Short-term treatment outcome of the trabecular monoblock metal tibial components versus conventional cemented tibial components in total knee arthroplasty

doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-4344.2017.35.003

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Porous tantalum metal has been recognized for its effective initial stability and superior bone consolidation in artificial hip/knee reversions. However, the application of the trabecular monoblock metal tibial components in the primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) still remains controversial. Some scholars think that the non-bone cement fixation of TKA affects the life of prosthesis, and even the soft tissue is easy to be adhered with the porous metal, which results in the stiffness or pain of the knee joint after surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the short-term clinical efficacy of the trabecular monoblock metal and conventional cemented tibial components in TKA.

METHODS: Fourteen patients undergoing unilateral TKA with trabecular monoblock metal tibial components non-bone cement porous tantalum tibial platform, and 14 patients with TKA using conventional cemented tibial components were enrolled. All patients suffered from advanced knee osteoarthritis, and were followed up for 1-3 years to correct the clinical and radiological data.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) No case underwent secondary surgery. (2) The clinical and function American Knee Society Score scales, the range of motion of the knee during flexion and extension, and femorotibial angle at last follow-up did not differ significantly between two groups (P > 0.05). (3) Radiological results revealed no aseptic loosening of the prosthesis, or subsidence and displacement of the tibial platform during follow-up. (4) These findings suggest that the application of trabecular monoblock metal tibial components in TKA can obtain similar clinical and radiological outcomes with the conventional cemented tibial components, but the long-term survival rate of the prosthesis still needs to be further explored.

中国组织工程研究杂志出版内容重点：人工关节；骨植入物；脊柱；骨折；内固定；数字化骨科；组织工程

Key words: Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee, Prosthesis Implantation, Tibia, Follow-Up Studies, Tissue Engineering

CLC Number:

R318

Li Guo-qing, Mohetaer•Momin, Ma Jun. Short-term treatment outcome of the trabecular monoblock metal tibial components versus conventional cemented tibial components in total knee arthroplasty[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2017, 21(35): 5589-5594.

Figures/Tables 4

References

[1] Kurtz SM,Lau E,Ong K,et al.Future young patient demand forprimary and revision joint replacement: national projections from2010 to 2030. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467: 2606-2612.

[2] Charnley J.Arthroplasty of the hip: A new operation. Lancet. 1961;1:1129-1132.

[3] Jain NB,Higgins LD,Ozumba D,et al.Trends in epidemiology of knee arthroplasty in the United States,1990-2000.Arthritis Rheum. 2005;52:3928-3933.

[4] Lombardi AV Jr, Berasi CC, Berend KR. Evolution of tibial fixation in total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2007;22: 25-29.

[5] 张忠,张海森,张冰,等. 全膝关节置换后早期疗效：3种假体的比较[J]. 中国组织工程研究,2014,18(17):2758-2761.

[6] 王国栋,郭艾,强华,等. 活动平台假体人工膝关节置换后的中期随访[J].中国组织工程研究,2014,18(26):4101-4107.

[7] Meneghini RM,Lewallen DG,Hanssen AD. Use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss during revision total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008; 90:78-84.

[8] Nehme A, Lewallen DG, Hanssen AD. Modular porous metal augments for treatment of severe acetabular bone loss during revision hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res.2004;429: 201-208.

[9] Fernandez-Fairen M, Hernandez-Vaquero D, Murcia A, et al. Trabecular metal in total knee arthroplasty associatedwith higher knee scores: a randomized controlled trial.Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471:3543-3553.

[10] Kamath AF, Lee GC, Sheth NP, et al. Prospective results of uncemented tantalum monoblock tibia in total knee arthroplasty: minimum 5-year follow-up in patients younger than 55 years. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26:1390-1395.

[11] Minoda Y, Kobayashi A,Ikebuchi M,et al. Porous tantalum tibial component prevents periprosthetic loss of bone mineral density after total knee arthroplasty for five years–a matched cohort study.J Arthroplasty.2013;28:1760-1764.

[12] Ghalayini SR,Helm AT,McLauchlan GJ.Minimum 6 year results of an uncemented trabecular metal tibial component in total knee arthroplasty. Knee. 2012;19:872-874.

[13] Niemelainen M,Skytta ET,Remes V,Makela K,Eskelinen A.Total knee arthroplasty with an uncemented trabecular metal tibial component:a registry-based analysis. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29:57-60.

[14] Dunbar MJ,Wilson DA,Hennigar AW,et al.Fixation of a trabecular metal knee arthroplasty component. A prospective randomized study.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:1578-1586.

[15] Henricson A,Linder L,Nilsson KG.A trabecular metal tibial component in total knee replacement in patients younger than 60 years:a two-year radiostereophotogrammetric analysis.J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90:1585-1593.

[16] Helm AT, Kerin C, Ghalayini SR, et al. Preliminary results of an uncemented trabecular metal tibial component in total knee arthroplasty.J Arthroplasty. 2009;24:941-944.

[17] Klein GR, Levine HB, Hartzband MA. Removal of a well-fixed trabecular metal monoblock tibial component. J Arthroplasty. 2008;23:619-622.

[18] 吴立东, 金礼斌, Thomas L Bemasek. 全膝关节翻修术中应用金属垫片修复非包容性骨缺损的中期随访[J].中华骨科杂志, 2004,24(4):224-229.

[19] 李展春,陈建伟,李新锋.肿瘤型全膝关节假体置换术治疗胫骨近端骨巨细胞瘤15例分析[J].中国骨与关节杂志, 2013,2(11) : 623-626.

[20] 黄华扬,郑小飞,李凭跃. 全膝关节翻修假体系统建骨缺损和关节稳定性的近期疗效观察[R].全军骨科学术大会, 2010.

[21] 张宇,张永兴,赵庆华 .多孔钽金属在临床骨关节修复中的应用[J].国际骨科学杂志,2015,36(1):36-39.