Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
41 result(s) for "Mellon, Stephen"
Sort by:
Cementless unicompartmental knee replacement achieves better ten-year clinical outcomes than cemented: a systematic review
Purpose The aim of this study was to report and compare the long-term revision rate, revision indications and patient reported outcome measures of cemented and cementless unicompartmental knee replacements (UKR). Methods Databases Medline, Embase and Cochrane Central of Controlled Trials were searched to identify all UKR studies reporting the ≥ 10 year clinical outcomes. Revision rates per 100 component years [% per annum (% pa)] were calculated by fixation type and then, subgroup analyses for fixed and mobile bearing UKRs were performed. Mechanisms of failure and patient reported outcome measures are reported. Results 25 studies were eligible for inclusion with a total of 10,736 UKRs, in which there were 8790 cemented and 1946 cementless knee replacements. The revision rate was 0.73% pa (CI 0.66–0.80) and 0.45% pa (CI 0.34–0.58) per 100 component years, respectively, with the cementless having a significantly ( p  < 0.001) lower overall revision rate. Therefore, based on these studies, the expected 10-year survival of cementless UKR would be 95.5% and cemented 92.7%. Subgroup analysis revealed this difference remained significant for the Oxford UKR (0.37% pa vs 0.77% pa, p  < 0.001), but for non-Oxford UKRs there were no significant differences in revision rates of cemented and cementless UKRs (0.57% pa vs 0.69% pa, p  = 0.41). Mobile bearing UKRs had significantly lower revision rates than fixed bearing UKRs in cementless ( p  = 0.001), but not cemented groups ( p  = 0.13). Overall the revision rates for aseptic loosening and disease progression were significantly lower ( p  = 0.02 and p  = 0.009 respectively) in the cementless group compared to the cemented group (0.06 vs 0.13% pa and 0.10 vs 0.21% pa respectively). Conclusions Cementless fixation had reduced long-term revision rates compared to cemented for the Oxford UKR. For the non-Oxford UKRs, the revision rates of cementless and cemented fixation types were equivalent. Therefore, cementless UKRs offer at least equivalent if not lower revision rates compared to cemented UKRs. Level of evidence III.
Ten-year clinical and radiographic results of 1000 cementless Oxford unicompartmental knee replacements
Purpose Unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) has substantial benefits over total knee replacement (TKR) but has higher revision rates. The cementless Oxford UKR was introduced to address this but there are concerns about fixation and tibial plateau fractures. The first long-term study of the device with clinical and radiographic outcomes is reported. Methods The first 1000 medial cementless Oxford UKR were prospectively identified and followed up by independent physiotherapists. Survival was calculated using the endpoints reoperation, revision, revision to TKR, major revision requiring revision TKR components and patient mortality. The Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Tegner Activity Score and American Knee Society Score (AKSS) were recorded and radiographs analysed. Results The ten year survival was 96.6% (CI 94.8–97.8), 97.5% (CI 95.7–98.5), 98.9% (CI 97.7–99.4) and 99.6% (CI 98.8–99.9) using reoperation, revision, revision to TKR and major revision as the endpoint, respectively. Commonest causes for revision were bearing dislocation ( n  = 7, 0.7%), disease progression ( n  = 4, 0.4%) and pain ( n  = 2, 0.2%). There was one lateral tibial plateau fracture and one femoral component loosening. At 10 years, the mean OKS was 41.2 (SD 9.8), Tegner 2.8 (SD 1.3), AKSS-O 89.1 (SD 13.0) and AKSS-F 80.4 (SD 14.6). There were no pathological radiolucencies or complete radiolucent lines. There were no implant-related deaths. Conclusions The cementless Oxford UKR is a safe procedure with excellent long-term clinical results. Our results suggest that reliable fixation was achieved with only one (0.1%) revision for loosening (femoral), no radiographic evidence of loosening in the remaining cases and no fractures related to implantation. Level of evidence III.
The effect of obesity on revision rate in unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis
The number of patients with knee osteoarthritis, the proportion that is obese and the number undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) are all increasing. The primary aim of this systematic review was to determine the effects of obesity on outcomes in UKA. A systematic review was performed using PRISMA guidelines and the primary outcome was revision rate per 100 observed component years, with a BMI of ≥ 30 used to define obesity. The MINORS criteria and OCEBM criteria were used to assess risk of bias and level of evidence, respectively. 9 studies were included in the analysis. In total there were 4621 knees that underwent UKA. The mean age in included studies was reported to be 63 years (mean range 59.5–72 years old)) and range of follow up was 2–18 years. Four studies were OCEBM level 2b and the average MINORS score was 13. The mean revision rate in obese patients (BMI > 30) was 0.33% pa (95% CI − 3.16 to 2.5) higher than in non-obese patients, however this was not statistically significant ( p  = 0.82). This meta-analysis concludes that there is no significant difference in outcomes between obese and non-obese patients undergoing UKA. There is currently no evidence that obesity should be considered a definite contraindication to UKA. Further studies are needed to increase the numbers in meta-analysis to explore activity levels, surgeon’s operative data, implant design and perioperative complications and revision in more depth. Level of evidence Level III.
Application of a robotics path planning algorithm to assess the risk of mobile bearing dislocation in lateral unicompartmental knee replacement
Due to ligament laxity, bearing dislocation occurs in 1–6% of Oxford Domed Lateral (ODL) replacements with most dislocations occurring medially. Dislocations were studied using a previously built mechanical rig, however testing using the rig was inefficient. The aim of this study was to develop a better tool that was more reliable and efficient. An established robotics software package, the Open Motion Planning Library, was modified to accept the ODL components. Using a robotics path planning algorithm, the mobile bearing was allowed to find a way out from between the femoral and tibial components i.e. to dislocate. Testing assessed a range of clinically relevant positions of the femoral component relative to the tibial component. Dislocations were labelled as medial, lateral, anterior or posterior depending on the dislocation direction. The Distraction to Dislocation (DD) measured the minimum vertical distraction of the femoral component from the tibial component for a dislocation to occur. Results were validated against the mechanical rig. Statistical analysis of medial dislocation showed excellent agreement with an intraclass correlation value of 0.993 (95% CI 0.982–0.998). All DDs from the dislocation analysis tool were within 1 mm of the mechanical rig DDs with results sharing a remarkably similar trend. The robotics dislocation analysis tool output DDs which were marginally higher than the manual mechanical rig: 0.50 mm anteriorly, 0.25 mm posteriorly and 0.50 mm laterally. Medially, the computational DD differed on average by 0.09 mm (stand deviation: 0.2026 mm). Our study describes the development and validation of a novel robotics dislocation analysis tool, which allows mobile bearing dislocation risk quantification. The tool may also be used to improve surgical implantation parameters and to assess new implant designs that aim to reduce the medial dislocation risk to an acceptable level.
Fixed lateral unicompartmental knee replacement is a reliable treatment for lateral compartment osteoarthritis after mobile-bearing medial unicompartmental replacement
Purpose Lateral osteoarthritis following medial unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) is usually treated with total knee replacement, however, lateral UKR is a less invasive option that preserves a well-functioning medial UKR. This study aimed to determine the 5-year outcome of the cemented Fixed Lateral Oxford UKR (FLO) when used for the treatment of severe lateral disease after medial Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement. Methods Forty-four knees with lateral bone-on-bone osteoarthritis ( n =  43) and avascular necrosis ( n =  1) treated with the FLO following medial Oxford UKR were followed up prospectively. The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Tegner Activity Score (TAS) were collected pre- and post-operatively. Life-table analysis was used to determine survival rates. Results The mean patient age at the time of FLO surgery was 74.4 years with a mean time of 12.1 years between the primary medial UKR and the conversion to a bi-UKR with a FLO. Mean follow-up of the FLO was 3.5 years. After FLO no intra-operative or medical complications, re-admissions, or mortality occurred. There was one reoperation in which a bearing was exchanged for a medial bearing dislocation. There were no revisions of the FLO, so the FLO survival rate at 5 years was 100% (24 at risk). The mean pre-operative OKS was 22, which significantly ( p <  0.0001) improved to a mean of 42, 42, and 40 at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively. The median TAS had a non-significant improvement from 2.5 (Range 0–8) pre-operatively to 2 (Range 1–6) at 5 years postoperatively. Conclusion The FLO is a reliable treatment for lateral osteoarthritis following medial UKR. At 5 years there was a 100% survival of the FLO with a mean OKS of 40. Level of evidence IV, Prospective Case Series.
Low polyethylene creep and wear following mobile-bearing unicompartmental knee replacement
Purpose The Oxford unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) has a fully congruent mobile bearing to minimise wear. However, with younger higher demand patients, wear remains a concern. The aim of this study was to quantify the wear rate of Phase 3 Oxford UKR bearings over the course of 5 years and to identify the factors that influence it. Methods 40 medial Oxford UKRs recruited for a randomised study of cemented and cementless fixation were studied with Radiostereometric analysis (RSA) at 1 week, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years post-operatively and bearing thickness was calculated. Penetration, defined as the change in thickness compared to the 1-week measurement, was determined. Creep (early penetration) and wear (late penetration at a constant rate) were calculated. The influence of demographic factors, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Tegner score, fixation and bearing overhang (determined by RSA) on wear was analysed. Results After 6 months the penetration rate was constant, indicating that wear alone was occurring. The wear rate was 0.07 mm/year (SD 0.03). The creep was 0.06 mm with about 95% occurring during the first 3 months. There was no significant relationship between fixation (cemented/cementless), age, component size, OKS and Tegner score with wear rate. Increasing BMI was associated with decreasing wear ( p  = 0.042). 37/40 bearings overhung the tibia to some extent and 23/40 overhung the tibia medially. An increase in the area of overhang ( p  = 0.036), amount of medial overhang ( p  = 0.028) and distance between the bearing and tibial wall ( p  = 0.019) were associated with increased wear. Bearings that did not overhang (0.06 mm/year) had less wear ( p  = 0.025) than those that did (0.08 mm/year). There was no relationship ( p  = 0.6) between the femoral contact area and wear. Conclusion During the first three to six months after implantation, the bearing becomes 0.06 mm thinner due to creep. The combined wear rate of the upper and lower surfaces of the bearing is constant (0.07 mm/year). The wear is lower if the bearing does not overhang the tibia so surgeons should aim for the bearing to be close to the tibial wall. The orientation of the femoral component does not influence wear. Level of evidence Retrospective Study, Level III.
Most unicompartmental knee replacement revisions could be avoided: a radiographic evaluation of revised Oxford knees in the National Joint Registry
Purpose The purpose of this study was to understand why the revision rate of unicompartmental knee replacement (UKR) in the National Joint Registry (NJR) is so high. Using radiographs, the appropriateness of patient selection for primary surgery, surgical technique, and indications for revision were determined. In addition, the alignment of the radiographs was assessed. Methods Oxford UKR registered with the NJR between 2006 and 2010 and subsequently revised were identified by the NJR. A blinded review was undertaken of pre-primary, post-primary, and pre-revision anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of a sample of 107 cases from multiple centres. Results The recommended indications were satisfied in 70%, with 29% not demonstrating bone-on-bone arthritis. Major technical errors, likely leading to revision, were seen in 6%. Pre-revision radiographs were malaligned and, therefore, difficult to interpret in 53%. No reason for revision was seen in 67%. Reasons for revision included lateral compartment arthritis (10%), tibial loosening (7%), bearing dislocation (7%), infection (6%), femoral loosening (3%), and peri-prosthetic fracture (2%, one femoral, one tibial). Conclusions Only 20% of the revised UKR were implanted for the recommended indications, using appropriate surgical technique and had a mechanical problem necessitating revision. One-third of primary surgeries were undertaken in patients with early arthritis, which is contraindicated. Two-thirds were presumably revised for unexplained pain, which is not advised as it tends not to help the pain. This study suggests that variable and inappropriate indications for primary and revision surgery are responsible for the high rates of revision seen in registries. Level of evidence III, Therapeutic study.
Medial meniscal extrusion: a validation study comparing different methods of assessment
Purpose Longitudinal cohort studies of knee OA aetiology use MRI to assess meniscal extrusion within the same knee at sequential time points. A validated method of assessment is required to ensure that extrusion is measured at the same location within the knee at each time point. Absolute perpendicular extrusion from the tibial edge can be assessed using the reference standard of segmentation of the tibia and medial meniscus. This is labour intensive and unsuitable for large cohorts. Two methods are commonly used as proxy measurements. Firstly, the apex of the medial tibial spine is used to identify a reproducible MRI coronal slice, from which extrusion is measured. Secondly, the coronal MRI slice of the knee demonstrating the greatest extrusion is used. The purpose of this study was to validate these two methods against the reference standard and to determine the most appropriate method to use in longitudinal cohort studies. We hypothesised that there is no difference in absolute meniscal extrusion measurements between methods. Methods Twenty high-resolution knee MRI scans were obtained in asymptomatic subjects. The tibia and medial meniscus were manually segmented. A custom MATLAB program was used to determine the difference in medial meniscal extrusion of the knee using the reference standard compared to the two other methods. Results Assessing extrusion using the single coronal MRI slice demonstrating the greatest extrusion overestimates the true extrusion of the medial meniscus. It incorrectly places the greatest meniscal extrusion at the anterior part of the tibia. Assessing extrusion using a consistent anatomical landmark, such as the medial tibial spine, most reliably corresponds to the reference of segmentation and measurement of true perpendicular extrusion from the tibial edge. Clinicians and researchers should consider this when assessing meniscal extrusion in the knee, and how it changes over time. Conclusion This study suggests measuring meniscal extrusion on the coronal MRI slice corresponding to the apex of the medial tibial spine as this correlates most closely with the true perpendicular extrusion measurements obtained from manually segmented models. Level of evidence Diagnostic, Level I.
Surgical factors that contribute to tibial periprosthetic fracture after cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement: a finite element analysis
Tibial periprosthetic fracture (TPF) is a severe complication of cementless Oxford Unicompartmental Knee Replacement (OUKR) with patient risk factors including small tibial size and tibia vara with an overhanging medial tibial condyle. Surgical factors also influence fracture but remain poorly defined. This finite element (FE) analysis study identified surgical risk factors for TPF after OUKR and determined the optimal tibial component positioning to minimise fracture risk. Knees in two very high-risk, small, bilateral OUKR patients who had a TPF in one knee and a good result in the other were studied with FE analysis. Each patient's unfractured tibia was used as a comparator to study surgical factors. The tibial geometries were segmented from the pre-operative CT scans and FE models were built with the tibial components implanted in their post-operative positions. The resections in the fractured and unfractured tibias were compared regarding their mediolateral position, distal-proximal position, internal-external rotation and varus-valgus orientation. Models of the TPF tibial resections in the contralateral sides were also built in both patients. The risk of TPF was assessed by examining the magnitude and location of the highest maximum principal stress. In both patients, large differences were found in the position and orientation of the tibial components in the fractured and unfractured tibias with the components in the fractured tibias placed more medially and distally. Suboptimal saw cuts resulted in poor positioning of the tibial components and created very high local stresses in the bone, particularly anteriorly (157 MPa and 702 MPa in the fractured side vs. 49 MPa and 63 MPa in the unfractured side in patient 1 and 2 respectively), causing fractures. In small patients with marked tibia vara the surgery is unforgiving. To avoid fracture, the horizontal cut should be conservative, aiming for a 3 bearing, the vertical cut should abut the apex of the medial tibial spine, and extreme internal or external rotation should be avoided. The component should be aligned with the posterior cortex and should not overhang anteriorly. In addition, contrary to current recommendations, the tibial component should be placed in varus (about 5°).
Optimal acetabular component orientation estimated using edge-loading and impingement risk in patients with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty
Edge-loading in patients with metal-on-metal resurfaced hips can cause high serum metal ion levels, the development of soft-tissue reactions local to the joint called pseudotumours and ultimately, failure of the implant. Primary edge-loading is where contact between the femoral and acetabular components occurs at the edge/rim of the acetabular component whereas impingement of the femoral neck on the acetabular component’s edge causes secondary or contrecoup edge-loading. Although the relationship between the orientation of the acetabular component and primary edge-loading has been identified, the contribution of acetabular component orientation to impingement and secondary edge-loading is less clear. Our aim was to estimate the optimal acetabular component orientation for 16 metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty (MoMHRA) subjects with known serum metal ion levels. Data from motion analysis, subject-specific musculoskeletal modelling and Computed Tomography (CT) measurements were used to calculate the dynamic contact patch to rim (CPR) distance and impingement risk for 3416 different acetabular component orientations during gait, sit-to-stand, stair descent and static standing. For each subject, safe zones free from impingement and edge-loading (CPR <10%) were defined and, consequently, an optimal acetabular component orientation was determined (mean inclination 39.7° (SD 6.6°) mean anteversion 14.9° (SD 9.0°)). The results of this study suggest that the optimal acetabular component orientation can be determined from a patient’s motion and anatomy. However, ‘safe’ zones of acetabular component orientation associated with reduced risk of dislocation and pseudotumour are also associated with a reduced risk of edge-loading and impingement.