-
Journal of Robotic Surgery Jun 2024This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to compare important clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes between robotic-assisted total... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Comparative Study Review
Clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes of robotic assisted versus conventional total hip arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
This systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aims to compare important clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes between robotic-assisted total hip arthroplasty (RATHA) and conventional total hip arthroplasty (COTHA) in patients with hip osteoarthritis. We identified published RCTs comparing RATHA with COTHA in Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Library. Two reviewers independently performed study screening, risk of bias assessment and data extraction. Main outcomes were major complications, revision, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and radiological outcomes. We included 8 RCTs involving 1014 patients and 977 hips. There was no difference in major complication rate (Relative Risk (RR) 0.78; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.22 to 2.74), revision rate (RR 1.33; 95%CI 0.08 to 22.74), and PROMs (standardized mean difference 0.01; 95%CI - 0.27 to 0.30) between RATHA and COTHA. RATHA resulted in little to no effects on femoral stem alignment (mean difference (MD) - 0.57 degree; 95%CI - 1.16 to 0.03) but yielded overall lower leg length discrepancy (MD - 4.04 mm; 95%CI - 7.08 to - 1.0) compared to COTHA. Most combined estimates had low certainty of evidence mainly due to risk of bias, inconsistency, and imprecision. Based on the current evidence, there is no important difference in clinical and functional outcomes between RATHA and COTHA. The trivial higher radiological accuracy was also unlikely to be clinically meaningful. Regardless, more robust evidence is needed to improve the quality and strength of the current evidence.PROSPERO registration: the protocol was registered in the PROSPERO database (CRD42023453294). All methods were carried out in accordance with relevant guidelines and regulations.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Osteoarthritis, Hip; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Reoperation; Radiography; Female; Male
PubMed: 38888718
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-024-01949-z -
Acta Orthopaedica Jun 2024International variation exists in the types of shoulder replacement used for treatment of specific diseases. Implant choice continues to evolve without high-quality... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
International variation exists in the types of shoulder replacement used for treatment of specific diseases. Implant choice continues to evolve without high-quality evidence. Our aim was to evaluate trends in incidence rates of shoulder replacement and assess any recent changes in practice between countries by using registry data.
METHODS
Patient characteristics, indication and year of surgery, type of replacement, and collection methods of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) was extracted from 11 public joint registries. Meta-analyses examined use of reverse total shoulder replacement (RTSR) for osteoarthritis, cuff tear arthropathy, and acute fracture; use of anatomical total shoulder replacement (TSR) for osteoarthritis; and use of humeral hemiarthroplasty for fracture.
RESULTS
The annual growth rate of shoulder replacements performed is 6-15% (2011-2019). The use of RTSR has almost doubled (93%). RTSR is now universally performed for cuff tear arthropathy (97.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 96.0-98.1). Its use for avascular necrosis, trauma, and inflammatory arthropathy is increasing. The use of RTSR was similar (43.1%, CI 30.0-57.2) versus TSR (44.7%, CI 31.1-59.1) for osteoarthritis. The types of PROMs used, collection time points, and response rates lack standardization. COVID-19 had a varying inter-registry impact on incidence rates.
CONCLUSION
The incidence of shoulder replacements has grown. Use of RTSR has increased for all disease indications despite limited high-quality evidence driving this change in indications outside of cuff arthropathy. Consequently, less variation is observed in international practice. Existing differences now relate to use of newer implant types and methodology of PROMs collection, which prevents international comparison and outcome analysis.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Shoulder; Registries; Shoulder Joint; Osteoarthritis; Rotator Cuff Tear Arthropathy; Hemiarthroplasty
PubMed: 38888103
DOI: 10.2340/17453674.2024.40948 -
Cureus Jun 2024Periprosthetic humeral fractures are a rare and increasing entity due to the rising number of shoulder arthroplasties. These fractures pose a significant challenge for...
INTRODUCTION
Periprosthetic humeral fractures are a rare and increasing entity due to the rising number of shoulder arthroplasties. These fractures pose a significant challenge for surgeons, with incidence rates ranging from 1.2% to 19.4%. They can occur intraoperatively or as late complications, often influenced by trauma, prosthetic wear, or loosening.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
A retrospective study was conducted on all patients admitted with periprosthetic humeral fractures over a four-year period (2018-2022). Inclusion criteria were postoperative periprosthetic humeral fractures with a minimum follow-up of six months. Exclusion criteria included intraoperative fractures, fractures of the glenoid or coracoid process, and cases with follow-up of less than six months or incomplete data.
RESULTS
The study included six patients with an average age of 83.1 years, predominantly female (four females and two males). All fractures occurred postoperatively: four on reverse shoulder prostheses, one on an anatomical prosthesis, and one on a hemiarthroplasty. The mechanism was low-energy trauma, with fractures occurring an average of 96 months post-initial surgery. Fractures were classified using the Campbell system: three in region 4, two in region 3, and one in region 2. Radiographs showed four cemented and two uncemented stems. Three patients underwent surgical treatment with either prosthetic replacement using a long stem and fracture cerclage or locking compression plate (LCP). The remaining three patients were treated conservatively with a Sarmiento brace due to advanced age, bone fragility, low functional demand, and comorbidities. Radial nerve palsy was a complication in two patients post-trauma, with one recovering fully and the other not recovering before death due to associated complications. All fractures consolidated within an average of seven months (range: 5-8 months). Functional recovery was satisfactory with a median Constant-Murley Shoulder Score of 69 in surgically treated patients, with range of motion between 100 and 140 degrees. Only two conservatively treated patients achieved fracture consolidation, and functional recovery was inadequate.
DISCUSSION
Managing periprosthetic humeral fractures remains challenging. Treatment goals include fracture healing, maintaining prosthetic stem stability, preserving glenohumeral motion, and restoring shoulder function. Despite various classification systems, the literature shows limited and variable data on incidence and treatment outcomes. Conservative treatment may be considered for stable implants and acceptable alignment, but surgical intervention is often necessary for displaced fractures or implant loosening.
CONCLUSION
The management of periprosthetic humeral fractures requires a tailored, multidisciplinary approach to optimize outcomes and improve patient quality of life. With the increasing incidence of these fractures due to the growing use of shoulder arthroplasty, ongoing research and development of new techniques and therapeutic strategies are essential to address this clinical challenge effectively.
PubMed: 38887746
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.62534 -
Frontiers in Bioengineering and... 2024Our group has developed a novel artificial cervical joint complex (ACJC) as a motion preservation instrument for cervical corpectomy procedures. Through finite element...
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Our group has developed a novel artificial cervical joint complex (ACJC) as a motion preservation instrument for cervical corpectomy procedures. Through finite element analysis (FEA), this study aims to assess this prosthesis's mobility and stability in the context of physiological reconstruction of the cervical spine.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A finite element (FE)model of the subaxial cervical spine (C3-C7) was established and validated. ACJC arthroplasty, anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion (ACCF), and two-level cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA) were performed at C4-C6. Range of motion (ROM), intervertebral disc pressure (IDP), facet joint stress (FJS), and maximum von Mises stress on the prosthesis and vertebrae during loading were compared.
RESULTS
Compared to the intact model, the ROM in all three surgical groups demonstrated a decline, with the ACCF group exhibiting the most significant mobility loss, and the highest compensatory motion in adjacent segments. ACJC and artificial cervical disc prosthesis (ACDP) well-preserved cervical mobility. In the ACCF model, IDP and FJS in adjacent segments increased notably, whereas the index segments experienced the most significant FJS elevation in the CDA model. The ROM, IDP, and FJS in both index and adjacent segments of the ACJC model were intermediate between the other two. Stress distribution of ACCF instruments and ACJC prosthesis during the loading process was more dispersed, resulting in less impact on the adjacent vertebrae than in the CDA model.
CONCLUSION
The biomechanical properties of the novel ACJC were comparable to the ACCF in constructing postoperative stability and equally preserved physiological mobility of the cervical spine as CDA without much impact on adjacent segments and facet joints. Thus, the novel ACJC effectively balanced postoperative stability with cervical motion preservation.
PubMed: 38887613
DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2024.1400614 -
Acta Orthopaedica Jun 2024Thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) joint osteoarthritis (OA) is increasingly treated with total joint arthroplasty (TJA). We aimed to perform a systematic review and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Thumb carpometacarpal (CMC) joint osteoarthritis (OA) is increasingly treated with total joint arthroplasty (TJA). We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of the benefits and harms of the TJA for thumb CMC OA compared with other treatment strategies.
PATIENTS AND METHODS
We performed a systematic search on MEDLINE and CENTRAL databases on August 2, 2023. We included randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of TJA in people with thumb CMC joint OA regardless of the stage or etiology of the disease or comparator. The outcomes were pooled with a random effect meta-analysis.
RESULTS
We identified 4 studies randomizing 420 participants to TJA or trapeziectomy. At 3 months, TJA's benefits for pain may exceed the clinically important difference. However, after 1-year follow-up TJA does not improve pain compared with trapeziectomy (mean difference 0.53 points on a 0 to 10 scale; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-0.81). Furthermore, it provides a transient benefit in hand function at 3 months (measured with Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire, scale 0-100, lower is better) compared with trapeziectomy with or without ligament reconstruction tendon interposition. The benefit in function diminished to a clinically unimportant level at 1-year follow-up (4.4 points better; CI 0.42-8.4).
CONCLUSION
Transient benefit in hand function for TJA implies that it could be a preferable option over trapeziectomy for people who consider fast postoperative recovery important. However, current evidence fails to inform us if TJA carries long-term higher risks of revisions compared with trapeziectomy.
Topics: Humans; Carpometacarpal Joints; Osteoarthritis; Thumb; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Arthroplasty, Replacement; Trapezium Bone
PubMed: 38887076
DOI: 10.2340/17453674.2024.40816 -
BMC Surgery Jun 2024To investigate the outcome and prognosis after Unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) in patients with medial compartment arthritis of the knee combined with anterior...
BACKGROUND
To investigate the outcome and prognosis after Unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) in patients with medial compartment arthritis of the knee combined with anterior cruciate ligament(ACL) dysfunction.
METHODS
A total of 122 patients diagnosed with knee osteoarthritis and treated with medial mobile platform unicondylar replacement at our center from January 2019 to December 2021 were retrospectively included in the study, and were divided into two groups according to ACL function, namely the normal ACL function group (ACLF) and the poor ACL function (N-ACLF) group. The postoperative results and prognosis of the two groups were evaluated and compared.
RESULTS
This study included 122 patients who underwent UKA surgery. There were no statistical differences in preoperative and postoperative posterior tibial tilt angle, knee mobility, KOOS, and prognosis between the two groups (P > 0.05).
CONCLUSION
For medial compartment arthritis of the knee combined with ACL malfunction, surgery resulted in pain relief, improved quality of life and a good prognosis for such patients. It is hoped that clinicians will perform UKA in patients with ACL dysfunction after a comprehensive evaluation to improve their quality of life.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Female; Male; Retrospective Studies; Osteoarthritis, Knee; Middle Aged; Aged; Treatment Outcome; Quality of Life; Prognosis; Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injuries
PubMed: 38886666
DOI: 10.1186/s12893-024-02482-4 -
Acta Orthopaedica Jun 2024This study aims to assess time trends in case-mix and to evaluate the risk of revision and causes following primary THA, TKA, and UKA in private and public hospitals in...
Time trends in case-mix and risk of revision following hip and knee arthroplasty in public and private hospitals: a cross-sectional analysis based on 476,312 procedures from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
This study aims to assess time trends in case-mix and to evaluate the risk of revision and causes following primary THA, TKA, and UKA in private and public hospitals in the Netherlands.
METHODS
We retrospectively analyzed 476,312 primary arthroplasties (public: n = 413,560 and private n = 62,752) implanted between 2014 and 2023 using Dutch Arthroplasty Register data. We explored patient demographics, procedure details, trends over time, and revisions per hospital type. Adjusted revision risk was calculated for comparable subgroups (ASA I/II, age ≤ 75, BMI ≤ 30, osteoarthritis diagnosis, and moderate-high socioeconomic status (SES).
RESULTS
The volume of THAs and TKAs in private hospitals increased from 4% and 9% in 2014, to 18% and 21% in 2022. Patients in private hospitals were younger, had lower ASA classification, lower BMI, and higher SES compared with public hospital patients. In private hospitals, age and ASA II proportion increased over time. Multivariable Cox regression demonstrated a lower revision risk for primary THA (HR 0.7, CI 0.7-0.8), TKA (HR 0.8, CI 0.7-0.9), and UKA (HR 0.8, CI 0.7-0.9) in private hospitals. After initial arthroplasty in private hospitals, 49% of THA and 37% of TKA revisions were performed in public hospitals.
CONCLUSION
Patients in private hospitals were younger, had lower ASA classification, lower BMI, and higher SES com-pared with public hospital patients. The number of arthroplasties increased in private hospitals, with a lower revision risk compared with public hospitals.
Topics: Humans; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Netherlands; Hospitals, Private; Male; Female; Hospitals, Public; Reoperation; Aged; Middle Aged; Registries; Retrospective Studies; Cross-Sectional Studies; Diagnosis-Related Groups; Risk Factors; Aged, 80 and over
PubMed: 38884413
DOI: 10.2340/17453674.2024.40906 -
Cureus May 2024The patient, a 69-year-old female, presented one year after receiving a total elbow arthroplasty with a nonunion periprosthetic fracture of the humerus. Due to the...
The patient, a 69-year-old female, presented one year after receiving a total elbow arthroplasty with a nonunion periprosthetic fracture of the humerus. Due to the patient's severe osteoarthritis of the ipsilateral shoulder and significant humeral deformity, a procedure linking the total elbow arthroplasty to the reverse shoulder implant via a cemented allograft-composite linkage sleeve was performed. Previous literature suggests upper extremity salvage surgery using large-scale allografts is successful in treating large tumor or infection-derived defects, though data is lacking as to whether this treatment is effective in periprosthetic fractures in patients with significant comorbidities. This patient's success in the postoperative year supports the use of allograft-composite reconstruction followed by linkage to a reverse shoulder implant as a salvage treatment for periprosthetic fractures under certain conditions, such as multiple adjacent implants, bone deformity, and severe osteoarthritis.
PubMed: 38883071
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.60491 -
Cureus May 2024Modular dual mobility total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be associated with complications if the liner is malseated, which can be unappreciated intraoperatively. A...
Modular dual mobility total hip arthroplasty (THA) can be associated with complications if the liner is malseated, which can be unappreciated intraoperatively. A meticulous surgical technique is needed to ensure that the liner is perfectly seated. In addition, a malseated liner can be missed if the postoperative films are not carefully reviewed by the surgeon. We present three cases of THA associated with a malseated modular dual mobility liner. In one case, the malpositioned liner was appreciated intraoperatively, but it was wedged in place and could not be removed. The entire shell needed to be revised. In two other cases, malseating was not detected intra-operatively. Both were appreciated postoperatively, and early revision surgery was needed.
PubMed: 38883007
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.60437 -
Arthroplasty Today Jun 2024Stiffness is a common complication following total knee arthroplasty. Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) is an intervention that can potentially improve range of motion...
BACKGROUND
Stiffness is a common complication following total knee arthroplasty. Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) is an intervention that can potentially improve range of motion (ROM). Continuous passive motion (CPM) therapy has been utilized to enhance post-MUA ROM, but its effectiveness remains debated. This study assesses whether CPM therapy after MUA results in superior ROM outcomes compared to MUA alone.
METHODS
A retrospective analysis included patients undergoing MUA for stiff primary total knee arthroplasty between 2017 and 2022. Demographics and ROM data were collected. Patients were in 2 groups: those who received inpatient CPM post-MUA and those who received day-case MUA alone. Complications and further interventions were noted.
RESULTS
Of 126 patients, 39 underwent MUA only (day-case group), and 87 received CPM and MUA (inpatient group). Mean preoperative ROM was 69.4° (standard deviation [SD]:18.0°) and 73.9° (SD: 18.1°) for inpatient and day-case groups, respectively. Mean post-MUA ROM improved by 39.4° (SD: 17.7°) and 25.5° (SD: 11.1°) inpatient groups and day-case, respectively. The mean percentage of ROM gained at MUA maintained at final follow-up was 63.7% (40.8%) and 67.0% (47.5%) inpatient and day-case groups, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
This study found no advantage in the routine use of CPM post-MUA for stiff total knee replacement patients, suggesting it may not provide sustained ROM improvements compared to MUA alone. Cost-effectiveness and patient selection merit further investigation.
PubMed: 38882466
DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2024.101397