单位:[1]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Center for Osteonecrosis and Joint Preserving & Reconstruction, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, 2 Yinghuadong Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100029, China[2]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Peking University China-Japan Friendship School of Clinical Medicine, Beijing 100029, China
Background: UKA has been proved to offer good results in treating patients with unicompartmental knee osteoarthritis (OA). However, there is still a controversy about the better fixation mode in UKA procedure between cemented and uncemented prosthesis. Therefore, this meta-analysis was conducted to compare clinical and radiological outcomes of cemented versus uncemented Oxford UKA.& nbsp; & nbsp;Hypothesis: The study surmised that uncemented Oxford UKA was associated with shorter operation time, higher function scores, lower revision rate and less radiolucency than cemented Oxford UKA.& nbsp; & nbsp;Methods: A meta-analysis to compare postoperative outcomes between cemented and uncemented Oxford UKA wsa conducted. The primary outcomes included Oxford knee score (OKS), revision rate, and incidence of radiolucency. The secondary outcomes included operation time, knee society score (KSS), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), range of motion (ROM). PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library and China national knowledge infrastructure were searched until April, 2020 to identify studies for including. Relevant data were analyzed using RevMan v5.3.& nbsp; Results: We identified nine studies involving 901 patients meeting our inclusion criteria. No significant difference of OKS was found in both groups. Compared with cemented group, uncemented Oxford UKA group was associated with lower revision rate (95% CI: 0.90 to 3.73; OR = 1.83) and less radiolucent lines (95% CI: 0.79 to 9.52; OR = 2.75) after following up for at least 2 years. The operation time was significantly shorter by 10.12 minutes (95% CI: p < 0.00001) in the uncemented group when compared against the cemented group. The KSS, WOMAC, ROM were not significantly different between two groups.& nbsp; Conclusions: Uncemented Oxford UKA had lower revision rate, shorter operation time and less radiolucent lines than cemented Oxford UKA did. There is still need for more long follow-up clinical trials with high evidence level to determine which method of fixation is of preferable for Oxford UKA in the future. Level of evidence: I.& nbsp; (c) 2021 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.
基金:
Beijing Natural Science FoundationBeijing Natural Science Foundation [7204301]; ChinaJapan Friendship Hospital project [2018-1-QN9]; Beijing Municipal Science and Technology CommissionBeijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission [Z171100001017209]; National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFC0108102]
第一作者单位:[1]Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Center for Osteonecrosis and Joint Preserving & Reconstruction, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, 2 Yinghuadong Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing 100029, China
通讯作者:
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
Ma Jinhui,Yan Yan,Wang Weiguo,et al.Lower early revision rates after uncemented Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) than cemented Oxford UKA: A meta-analysis[J].ORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH.2021,107(3):doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2021.102802.
APA:
Ma, Jinhui,Yan, Yan,Wang, Weiguo,Wang, Bailiang,Yue, Debo&Guo, Wanshou.(2021).Lower early revision rates after uncemented Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) than cemented Oxford UKA: A meta-analysis.ORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH,107,(3)
MLA:
Ma, Jinhui,et al."Lower early revision rates after uncemented Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty (UKA) than cemented Oxford UKA: A meta-analysis".ORTHOPAEDICS & TRAUMATOLOGY-SURGERY & RESEARCH 107..3(2021)