4.5 Article

Total knee arthroplasty with an oxidised zirconium femoral component TEN-YEAR SURVIVORSHIP ANALYSIS

期刊

BONE & JOINT JOURNAL
卷 98B, 期 1, 页码 58-64

出版社

BRITISH EDITORIAL SOC BONE JOINT SURGERY
DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.98B1.36314

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims Oxidised zirconium was introduced as a material for femoral components in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) as an attempt to reduce polyethylene wear. However, the long-term survival of this component is not known. Methods We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database to assess the ten year survival and clinical and radiological outcomes of an oxidised zirconium total knee arthroplasty with the Genesis II prosthesis. The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and a patient satisfaction scale were used to assess outcome. Results A total of 303 consecutive TKAs were performed in 278 patients with a mean age of 68 years (45 to 89). The rate of survival ten years post-operatively as assessed using Kaplan-Meier analysis was 97% (95% confidence interval 94 to 99) with revision for any reason as the endpoint. There were no revisions for loosening, osteolysis or failure of the implant. There was a significant improvement in all components of the WOMAC score at final follow-up (p < 0.001). The mean individual components of the KOOS score for symptoms (82.4 points; 36 to 100), pain (87.5 points; 6 to 100), activities of daily life (84.9 points; 15 to 100) and quality of life (71.4 points; 6 to 100) were all at higher end of the scale. Discussion This study provides further supportive evidence that the oxidised zirconium TKA gives comparable rates of survival with other implants and excellent functional outcomes ten years post-operatively. Take home message: Total knee arthroplasty with an oxidised zirconium femoral component gives comparable long-term rates of survival and functional outcomes with conventional implants.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据