Literature DB >> 26992719

Do Stemmed Tibial Components in Total Knee Arthroplasty Improve Outcomes in Patients With Obesity?

Sébastien Parratte1,2, Matthieu Ollivier3,4, Alexandre Lunebourg3,4, Nicolas Verdier3,4, Jean Noel Argenson3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical studies have reported that patients with higher body mass index (BMI) are more likely to experience premature failure of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), lower knee scores, and perhaps more pain in the prosthetic joint. However, it is not known whether certain implant design features such as tibial stems might be associated with differences in the frequency of tibial pain in patients with higher BMIs. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Therefore, it was our aim to compare (1) function and pain (as measured by the New Knee Society Score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score [KOOS], and visual analog pain scores); (2) quality of life (as measured by SF-12); and (3) mechanical complications and premature revision (defined as revision before 2 years) between patients with obesity undergoing TKA (BMI > 30 kg/m2) who received either a stemmed or an unstemmed tibial component.
METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, 120 patients with a BMI > 30 kg/m2 scheduled for primary arthritis TKAs and end-stage knee osteoarthritis were included. Patients were stratified into groups defined as moderately obese (BMI 30-35 kg/m2, N = 60) and severely obese (BMI > 35 kg/m2, N = 60) groups. Patients in each stratified subgroup then were randomized to receive either a stemmed (10 mm/100 mm) proximally cemented tibial component or the other, a standard cemented component. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and 2 years after surgery using the new Knee Society Score (KSS), KOOS, SF-12 score, and a visual analog pain score after 100 meters of walking. Although no minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs) have yet been defined for the new KSS, we considered differences smaller than 10 points to be unlikely to be clinically important; the MCID for the KOOS is estimated at 8 to 10 points, the SF-12 to be 4 points, and the visual analog scale to be 2 cm on a 10-cm scale. Patients were followed until death, revision, or for a minimum of 2 years (mean, 3 ± 0.8 years; range, 2-4 years). No patient was lost to followup before 2 years.
RESULTS: Although we found that patients treated with stemmed TKAs had higher functional outcomes, the differences were small and unlikely to be clinically important (subjective KSS mean 69 ± 7 points versus 75 ± 7, mean difference 6 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2-11, p = 0.03; objective KSS mean 80 ± 6 points versus 85 ± 6 points, mean difference 5 points, 95% CI 0-9, p = 0.01). Compared with patients with a stemmed TKA, patients with a standard implant reported lower KOOS pain subscores (81 ± 9 versus 76 ± 8; p = 0.04) and lower KOOS symptom subscores (74 ± 7 versus 68 ± 7; p = 0.03). The proportions of patients experiencing complications were not different with the numbers available for all groups and subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS: Although we detected differences in some patient-reported outcomes scores for pain and function favoring implants with stems, the differences were small and unlikely to be clinically important. Because these stems may have disadvantages, perhaps including difficulty of revision, we cannot draw a strong conclusion in support of their use. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 26992719      PMCID: PMC5174024          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-016-4791-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  28 in total

1.  Tibial component failure mechanisms in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Michael E Berend; Merrill A Ritter; John B Meding; Philip M Faris; E Michael Keating; Ryan Redelman; Gregory W Faris; Kenneth E Davis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Reliability and validity of the evaluation of pain in patients with total knee replacement.

Authors:  M E Boeckstyns; M Backer
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 6.961

3.  Measured resection versus gap balancing for total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Bryan D Springer; Sébastien Parratte; Matthew P Abdel
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-02-27       Impact factor: 4.176

4.  Health-related quality of life and costs in patients with osteoarthritis on waiting list for total knee replacement.

Authors:  M Núñez; E Núñez; J M Segur; F Maculé; A Sanchez; Maria V Hernández; C Vilalta
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2006-09-08       Impact factor: 6.576

Review 5.  The effects of obesity and morbid obesity on outcomes in TKA.

Authors:  Mark J McElroy; Robert Pivec; Kimona Issa; Steven F Harwin; Michael A Mont
Journal:  J Knee Surg       Date:  2013-03-11       Impact factor: 2.757

6.  Increased Aseptic Tibial Failures in Patients With a BMI ≥35 and Well-Aligned Total Knee Arthroplasties.

Authors:  Matthew P Abdel; George F Bonadurer; Matthew T Jennings; Arlen D Hanssen
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 4.757

7.  Does obesity affect the outcomes of primary total knee arthroplasty?

Authors:  Kimona Issa; Robert Pivec; Bhaveen H Kapadia; Tarak Shah; Steven F Harwin; Ronald E Delanois; Michael A Mont
Journal:  J Knee Surg       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 2.757

8.  Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the French version of the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) in knee osteoarthritis patients.

Authors:  P Ornetti; S Parratte; L Gossec; C Tavernier; J-N Argenson; E M Roos; F Guillemin; J F Maillefert
Journal:  Osteoarthritis Cartilage       Date:  2007-10-01       Impact factor: 6.576

9.  Overweight preoperatively impairs clinical outcome after knee arthroplasty: a cohort study of 197 patients 3–5 years after surgery.

Authors:  Anette Liljensøe; Jens Ole Lauersen; Kjeld Søballe; Inger Mechlenburg
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 3.717

10.  Influence of body mass index (BMI) on functional improvements at 3 years following total knee replacement: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Paul Baker; Karthikeyan Muthumayandi; Craig Gerrand; Benjamin Kleim; Karen Bettinson; David Deehan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Pathogenesis and clinical management of obesity-related knee osteoarthritis: Impact of mechanical loading.

Authors:  Lianzhi Chen; Jessica Jun Yi Zheng; Guangyi Li; Jun Yuan; Jay R Ebert; Hengyuan Li; John Papadimitriou; Qingwen Wang; David Wood; Christopher W Jones; Minghao Zheng
Journal:  J Orthop Translat       Date:  2020-05-15       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Failure After Modern Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Study of 18,065 Knees.

Authors:  Michael Pitta; Christina I Esposito; Zhichang Li; Yuo-Yu Lee; Timothy M Wright; Douglas E Padgett
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2017-09-25       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  Prophylactic Tibial Stem Fixation in the Obese: Comparative Early Results in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Joshua T Steere; Michael C Sobieraj; Christopher J DeFrancesco; Craig L Israelite; Charles L Nelson; Atul F Kamath
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2018-09-01

Review 4.  Lower limb joint repair and replacement: an overview.

Authors:  Rocco Aicale; Nicola Maffulli
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2019-12-19

5.  Slight femoral under-correction versus neutral alignment in total knee arthroplasty with preoperative varus knees: a comparative study.

Authors:  Kai Lei; Li-Ming Liu; Peng-Fei Yang; Ran Xiong; De-Jie Fu; Liu Yang; Lin Guo
Journal:  Arthroplasty       Date:  2022-01-07

Review 6.  Mid- to long-term complications and outcome for morbidly obese patients after total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Joost van Tilburg; Mikkel Rathsach Andersen
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2022-05-05
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.