Revisions of total knee arthroplasty:A Meta analysis

Pu-yi SHENG,Lehto Matti,Wei-ming LIAO,Ai-shan HE,Ming FU,Kataja Matti,Zi-ji ZHANG,Moilanen Teemu,Pajam(a)ki Jorma,T Yrj(ó)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1674-134X.2007.01.010

2007-01-01

Abstract:Objective The purpose of this study was to summarize the literature describing patient outcome following revision total knee arthroplasty. The study investigators agreed a priori on four questions of patient prognosis to be addressed in this review: (1) Is there significant difference between pre-operative and post-operative in knee scores, function scores and motion? (2) What is the revision main indication? (3) What is the main complication after revision surgery? 4) Are the significant differences between various implants? Methods Data sources, original studies were included in this meta-analysis if they enrolled 10 or more patients at the time of the revision total knee arthroplasty and measured patient outcome using a global knee rating scale from 1990 to 2002. One investigator, who had been educated in the data abstraction requirements, completed the data abstraction. One investigator, who is professional statistician, completed the data analysis independently. Results 33 studies were found. The total number of enrolled patients was 1356 with a mean enrolment of 41 patients. There were 429 men and 611 women with a mean age of 67 years (range 45 to 90 years). The weighted mean patient follow up time was 57 months (range 6 to 108 months). The weighted mean preoperative and postoperative global rating scale knee scores were 49 (range 15 to 82) and 84 (range 58 to 109). There were observably significant difference between pre-operative and post-operative in Knee scores, Function scores and Motion (Knee score:t=12.507, P< 0.01, Function scores:t=4.704, P< 0.01, Motion:t=5.346, P< 0.01). The main indication of revision was loosening( 55% ) , and other reasons include polyethylene wear (11% ), instability (10% ), infection (7% ). The main complication after revision surgery was loosening also(18% ), and included instability(16% ), infection(16% ), patellar failure(15% ). The patellar failure includes patellar subluxation, patellar dislocation, patellar tendon avulsion, patellofemoral pain, and clunk. Conclusions The revision total knee arthroplasty was a safe and effective procedure for patients reported in these studies. Loosening was the main reason and main complication of the revision total knee arthroplasty.