Kooner Sahil, Johal Herman, Clark Marcia
Department of Orthopedics, University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine, Foothills Medical Centre, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Center for Evidence-Based Orthopaedics, Division of Orthopaedics, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Arthroplast Today. 2017 Nov 29;3(4):309-314. doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2017.02.006. eCollection 2017 Dec.
Interest in bicompartmental knee arthroplasty (BKA) for the treatment of medial patellofemoral osteoarthritis (MPFOA) has grown in recent years because BKA offers a bone and ligament-preserving alternative to total knee arthroplasty (TKA). BKA only resurfaces the diseased compartments, while preserving proprioception and native knee kinematics. Therefore, the objective of this study is to assess knee function, perioperative morbidity, and implant survivability in patients undergoing BKA vs TKA for MPFOA.
The databases MEDLINE, PUBMED, and EMBASE were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized comparative studies comparing BKA with TKA for the treatment of MPFOA were included for further analysis. The primary outcome of interest was knee function. Secondary outcomes included range of movement, operation length, intraoperative blood loss, hospital length of stay, postoperative complications, and rate of revision length. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Meta-analysis was performed by pooling the results of the selected studies when possible.
Six studies were selected for inclusion (4 prospective studies and 2 retrospective cohort studies). In total, 274 patients and 277 knees were included for analysis. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups at any time points in terms of knee function, length of stay, complication rate, or revision rate, when monolithic BKA designs were controlled for. BKA did result in significantly decreased intraoperative blood loss, at the expense of increased operative length compared with TKA.
The use of modular BKA for MPFOA is comparable with TKA in terms of short-term function, complication rate, and revision rate. BKA reduces intraoperative blood losses, but it is also more technically demanding, resulting in increased operation length. The use of modular BKA has acceptable short-term outcomes, but more long-term data are needed before it can be recommended for routine use in the treatment of MPFOA. The selection of modular BKA should be determined on a patient-specific basis. Currently, there is no evidence to suggest the use of monolithic BKA designs because of their high revision and failure rate.
近年来,双间室膝关节置换术(BKA)治疗内侧髌股关节炎(MPFOA)越来越受到关注,因为BKA为全膝关节置换术(TKA)提供了一种保留骨骼和韧带的替代方案。BKA仅对病变间室进行表面置换,同时保留本体感觉和膝关节的自然运动学。因此,本研究的目的是评估接受BKA与TKA治疗MPFOA患者的膝关节功能、围手术期发病率和植入物生存率。
系统检索MEDLINE、PUBMED和EMBASE数据库。纳入比较BKA与TKA治疗MPFOA的随机对照试验和非随机对照研究进行进一步分析。主要关注的结局是膝关节功能。次要结局包括活动范围、手术时长、术中失血、住院时间、术后并发症和翻修率。采用GRADE方法评估证据质量。尽可能汇总所选研究的结果进行荟萃分析。
选择6项研究纳入(4项前瞻性研究和2项回顾性队列研究)。总共纳入274例患者和277个膝关节进行分析。在控制整体式BKA设计的情况下,两组在任何时间点的膝关节功能、住院时间、并发症发生率或翻修率方面均无显著差异。与TKA相比,BKA确实导致术中失血显著减少,但以手术时长增加为代价。
就短期功能、并发症发生率和翻修率而言,使用模块化BKA治疗MPFOA与TKA相当。BKA减少了术中失血,但技术要求也更高,导致手术时长增加。模块化BKA的短期结局可接受,但在推荐其用于MPFOA的常规治疗之前,还需要更多的长期数据。模块化BKA的选择应根据患者的具体情况确定。目前,没有证据表明应使用整体式BKA设计,因为其翻修率和失败率较高。