-
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related... Aug 2011Highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) was introduced to reduce wear and osteolysis in total joint arthroplasty. While many studies report wear and osteolysis... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) was introduced to reduce wear and osteolysis in total joint arthroplasty. While many studies report wear and osteolysis associated with HXLPE, analytical techniques, clinical study design and followup, HXLPE formulation and implant design characteristics, and patient populations differ substantially among investigations, complicating a unified perspective.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
Literature on first-generation HXLPE was summarized. We systematically reviewed the radiographic wear data and incidence of osteolysis for HXLPE in hip and knee arthroplasty.
METHODS
PubMed identified 391 studies; 28 met inclusion criteria for a weighted-averages analysis of two-dimensional femoral head penetration rates. To determine the incidence of osteolysis, we estimated a pooled odds ratio using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Weighted-averages analyses of femoral head penetration rates in HXLPE liners and conventional UHMWPE liners resulted, respectively, in a mean two-dimensional linear penetration rate of 0.042 mm/year based on 28 studies (n=1503 hips) and 0.137 mm/year based on 18 studies (n=695 hips). The pooled odds ratio for the risk of osteolysis in HXLPE versus conventional liners was 0.13 (95% confidence interval, 0.06-0.27) among studies with minimum 5-year followup. We identified two clinical studies of HXLPE in TKA, preventing systematic analysis of outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
HXLPE liner studies consistently report lower femoral head penetration and an 87% lower risk of osteolysis. Reduction in femoral head penetration or osteolysis risk is not established for large-diameter (>32 mm) metallic femoral heads or ceramic femoral heads of any size. Few studies document the clinical performance of HXLPE in knees.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Cross-Linking Reagents; Femur Head; Hip Prosthesis; Humans; Knee Prosthesis; Materials Testing; Osteolysis; Polyethylenes; Prosthesis Design; Prosthesis Failure
PubMed: 21431461
DOI: 10.1007/s11999-011-1872-4 -
HSS Journal : the Musculoskeletal... Oct 2019Peri-prosthetic bone loss can result from chemical, biological, and mechanical factors. Mechanical stimulation via fluid pressure and flow at the bone-implant interface... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Peri-prosthetic bone loss can result from chemical, biological, and mechanical factors. Mechanical stimulation via fluid pressure and flow at the bone-implant interface may be a significant cause. Evidence supporting mechanically induced osteolysis continues to grow, but there is no synthesis of published clinical and basic science data.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
We sought to review the literature on two questions: (1) What published evidence supports the concept of mechanically induced osteolysis? (2) What is the proposed mechanism of mechanically induced osteolysis, and does it differ from that of particle-induced osteolysis?
METHODS
A systematic review was performed of the PubMed and Web of Science databases. Additional relevant articles were recommended by the senior authors based on their expert opinion. Abstracts were reviewed and the manuscripts pertaining to the study questions were read in full. Studies showing support of mechanically induced osteolysis were quantified and findings summarized.
RESULTS
We identified 49 articles of experimental design supporting the hypothesis that mechanical stimulation of peri-prosthetic bone from fluid pressure and flow can induce osteolysis. While the molecular mechanisms may overlap with those implicated in particle-induced osteolysis, mechanically induced osteolysis appears to be mediated by distinct and parallel pathways.
CONCLUSIONS
The role of mechanical stimuli is increasingly recognized in the pathogenesis of peri-prosthetic osteolysis. Current research aims to elucidate the molecular mechanisms to better target therapeutic interventions.
PubMed: 31624485
DOI: 10.1007/s11420-018-9641-5 -
Danish Medical Journal May 2014Severely painful or dysfunctional destroyed wrists can be reconstructed by fusion, interposition of soft-tissue or by arthroplasty using artificial materials. Total and... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Severely painful or dysfunctional destroyed wrists can be reconstructed by fusion, interposition of soft-tissue or by arthroplasty using artificial materials. Total and partial wrist arthroplasty (T/PWA) has been used on a regular basis since the 1960's. The objective of this study was to review the literature on second, third and fourth generation implants.
METHODS
The review was conducted according to the PRISMA-guidelines. A search was made using a protocolled strategy and well-defined criteria in PubMed, in the Cochrane Library and by screening reference lists.
RESULTS
37 publications describing a total of 18 implants were selected for analysis. 16 of the publications were useful for the evaluation of implant longevity. Despite methodological shortcomings in many of the source documents, a summary estimate was possible.
CONCLUSION
It seems that T/PWA has a good potential to improve function through pain reduction and preservation of mobility. The risk of severe complications - deep infection and instability problems - is small with the available implants. Implant survival of 90-100% at five years are reported in most series - if not all - using newer second generation and third generation implants, but declines from five to eight years. Periprosthetic osteolysis/radiolucency is frequently reported. Its causes and consequences are not clarified.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement; Hand Strength; Humans; Joint Prosthesis; Radiography; Range of Motion, Articular; Wrist Joint
PubMed: 24814740
DOI: No ID Found -
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery.... May 2011We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing cross-linked with conventional polyethylene liners for total hip replacement... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing cross-linked with conventional polyethylene liners for total hip replacement in order to determine whether these liners reduce rates of wear, radiological evidence of osteolysis and the need for revision. The MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases were searched from their inception to May 2010 for all trials involving the use of cross-linked polyethylene in total hip replacement. Eligibility for inclusion in the review included the random allocation of treatments, the use of cross-linked and conventional polyethylene, and radiological wear as an outcome measure. The pooled mean differences were calculated for bedding-in, linear wear rate, three-dimensional linear wear rate, volumetric wear rate and total linear wear. Pooled risk ratios were calculated for radiological osteolysis and revision hip replacement. A search of the literature identified 194 potential studies, of which 12 met the inclusion criteria. All reported a significant reduction in radiological wear for cross-linked polyethylene. The pooled mean differences for linear rate of wear, three-dimensional linear rate of wear, volumetric wear rate and total linear wear were all significantly reduced for cross-linked polyethylene. The risk ratio for radiological osteolysis was 0.40 (95% confidence interval 0.27 to 0.58; I(2) = 0%), favouring cross-linked polyethylene. The follow-up was not long enough to show a difference in the need for revision surgery.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Female; Hip Prosthesis; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Polyethylene; Prosthesis Design; Prosthesis Failure; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Research Design; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 21511923
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B5.25908 -
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology,... Sep 2022Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has experienced exponential growth over the last decade, including increasingly younger patients with high functional demands. Highly... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparable results between crosslinked polyethylene and conventional ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene implanted in total knee arthroplasty: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials.
PURPOSE
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has experienced exponential growth over the last decade, including increasingly younger patients with high functional demands. Highly crosslinked polyethylene (HXLPE) has been proven effective in reducing osteolysis and loosening revisions while improving long-term survival and performance in total hip arthroplasty; nevertheless, this superiority is not demonstrated in TKA. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine whether HXLPE improved overall survival and postoperative functional and radiological outcomes compared to conventional polyethylene (CPE) in TKA.
METHODS
According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guideline, a literature search of five databases (PubMed, Medline, Scopus, Science Direct and Embase) was made. A PICOS model was performed. The initial screening identified 2541 studies. Each eligible clinical article was analysed according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine 2011 Levels of Evidence (LoE). Only randomised clinical trials (RCTs) of LoE 1 and 2 were included. The methodological quality of the articles was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool.
RESULTS
Six clinical studies were included in the final study. This systematic review and meta-analysis were registered on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). A total of 2285 knees were included. Eight outcomes (total reoperations, reoperations for prosthesis loosening and infections, radiolucent lines, osteolysis, mechanical failure, postoperative KSS knee score and function score) were analysed. For none of them, a statistically significant difference was found about the superiority of HXLPE over CPE (p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS
There were no statistically significant differences between HXLPE and CPE for TKA concerning clinical, radiological, and functional outcomes; nevertheless, HXLPE did not show higher failure rates or complications and can be safely used for TKA.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
II.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Humans; Knee Prosthesis; Osteolysis; Polyethylene; Polyethylenes; Prosthesis Design; Prosthesis Failure; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 35182171
DOI: 10.1007/s00167-022-06879-7 -
JSES International Mar 2020Numerous fixed-stem implants exist for radial head arthroplasty; therefore, we conducted a systematic review to compare the safety and efficacy of different types of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Numerous fixed-stem implants exist for radial head arthroplasty; therefore, we conducted a systematic review to compare the safety and efficacy of different types of fixed-stem implants.
METHODS
We conducted a literature search, updated from a previous systematic review, to identify studies evaluating a fixed-stem radial head arthroplasty implant for any indication. We extracted data on revision rates, specific complications, and functional scores. We pooled results across studies using a random-effects method, using proportions for dichotomous data and mean values for functional scores. We analyzed outcomes by indication and specific implant.
RESULTS
We included 31 studies. Studies included patients with radial head fractures only, terrible-triad injuries, or Essex-Lopresti injuries or included a heterogeneous population. We identified 15 different fixed-stem implants. The results of our analysis revealed that patients with terrible-triad injuries may be at an increased risk of revision and instability and patients with Essex-Lopresti injuries may be at an increased risk of arthritis, capitellar erosion, and osteolysis. After removing these outliers and pooling the results by specific device, we observed variability across devices in the rates of revision, arthritis, capitellar erosion, instability, and osteolysis, as well as in functional scores.
CONCLUSION
Differences were seen across different implants in revision rates, certain complications, and functional scores. This study highlighted that these devices should be evaluated within the context of the patient population under examination, as patients with Essex-Lopresti or terrible-triad injuries may demonstrate worse outcomes relative to those with a fracture only.
PubMed: 32195463
DOI: 10.1016/j.jseint.2019.11.003 -
Annals of Translational Medicine May 2019Mechanical instability is one of the two main indications for surgical intervention in patients with metastatic spine disease. Since its publication in 2010, the Spinal... (Review)
Review
Mechanical instability is one of the two main indications for surgical intervention in patients with metastatic spine disease. Since its publication in 2010, the Spinal Instability Neoplastic Score (SINS) has been the most commonly used means of assessing mechanical instability. To prove clinically valuable though, diagnostic tests must demonstrate consistency across measures and across observers. Here we report a systematic review and meta-analysis of all prior reports of intraobserver and interobserver reliability of the SINS score. To identify articles, we queried the PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases for all full-text English articles reporting interobserver or intraobserver reliability for the SINS score, category, or a domain of the SINS score. Articles reporting confidence intervals for these metrics were then subjected to meta-analysis to identify pooled estimates of reliability. Of 167 unique studies identified, seven met inclusion criteria and were subjected to qualitative review and meta-analysis. Intraobserver reliability for SINS score was found to be near perfect [estimate =0.815; 90% CI (0.661-0.969)] and interobserver reliability was substantial [0.673; (0.227-1.12)]. Intraobserver and interobserver reliability among spine surgeons was significantly better than reliability across all observers (both P<0.0001). Qualitative analysis suggested that increased surgeon experience may be associated with greater intraobserver and interobserver reliability among spine surgeons. On the whole, meta-analysis of the available literature suggests SINS to have good intraobserver and interobserver reliability, giving it the potential to be a valuable guide to the management of patients with spinal metastases. Further research is required to demonstrate that SINS score correlates with the clinical decision to stabilize.
PubMed: 31297383
DOI: 10.21037/atm.2019.01.65 -
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related... Dec 2014Identification of biomarkers associated with wear and tribocorrosion in joint arthroplasty would be helpful to enhance early detection of aseptic loosening and/or... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Identification of biomarkers associated with wear and tribocorrosion in joint arthroplasty would be helpful to enhance early detection of aseptic loosening and/or osteolysis and to improve understanding of disease progression. There have been several new reports since the last systematic review (which covered research through mid-2008) justifying a new assessment.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
We sought to determine which biomarkers have the most promise for early diagnosis and monitoring of aseptic loosening and/or osteolysis related to wear or corrosion in total joint arthroplasty.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review using MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, covering the period through December 2013, and identified 1050 articles. We restricted the definition of biomarker to biomolecules and imaging parameters useful for diagnosis and monitoring of disease progression, only including articles in English. We chose 65 articles for full review, including 44 from the original search and 21 from subsequent hand searches. We used the 22 articles in which patients with total joint arthroplasty who had aseptic loosening and/or periimplant osteolysis unrelated to sepsis had been compared with patients with total joint arthroplasty with stable implants. There were 90 comparisons of these two patient populations involving 35 different biomarkers.
RESULTS
Diagnostic accuracy was assessed in nine of the 90 comparisons with the highest accuracy found for tartrate-resistant acid phosphatase 5b (0.96), although a separate comparison for this biomarker found a lower accuracy (0.76). Accuracy of > 0.80 was also found for crosslinked n-telopeptide of type I collagen, osteoprotegerin, and deoxypyridinoline. The most studied markers, tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin-1β, were found to differ in the affected and control groups in < 30% of the comparisons. Thirty of the 35 biomarkers were studied in four or fewer separate comparisons with nearly half of the biomarkers (17) studied in only one comparison. Many of the comparisons were not able to eliminate a number of confounding variables, and there was only one prospective study.
CONCLUSIONS
Currently, there are no validated biomarkers for early diagnosis and monitoring of the biological sequelae of wear or tribocorrosion, although there are some promising leads, including markers of bone turnover.
Topics: Arthroplasty, Replacement; Biomarkers; Biomechanical Phenomena; Corrosion; Diagnostic Imaging; Humans; Joint Prosthesis; Joints; Osteolysis; Predictive Value of Tests; Prosthesis Design; Prosthesis Failure; Risk Factors; Stress, Mechanical; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24668073
DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3580-3 -
Is there evidence for a superior method of socket fixation in hip arthroplasty? A systematic review.International Orthopaedics Aug 2011Total hip arthroplasty has been a very succesful orthopaedic procedure. The optimal fixation method of the acetabular component however, has not yet been defined. (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
PURPOSE
Total hip arthroplasty has been a very succesful orthopaedic procedure. The optimal fixation method of the acetabular component however, has not yet been defined.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review using the Medline and Embase databases to find evidence for the superiority of cemented or cementless acetabular components on short- and long-term clinical and radiological parameters. Methodological quality for randomised trials was assessed using the van Tulder checklist, and for the non randomised studies we used the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale.
RESULTS
Our search strategy revealed 16 randomised controlled trials (RCT) and 19 non RCT studies in which cemented and cementless acetabular components are compared. A best evidence analysis for complications, wear, osteolysis, migration and clinical scores showed no superiority for either cemented or cementless socket in the RCTs. A best evidence analysis for non RCT studies revealed better osteolysis, migration properties and aseptic loosening survival for cementless sockets; however, wear and overall survival favoured the cemented sockets.
CONCLUSIONS
We recommend that an orthopaedic surgeon should choose an established cemented or cementless socket for hip replacement based on patient characteristics, knowledge, experience and preference.
Topics: Acetabulum; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Hip; Bone Cements; Clinical Competence; Databases, Bibliographic; Femur Head; Hip Prosthesis; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Prosthesis Failure; Radiography; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Reoperation
PubMed: 21404024
DOI: 10.1007/s00264-011-1234-6 -
Brain & Spine 2023Cranioplasty is required after decompressive craniectomy (DC) to restore brain protection and cosmetic appearance, as well as to optimize rehabilitation potential from... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Cranioplasty is required after decompressive craniectomy (DC) to restore brain protection and cosmetic appearance, as well as to optimize rehabilitation potential from underlying disease. Although the procedure is straightforward, complications either caused by bone flap resorption (BFR) or graft infection (GI), contribute to relevant comorbidity and increasing health care cost. Synthetic calvarial implants (allogenic cranioplasty) are not susceptible to resorption and cumulative failure rates (BFR and GI) tend therefore to be lower in comparison with autologous bone. The aim of this review and meta-analysis is to pool existing evidence of infection-related cranioplasty failure in autologous allogenic cranioplasty, when bone resorption is removed from the equation.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search in PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science medical databases was performed on three time points (2018, 2020 and 2022). All clinical studies published between January 2010 and December 2022, in which autologous and allogenic cranioplasty was performed after DC, were considered for inclusion. Studies including non-DC cranioplasty and cranioplasty in children were excluded. The cranioplasty failure rate based on GI in both autologous and allogenic groups was noted. Data were extracted by means of standardized tables and all included studies were subjected to a risk of bias (RoB) assessment using the Newcastle-Ottawa assessment tool.
RESULTS
A total of 411 articles were identified and screened. After duplicate removal, 106 full-texts were analyzed. Eventually, 14 studies fulfilled the defined inclusion criteria including one randomized controlled trial, one prospective and 12 retrospective cohort studies. All but one study were rated as of poor quality based on the RoB analysis, mainly due to lacking disclosure why which material (autologous allogenic) was chosen and how GI was defined. The infection-related cranioplasty failure rate was 6.9% (125/1808) for autologous and 8.3% (63/761) for allogenic implants resulting in an OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.13 (Z = 1.24; p = 0.22).
CONCLUSION
In respect to infection-related cranioplasty failure, autologous cranioplasty after decompressive craniectomy does not underperform compared to synthetic implants. This result must be interpreted in light of limitations of existing studies. Risk of graft infection does not seem a valid argument to prefer one implant material over the other. Offering an economically superior, biocompatible and perfect fitting cranioplasty implant, autologous cranioplasty can still have a role as the first option in patients with low risk of developing osteolysis or for whom BFR might not be of major concern.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This systematic review was registered in the international prospective register of systematic reviews. PROSPERO: CRD42018081720.
PubMed: 37383468
DOI: 10.1016/j.bas.2023.101760