305-312&rft.issn=0968-0160&rft.eissn=1873-5800&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.knee.2022.12.003&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2760547558%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2760547558&rft_id=info:pmid/36592499&rft_els_id=S0968016022002137&rfr_iscdi=true |