Background: Various surface modifications are used in uncemented total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) to enhance bony ingrowth and longevity of implants. This study aimed to identify which surface... Show moreBackground: Various surface modifications are used in uncemented total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) to enhance bony ingrowth and longevity of implants. This study aimed to identify which surface modifications are used, whether they are associated with different revision rates for aseptic loosening, and which are underperforming compared to cemented implants.Methods: Data on all cemented and uncemented TKAs used between 2007 and 2021 were obtained from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. Uncemented TKAs were divided into groups based on their surface modifications. Revision rates for aseptic loosening and major revisions were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier, Competing-Risk, Log-rank tests, and Cox regression analyses were used. In total, 235,500 cemented and 10,749 uncemented primary TKAs were included. The different uncemented TKA groups included the following: 1,140 porous-hydroxyapatite (HA); 8,450 Porous-uncoated; 702 Grit-blasteduncoated; and 172 Grit-blasted-Titanium-nitride (TiN) implants.Results: The 10-year revision rates for aseptic loosening and major revision of the cemented TKAs were 1.3 and 3.1%, and for uncemented TKAs 0.2 and 2.3% (porous-HA), 1.3 and 2.9% (porous-uncoated), 2.8 and 4.0% (grit-blasted-uncoated), and 7.9% and 17.4% (grit-blasted-TiN), respectively. Both type of revision rates varied significantly between the uncemented groups (log-rank tests, P < .001, P < .001). All grit-blasted implants had a significantly higher risk of aseptic loosening (P < .01), and porous-uncoated implants had a significantly lower risk of aseptic loosening than cemented implants (P 1/4 .03) after 10 years.Conclusion: There were 4 main uncemented surface modifications identified, with different revision rates for aseptic loosening. Implants with porous-HA and porous-uncoated had the best revision rates, at least equal to cemented TKAs. Grit-blasted implants with and without TiN underperformed, possibly due to the interaction of other factors.(c) 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Show less
AimsThe primary aim of this study was to compare the migration of the femoral and tibial components of the cementless rotating platform Attune and Low Contact Stress (LCS) total knee arthroplasty ... Show moreAimsThe primary aim of this study was to compare the migration of the femoral and tibial components of the cementless rotating platform Attune and Low Contact Stress (LCS) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) designs, two years postoperatively, using radiostereometric analysis (RSA) in order to assess the risk of the development of aseptic loosening. A secondary aim was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) between the designs.MethodsA total of 61 TKAs were analyzed in this randomized clinical RSA trial. RSA examinations were performed one day and three, six, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. The maximal total point motion (MPTM), translations, and rotations of the components were analyzed. PROMs and clinical data were collected preoperatively and at six weeks and three, six, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Linear mixed effect modelling was used for statistical analyses.ResultsThe mean MTPM two years postoperatively (95% confidence interval (CI)) of the Attune femoral component (0.92 mm (0.75 to 1.11)) differed significantly from that of the LCS TKA (1.72 mm (1.47 to 2.00), p < 0.001). The Attune femoral component subsided, tilted (anteroposteriorly), and rotated (internal-external) significantly less. The mean tibial MTPM two years postoperatively did not differ significantly, being 1.11 mm (0.94 to 1.30) and 1.17 mm (0.99 to 1.36, p = 0.447) for the Attune and LCS components, respectively. The rate of migration in the second postoperative year was negligible for the femoral and tibial components of both designs. The mean pain-at-rest (numerical rating scale (NRS)-rest) in the Attune group was significantly less compared with that in the LCS group during the entire follow-up period. At three months postoperatively, the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Physical Function Shortform score, the Oxford Knee Score, and the NRS-activity scores were significantly better in the Attune group.ConclusionThe mean MTPM of the femoral components of the cementless rotating platform Attune was significantly less compared with that of the LCS design. This was reflected mainly in significantly less subsidence, posterior tilting, and internal rotation. The mean tibial MTPMs were not significantly different. During the second postoperative year, the components of both designs stabilized and low risks for the development of aseptic loosening are expected. Show less
Background There is an ongoing debate regarding optimal fixation of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), however cost has not been addressed as profoundly. Therefore, the current study primarily aimed to... Show moreBackground There is an ongoing debate regarding optimal fixation of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), however cost has not been addressed as profoundly. Therefore, the current study primarily aimed to compare costs and cost-effectiveness 1 year after cemented or uncemented TKA. A secondary objective was to compare short-term functional outcomes between both groups. Methods A posthoc prospective observational multicenter cohort study of 60 cemented and 50 uncemented Low Contact Stress (LCS) knee systems. Outcome was evaluated using the EuroQol5D-3 L (EQ5D) index, in order to calculate quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Total costs were calculated considering direct costs within the hospital setting (inpatient cost) as well as direct and indirect costs outside the hospital. Cost-effectiveness (total costs per QALY), Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) were compared between cemented and uncemented cases at 1 year after surgery. HealthBASKET project, a micro-costing approach, represents the Dutch costs and situation and was used to calculate hospital stay. (In) direct costs outside the healthcare (medical cost and productivity cost) were determined using two validated questionnaires. Results Median costs per QALY were similar between cemented and uncemented TKA patients (euro16,269 and euro17,727 respectively;p = 0.50). Median OKS (44 and 42;p = 0.79), EQ5D (0.88 and 0.90;p = 0.82) and NRS for pain (1.0 and 1.0;p = 0.48) and satisfaction (9.0 and 9.0;p = 0.15) were also comparable between both groups. Conclusion For this type of knee implant (LCS), inpatient hospital costs and costs after hospitalization were comparable between groups. Show less
