Dubin J A, Westrich G H
Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, NY, NY, 10021, USA.
J Orthop. 2020 Sep 18;21:532-536. doi: 10.1016/j.jor.2020.09.008. eCollection 2020 Sep-Oct.
Cementless total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is now becoming more acceptable with the advent of newer ongrowth constructs and better initial fixation. It has been proposed that cementless TKA may save OR time and result in a lower incidence of manipulation. This study was designed to assess the difference between cemented and cementless TKA.
Our hospital statistician performed a matched cohort analysis between 127 cementless TKAs and 127 cemented TKRs performed by a single surgeon. Patients were matched on age and BMI. Mean tourniquet time between the cemented and cementless TKAs was assessed as well as the rate of manipulation between these groups. Of note, a tourniquet was routinely used in both the cementless and cemented cohorts to reduce confounding bias.
A total of 127 cementless TKAs with a mean age of 60.8 years and mean BMI 32.2 were compared to 127 cemented TKAs with a mean age of 61.5 years and mean BMI of 32.2 at an average follow-up of 2.0 years. There was a statistically significant reduction in tourniquet time in the cementless TKA cohort at 45.7 min compared to the cemented TKA cohort at 54.8 min (p = 0.001). Estimated blood loss was similar in both the cementless (179.5 ml) and cemented (196 ml) cohorts (p = 0.3) and postoperative outcomes, including UCLA score.In addition, the cementless TKA cohort had a manipulation rate of 0% compared to 3.1% for the cemented TKA group (p = 0.044).
While cementless and cemented TKA have shown similar PROMs and survivorship, we demonstrated a significant reduction in tourniquet time with cementless TKRs, with similar estimated blood loss, and a lower incidence of manipulation with cementless TKRs in this matched cohort study. The increased cost of a cementless implant may be negated if one considers the cost savings of not using cement, the cost savings of not performing manipulations, and the shorter operative time.
随着新型骨长入结构和更好的初始固定方式的出现,非骨水泥全膝关节置换术(TKA)现在越来越被接受。有人提出,非骨水泥TKA可能节省手术时间并降低手法操作的发生率。本研究旨在评估骨水泥型和非骨水泥型TKA之间的差异。
我们医院的统计学家对由一位外科医生进行的127例非骨水泥TKA和127例骨水泥TKR进行了匹配队列分析。患者在年龄和体重指数方面进行了匹配。评估了骨水泥型和非骨水泥型TKA之间的平均止血带时间以及这些组之间的手法操作率。值得注意的是,在非骨水泥型和骨水泥型队列中均常规使用止血带以减少混杂偏倚。
共比较了127例平均年龄60.8岁、平均体重指数32.2的非骨水泥TKA与127例平均年龄61.5岁、平均体重指数32.2的骨水泥TKA,平均随访2.0年。非骨水泥TKA队列的止血带时间为45.7分钟,与骨水泥TKA队列的54.8分钟相比有统计学显著降低(p = 0.001)。非骨水泥组(179.5毫升)和骨水泥组(196毫升)的估计失血量相似(p = 0.3),术后结果包括加州大学洛杉矶分校(UCLA)评分。此外,非骨水泥TKA队列的手法操作率为0%,而骨水泥TKA组为3.1%(p = 0.044)。
虽然非骨水泥型和骨水泥型TKA显示出相似的患者报告结局测量指标(PROMs)和生存率,但在这项匹配队列研究中,我们证明非骨水泥TKR的止血带时间显著缩短,估计失血量相似,且非骨水泥TKR的手法操作发生率更低。如果考虑到不使用骨水泥的成本节省、不进行手法操作的成本节省以及更短的手术时间,非骨水泥植入物增加的成本可能会被抵消。