Should we reconsider all-polyethylene tibial implants in total knee replacement?
The role of modular tibial implants in total knee replacement is not fully defined. We performed a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial using radiostereophotogrammetric analysis to compare the performance of an all-polyethylene tibia with a metal-backed cruciate-retaining condylar design...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume 2006-12, Vol.88 (12), p.1596-1602 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1602 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 12 |
| container_start_page | 1596 |
| container_title | Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume |
| container_volume | 88 |
| creator | MULLER, S. D DEEHAN, D. J HOLLAND, J. P OUTTERSIDE, S. E KIRK, L. M. G GREGG, P. J MCCASKIE, A. W |
| description | The role of modular tibial implants in total knee replacement is not fully defined. We performed a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial using radiostereophotogrammetric analysis to compare the performance of an all-polyethylene tibia with a metal-backed cruciate-retaining condylar design, PFC-Sigma total knee replacement for up to 24 months. There were 51 patients who were randomised into two treatment groups. There were 10 subsequent withdrawals, leaving 21 all-polyethylene and 20 metal-backed tibial implants. No patient was lost to follow-up. There were no significant demographic differences between the groups. At two years one metal-backed implant showed migration > 1 mm, but no polyethylene implant reached this level. There was a significant increase in the SF-12 and Oxford knee scores after operation in both groups. In an uncomplicated primary total knee replacement the all-polyethylene PFC-Sigma tibial prosthesis showed no statistical difference in migration from that of the metal-backed counterpart. There was no difference in the clinical results as assessed by the SF-12, the Oxford knee score, alignment or range of movement at 24 months, although these assessment measures were not statistically powered in this study. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1302/0301-620X.88B12.17695 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68230790</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>68230790</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-cdba28c180dd2134e4c829ce6741bea2c57111f879e1db0260ad87c28c8ebaed3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkF1r2zAUhsVYWbK2P2HDDLo7p-dItiVflTbso1BooS30TsjSCXUm26lkM_LvqzRhhV0deHnel8PD2BeEBQrg5yAA84rD00KpK-QLlFVdfmBzDkWRl0LKj2z-j5mxzzGuAaAoS_GJzVBiWaOEObu7fx4m77K_lAWyQx9bRyEz3uebwW9pfN566ikb26Y1Pmu7jTf9GLO2z8ZhTMmfnnbNFFvqqB8vTtjRyvhIp4d7zB5__nhY_s5vbn9dLy9vclsgjrl1jeHKogLnOIqCCqt4bamSBTZkuC0lIq6UrAldA7wC45S0qaKoMeTEMfu-392E4WWiOOqujZZ8-o-GKepKcQGyhgR--w9cD1Po02-a87qqZV1igso9ZMMQY6CV3oS2M2GrEfTOt9651DuX-s23fvOdel8P41PTkXtvHQQn4OwAmGiNXwXT2za-c0pUkISIVwLaiLo</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>229697951</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Should we reconsider all-polyethylene tibial implants in total knee replacement?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>MULLER, S. D ; DEEHAN, D. J ; HOLLAND, J. P ; OUTTERSIDE, S. E ; KIRK, L. M. G ; GREGG, P. J ; MCCASKIE, A. W</creator><creatorcontrib>MULLER, S. D ; DEEHAN, D. J ; HOLLAND, J. P ; OUTTERSIDE, S. E ; KIRK, L. M. G ; GREGG, P. J ; MCCASKIE, A. W</creatorcontrib><description>The role of modular tibial implants in total knee replacement is not fully defined. We performed a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial using radiostereophotogrammetric analysis to compare the performance of an all-polyethylene tibia with a metal-backed cruciate-retaining condylar design, PFC-Sigma total knee replacement for up to 24 months. There were 51 patients who were randomised into two treatment groups. There were 10 subsequent withdrawals, leaving 21 all-polyethylene and 20 metal-backed tibial implants. No patient was lost to follow-up. There were no significant demographic differences between the groups. At two years one metal-backed implant showed migration > 1 mm, but no polyethylene implant reached this level. There was a significant increase in the SF-12 and Oxford knee scores after operation in both groups. In an uncomplicated primary total knee replacement the all-polyethylene PFC-Sigma tibial prosthesis showed no statistical difference in migration from that of the metal-backed counterpart. There was no difference in the clinical results as assessed by the SF-12, the Oxford knee score, alignment or range of movement at 24 months, although these assessment measures were not statistically powered in this study.</description><edition>British volume</edition><identifier>ISSN: 0301-620X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 2049-4394</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2044-5377</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2049-4408</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.88B12.17695</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17159170</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JBSUAK</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Arthritis, Rheumatoid - surgery ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods ; Biological and medical sciences ; Female ; Humans ; Knee Joint - physiopathology ; Knee Prosthesis ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Orthopedic surgery ; Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery ; Photogrammetry - methods ; Polyethylene ; Prospective Studies ; Prosthesis Design ; Range of Motion, Articular ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Tibia - surgery ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume, 2006-12, Vol.88 (12), p.1596-1602</ispartof><rights>2007 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery Dec 2006</rights><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-cdba28c180dd2134e4c829ce6741bea2c57111f879e1db0260ad87c28c8ebaed3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-cdba28c180dd2134e4c829ce6741bea2c57111f879e1db0260ad87c28c8ebaed3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=18360411$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17159170$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>MULLER, S. D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DEEHAN, D. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HOLLAND, J. P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>OUTTERSIDE, S. E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KIRK, L. M. G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GREGG, P. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCCASKIE, A. W</creatorcontrib><title>Should we reconsider all-polyethylene tibial implants in total knee replacement?</title><title>Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume</title><addtitle>J Bone Joint Surg Br</addtitle><description>The role of modular tibial implants in total knee replacement is not fully defined. We performed a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial using radiostereophotogrammetric analysis to compare the performance of an all-polyethylene tibia with a metal-backed cruciate-retaining condylar design, PFC-Sigma total knee replacement for up to 24 months. There were 51 patients who were randomised into two treatment groups. There were 10 subsequent withdrawals, leaving 21 all-polyethylene and 20 metal-backed tibial implants. No patient was lost to follow-up. There were no significant demographic differences between the groups. At two years one metal-backed implant showed migration > 1 mm, but no polyethylene implant reached this level. There was a significant increase in the SF-12 and Oxford knee scores after operation in both groups. In an uncomplicated primary total knee replacement the all-polyethylene PFC-Sigma tibial prosthesis showed no statistical difference in migration from that of the metal-backed counterpart. There was no difference in the clinical results as assessed by the SF-12, the Oxford knee score, alignment or range of movement at 24 months, although these assessment measures were not statistically powered in this study.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - surgery</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Knee Joint - physiopathology</subject><subject>Knee Prosthesis</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Orthopedic surgery</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery</subject><subject>Photogrammetry - methods</subject><subject>Polyethylene</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Tibia - surgery</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0301-620X</issn><issn>2049-4394</issn><issn>2044-5377</issn><issn>2049-4408</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkF1r2zAUhsVYWbK2P2HDDLo7p-dItiVflTbso1BooS30TsjSCXUm26lkM_LvqzRhhV0deHnel8PD2BeEBQrg5yAA84rD00KpK-QLlFVdfmBzDkWRl0LKj2z-j5mxzzGuAaAoS_GJzVBiWaOEObu7fx4m77K_lAWyQx9bRyEz3uebwW9pfN566ikb26Y1Pmu7jTf9GLO2z8ZhTMmfnnbNFFvqqB8vTtjRyvhIp4d7zB5__nhY_s5vbn9dLy9vclsgjrl1jeHKogLnOIqCCqt4bamSBTZkuC0lIq6UrAldA7wC45S0qaKoMeTEMfu-392E4WWiOOqujZZ8-o-GKepKcQGyhgR--w9cD1Po02-a87qqZV1igso9ZMMQY6CV3oS2M2GrEfTOt9651DuX-s23fvOdel8P41PTkXtvHQQn4OwAmGiNXwXT2za-c0pUkISIVwLaiLo</recordid><startdate>20061201</startdate><enddate>20061201</enddate><creator>MULLER, S. D</creator><creator>DEEHAN, D. J</creator><creator>HOLLAND, J. P</creator><creator>OUTTERSIDE, S. E</creator><creator>KIRK, L. M. G</creator><creator>GREGG, P. J</creator><creator>MCCASKIE, A. W</creator><general>British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery</general><general>British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery</general><scope>IQODW</scope><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>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20061201</creationdate><title>Should we reconsider all-polyethylene tibial implants in total knee replacement?</title><author>MULLER, S. D ; DEEHAN, D. J ; HOLLAND, J. P ; OUTTERSIDE, S. E ; KIRK, L. M. G ; GREGG, P. J ; MCCASKIE, A. W</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-cdba28c180dd2134e4c829ce6741bea2c57111f879e1db0260ad87c28c8ebaed3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Arthritis, Rheumatoid - surgery</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Knee Joint - physiopathology</topic><topic>Knee Prosthesis</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Orthopedic surgery</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery</topic><topic>Photogrammetry - methods</topic><topic>Polyethylene</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Tibia - surgery</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>MULLER, S. D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DEEHAN, D. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>HOLLAND, J. P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>OUTTERSIDE, S. E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>KIRK, L. M. G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GREGG, P. J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCCASKIE, A. W</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>MULLER, S. D</au><au>DEEHAN, D. J</au><au>HOLLAND, J. P</au><au>OUTTERSIDE, S. E</au><au>KIRK, L. M. G</au><au>GREGG, P. J</au><au>MCCASKIE, A. W</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Should we reconsider all-polyethylene tibial implants in total knee replacement?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume</jtitle><addtitle>J Bone Joint Surg Br</addtitle><date>2006-12-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>88</volume><issue>12</issue><spage>1596</spage><epage>1602</epage><pages>1596-1602</pages><issn>0301-620X</issn><issn>2049-4394</issn><eissn>2044-5377</eissn><eissn>2049-4408</eissn><coden>JBSUAK</coden><abstract>The role of modular tibial implants in total knee replacement is not fully defined. We performed a prospective randomised controlled clinical trial using radiostereophotogrammetric analysis to compare the performance of an all-polyethylene tibia with a metal-backed cruciate-retaining condylar design, PFC-Sigma total knee replacement for up to 24 months. There were 51 patients who were randomised into two treatment groups. There were 10 subsequent withdrawals, leaving 21 all-polyethylene and 20 metal-backed tibial implants. No patient was lost to follow-up. There were no significant demographic differences between the groups. At two years one metal-backed implant showed migration > 1 mm, but no polyethylene implant reached this level. There was a significant increase in the SF-12 and Oxford knee scores after operation in both groups. In an uncomplicated primary total knee replacement the all-polyethylene PFC-Sigma tibial prosthesis showed no statistical difference in migration from that of the metal-backed counterpart. There was no difference in the clinical results as assessed by the SF-12, the Oxford knee score, alignment or range of movement at 24 months, although these assessment measures were not statistically powered in this study.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>British Editorial Society of Bone and Joint Surgery</pub><pmid>17159170</pmid><doi>10.1302/0301-620X.88B12.17695</doi><tpages>7</tpages><edition>British volume</edition><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0301-620X |
| ispartof | Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume, 2006-12, Vol.88 (12), p.1596-1602 |
| issn | 0301-620X 2049-4394 2044-5377 2049-4408 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68230790 |
| source | MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Aged Aged, 80 and over Arthritis, Rheumatoid - surgery Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods Biological and medical sciences Female Humans Knee Joint - physiopathology Knee Prosthesis Male Medical sciences Orthopedic surgery Osteoarthritis, Knee - surgery Photogrammetry - methods Polyethylene Prospective Studies Prosthesis Design Range of Motion, Articular Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Tibia - surgery Treatment Outcome |
| title | Should we reconsider all-polyethylene tibial implants in total knee replacement? |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T13%3A27%3A00IST&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=Should%20we%20reconsider%20all-polyethylene%20tibial%20implants%20in%20total%20knee%20replacement?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20bone%20and%20joint%20surgery.%20British%20volume&rft.au=MULLER,%20S.%20D&rft.date=2006-12-01&rft.volume=88&rft.issue=12&rft.spage=1596&rft.epage=1602&rft.pages=1596-1602&rft.issn=0301-620X&rft.eissn=2044-5377&rft.coden=JBSUAK&rft_id=info:doi/10.1302/0301-620X.88B12.17695&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E68230790%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=229697951&rft_id=info:pmid/17159170&rfr_iscdi=true |