Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg ; 144(3): 1353-1359, 2024 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38214714

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Tibial periprosthetic fractures (TPF) after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are a rare condition that affects about 1% of cases. Known risk factors include age, sex, body mass index (BMI), and bone density, as well as surgical technique and prosthesis design. The purpose of the study was to determine if undersizing of the tibial component in relation to the femoral component increases the risk of tibial periprosthetic fractures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Over a 6-year-period 1542 patients with cemented (n = 363) and uncemented (n = 1179) medial UKA were retrospectively evaluated. Tibial periprosthetic fractures were identified and classified, and epidemiologic data were documented at follow-up. Undersizing was defined as a smaller tibial component compared to the femoral implant. The association of potential risk factors for TPF with the incidence of TPF was investigated with binominal logistic regression. RESULTS: Fourteen patients (0.9%) suffered from TPF at a median of 1 month after surgery. The mean follow-up period was 5.9 ± 1.7 years. Fractures were more common in cases with undersized tibial components [odds ratio (OR) 3.2, p < 0.05]. Furthermore, older age (OR 1.1, p < 0.05) and female sex (OR 6.5, p < 0.05) were identified as significant risk factors, while BMI (p = 0.8) and cemented implantation (p = 0.2) had no effect on fracture rate. Revision surgery included open reduction and internal fixation or conversion to total knee arthroplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Undersizing of implant sizes in UKA increases the risk for TPF especially in patients with small tibial implants. Therefore, mismatched implants should be avoided for UKA particularly when risk factors like obesity, older age, or female gender are present. Tibial periprosthetic fractures were successfully treated by open reduction and internal fixation or conversion to total knee arthroplasty.


Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho , Prótese do Joelho , Osteoartrite do Joelho , Fraturas Periprotéticas , Fraturas da Tíbia , Humanos , Feminino , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Artroplastia do Joelho/métodos , Fraturas Periprotéticas/epidemiologia , Fraturas Periprotéticas/etiologia , Prótese do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Tíbia/cirurgia , Fraturas da Tíbia/etiologia , Fraturas da Tíbia/cirurgia , Osteoartrite do Joelho/cirurgia , Resultado do Tratamento , Articulação do Joelho/cirurgia
2.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord ; 23(1): 597, 2022 Jun 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35729631

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Tibial plateau fractures and tibial implant- loosening are severe complications in cementless unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR). The tibial keel preparation is particularly demanding and different saw blades can be used. It was hypothesized that different blade designs and thickness have an influence on the frequency of tibial plateau fractures and implant-loosening in cementless medial UKR. METHODS: 1258 patients with cementless medial UKR were included in this retrospective study between 2013 and 2020. The tibial keel cut was performed either with a double keel saw blade (DKS; 2.8 mm) and added hand guided pick or a mono reciprocating saw blade (RKB) of different thickness (2.5 mm; 2.65 mm; 2.75 mm). Tibial plateau fracture and loosening were demonstrated by standard two-plane radiographs. Tibial implant-loosening was defined as complete radiolucency and implant migration. Fracture and loosening were combined with pain and loss of function. RESULTS: In 126 patients (10%) the tibial keel was prepared with DKS, in 407 patients (32.4%) with RKB 2.5 mm, in 330 patients (26.2%) with RKB 2.65 mm and in 395 patients (31.4%) with 2.75 mm. In 4 patients (3.17%) with DKS tibial plateau fracture occurred, in 4 patients (0.99%) with 2.5 mm RKB, in 3 patients (0.92%) with 2.65 mm RKB and in 1 patient (0.25%) with 2.75 mm RKB. Significantly fewer fractures occurred with a RKB design (p = 0.007). A negative correlation between fracture incidence and RKB saw blade thickness was found (Spearman-r = - 0.93). No difference for tibial implant-loosening was shown (p = 0.51). CONCLUSION: Different blade designs and thickness have a significant influence on the incidence of tibial plateau fractures and aseptic tibial implant-loosening. The incidence of tibial plateau fractures in cementless medial UKR can be reduced by changing the design and thickness of the tibial keel saw blade. Greater thickness of RKB leads to significantly fewer tibial plateau fractures while the incidence of implant-loosening is not increasing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered and ethical approval was waived by the local ethical committee (No. 2020-1174).


Assuntos
Artroplastia do Joelho , Prótese do Joelho , Fraturas da Tíbia , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Incidência , Prótese do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Desenho de Prótese , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fraturas da Tíbia/diagnóstico por imagem , Fraturas da Tíbia/epidemiologia , Fraturas da Tíbia/cirurgia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA