Metal-backed versus all-polyethylene tibias in megaprostheses of the distal femur.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 20334995.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.arth.2010.01.007.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
In megaprostheses, the tibial component is rarely a source of failure. The evolution of these implants has followed standard arthroplasty trends moving from majority use of all-polyethylene tibias (APT) to high volume use of metal-backed tibial (MBT) components. We report the results of 72 endoprostheses using either MBT (n = 42) or APT (n = 30) implanted between 1994 and 2006. Failures of the implant related to the tibial component were isolated, and 5-year survival of the tibial implant of the MBT cohort was 94%, and for the APT cohort, 87% (P = .39). The difference in tibial component failures between the 2 groups was not statistically significant (Pearson χ(2) = 0.1535, P = .6952). Revision rates for the entire implant and infection rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups.
Medical subject headings
- Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee
- Femur
- Knee Prosthesis
- Metals
- Polyethylene
- Prosthesis Design
- Tibia
Anatomy
- femur
- knee
- tibia