Literature DB >> 32886142

Outcome of proximal interphalangeal joint replacement with pyrocarbon implants: a long-term longitudinal follow-up study.

Harald F Selig1, Matthias Schulz2, Thomas Pillukat1, Karl Josef Prommersberger1, Jörg van Schoonhoven1, Marion Mühldorfer-Fodor3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to compare the short-, mid-, and long-term results of pyrocarbon PIPJ arthroplasty.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-seven consecutive patients (9 males, 18 females) had arthroplasty for 32 pyrocarbon PIPJ prostheses. Two patients (two joints) were lost for follow-up. Four implants were removed during follow-up. Fifteen patients (18 implants) were available for a long-term follow-up assessment on average 9.7 (9-10.8) years postoperatively and seven patients with eight implants had telephone interviews to calculate the implant survival and complications. Of the 15 patients who came to the latest follow-up, 12 (14 implants) passed each of the three follow-up visits for short-term (ø 19 months), mid-term (ø 54 months), and long-term follow-up (ø 9.8 years) to compare functional and radiological parameters longitudinally.
RESULTS: In total, seven of the 30 joints (23%) required a revision surgery, all within the first 2 years postoperatively, including three arthrodesis due to early infection or dislocation, and one distal component removal due to primary loosening. Three patients required soft tissue revisions. The implant survival after 9 years was 87%. There was minimal pain at rest throughout the 9-year follow-up analysis; pain with activity was rated 1.9 at the short-term assessment, 1.5 at mid-term, and 1.6 at long-term. The average active range of motion was at short-, mid-, and long-term examination 49°, 50°, and 48° and grip strength averaged 24, 24, and 21 kg, respectively. The DASH score was stable with 35, 36, and 33 points. At the long-term follow-up, all evaluated implants showed radiological signs of implant loosening or migration. According to the PIP joint outcome score, 57% resulted finally in a "good" outcome.
CONCLUSIONS: Pyrocarbon PIPJ arthroplasty has a risk of early complications necessitating revision surgeries. In spite of radiological implant migration, good pain relief, grip strength, and high quality-of-life ratings are stable for a long time.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arthroplasty; Osteoarthritis; Prosthesis; Proximal interphalangeal joint; Pyrocarbon; Pyrolytic carbon

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32886142     DOI: 10.1007/s00402-020-03592-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg        ISSN: 0936-8051            Impact factor:   3.067


  3 in total

1.  Systematic review of the introduction, early phase study and evaluation of pyrocarbon proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty.

Authors:  Paul Welford; Natalie S Blencowe; Emily Pardington; Conor S Jones; Jane M Blazeby; Barry G Main
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-10-19       Impact factor: 3.752

2.  Perichondrial Arthroplasty Revisited: Technical Pearls.

Authors:  Ann-Sophie Lafreniere; Mariëlle Saayman; Antoine Lessard; Christiaan Schrag; Justin K Yeung
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2022-08-19

3.  Development and Biomechanical Evaluation of an Anatomical 3D Printing Modularized Proximal Inter-Phalangeal Joint Implant Based on the Computed Tomography Image Reconstructions.

Authors:  Yi-Chao Hunag; Chun-Ming Chang; Shao-Fu Huang; Chia-Heng Hong; Chun-Li Lin
Journal:  Int J Bioprint       Date:  2022-06-10
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.