Beckmann Nicholas A, Mueller Sebastian, Gondan Matthias, Jaeger Sebastian, Reiner Tobias, Bitsch Rudi G
Department of Orthopedics, Trauma Surgery and Spinal Cord Injury, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Department of Traumatology, Department of Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
J Arthroplasty. 2015 Feb;30(2):249-53. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.09.016. Epub 2014 Oct 20.
Aseptic loosening and focal osteolysis are the most common reasons for knee arthroplasty failure. The best treatment remains unclear. We reviewed the literature on the treatment of revision knee arthroplasty using bony structural allografts (476 cases) and porous metal cones (223 cases) to determine if a difference in the revision failure rates was discernable. The failure rates were compared using a logistic regression model with adjustment for discrepancies in FU time and number of grafts used (femoral, tibial, or both). In this analysis, the porous implant shows a significantly decreased loosening rate in AORI 2 and 3 defects. The overall failure rate was also substantially lower in the porous metal group than the structural allograft group; little difference in the infection rates was noted.
无菌性松动和局灶性骨溶解是膝关节置换术失败的最常见原因。最佳治疗方法仍不明确。我们回顾了关于使用骨结构同种异体移植物(476例)和多孔金属锥体(223例)治疗翻修膝关节置换术的文献,以确定翻修失败率是否存在差异。使用逻辑回归模型比较失败率,并对随访时间和使用的移植物数量(股骨、胫骨或两者)的差异进行调整。在该分析中,多孔植入物在AORI 2级和3级缺损中显示出显著降低的松动率。多孔金属组的总体失败率也显著低于结构同种异体移植组;感染率差异不大。