Nikhil Agarwal1,2, Kendrick To3, Bridget Zhang3, Wasim Khan3. 1. Division of Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery, Addenbrooke's Hospital, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK. u09na16@abdn.ac.uk. 2. MBChB Office, University of Aberdeen College of Life Sciences and Medicine, Foresterhill Rd, Aberdeen, AB25 2ZD, UK. u09na16@abdn.ac.uk. 3. Division of Trauma & Orthopaedic Surgery, Addenbrooke's Hospital, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with end-stage single compartment osteoarthritis benefit from the less invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). With increasing financial restraints, some healthcare services have set specific BMI cut-offs when determining patient eligibility for knee arthroplasty due to perceived obesity-related complications. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the effect obesity has on outcomes following UKA, and thus elucidate whether obesity should be a contraindication for UKA. METHODS: A PRISMA systematic review was conducted using five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, PubMed and Web of Science) to identify all clinical studies that examined the effect of obesity on outcomes following UKA. Quantitative meta-analysis was carried out using RevMan 5.3 software. Quality assessment was carried out using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. RESULTS: Thirty studies, including a total of 80 798 patients were analysed. The mean follow- up duration was 5.42 years. Subgroup meta-analyses showed no statistically significant difference following UKA between patients cohorts with and without obesity in overall complication rates (95% CI, P = 0.52), infection rates (95% CI, P = 0.81), and revision surgeries (95% CI, P = 0.06). When further analysing complications, no differences were identified in minor (95% CI, P = 0.23) and major complications (95% CI, P = 0.68), or venous thromboembolism rates (95% CI, P = 0.06). When further analysing revision surgeries, no differences were identified for revisions specifically for infection (95% CI, P = 0.71) or aseptic loosening (95% CI, P = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that obesity does not result in poorer post-operative outcomes following UKA and should not be considered a contraindication for UKA. Future studies, including long-term follow-up RCTs and registry-level analyses, should examine factors associated with obesity and consider stratifying obesity to better delineate any potential differences in outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Patients with end-stage single compartment osteoarthritis benefit from the less invasive unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). With increasing financial restraints, some healthcare services have set specific BMI cut-offs when determining patient eligibility for knee arthroplasty due to perceived obesity-related complications. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the effect obesity has on outcomes following UKA, and thus elucidate whether obesity should be a contraindication for UKA. METHODS: A PRISMA systematic review was conducted using five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, PubMed and Web of Science) to identify all clinical studies that examined the effect of obesity on outcomes following UKA. Quantitative meta-analysis was carried out using RevMan 5.3 software. Quality assessment was carried out using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist. RESULTS: Thirty studies, including a total of 80 798 patients were analysed. The mean follow- up duration was 5.42 years. Subgroup meta-analyses showed no statistically significant difference following UKA between patients cohorts with and without obesity in overall complication rates (95% CI, P = 0.52), infection rates (95% CI, P = 0.81), and revision surgeries (95% CI, P = 0.06). When further analysing complications, no differences were identified in minor (95% CI, P = 0.23) and major complications (95% CI, P = 0.68), or venous thromboembolism rates (95% CI, P = 0.06). When further analysing revision surgeries, no differences were identified for revisions specifically for infection (95% CI, P = 0.71) or aseptic loosening (95% CI, P = 0.75). CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis shows that obesity does not result in poorer post-operative outcomes following UKA and should not be considered a contraindication for UKA. Future studies, including long-term follow-up RCTs and registry-level analyses, should examine factors associated with obesity and consider stratifying obesity to better delineate any potential differences in outcomes.
Authors: E Cavaignac; V Lafontan; N Reina; R Pailhé; M Wargny; M Warmy; J M Laffosse; P Chiron Journal: Bone Joint J Date: 2013-08 Impact factor: 5.082
Authors: Hasham M Alvi; Rachel E Mednick; Varun Krishnan; Mary J Kwasny; Matthew D Beal; David W Manning Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2015-02-07 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Stavros G Memtsoudis; Melanie C Besculides; Licia Gaber; Spencer Liu; Alejandro González Della Valle Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2008-10-17 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Linda P Hunt; Yoav Ben-Shlomo; Emma M Clark; Paul Dieppe; Andrew Judge; Alex J MacGregor; Jon H Tobias; Kelly Vernon; Ashley W Blom Journal: Lancet Date: 2014-10-18 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Carlen Reyes; Kirsten M Leyland; George Peat; Cyrus Cooper; Nigel K Arden; Daniel Prieto-Alhambra Journal: Arthritis Rheumatol Date: 2016-08 Impact factor: 10.995
Authors: Margreth Grotle; Kare B Hagen; Bard Natvig; Fredrik A Dahl; Tore K Kvien Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2008-10-02 Impact factor: 2.362