Increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior stabilized compared with posterior cruciate-retaining uncemented total knee replacements: a cohort study of 13,667 knees from the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry

Background and purpose: While registry studies have suggested a higher risk of revision for posterior-stabilized (PS) compared with posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee replacements (TKR) using cement, it is unknown whether this is also the case for uncemented TKR. We aimed to compare the r...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Raymond Puijk, Inger N Sierevelt, Bart G C W Pijls, Anneke Spekenbrink-Spooren, Peter A Nolte
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Medical Journals Sweden 2023-12-01
Series:Acta Orthopaedica
Subjects:
Online Access:https://actaorthop.org/actao/article/view/33283
_version_ 1797391548602646528
author Raymond Puijk
Inger N Sierevelt
Bart G C W Pijls
Anneke Spekenbrink-Spooren
Peter A Nolte
author_facet Raymond Puijk
Inger N Sierevelt
Bart G C W Pijls
Anneke Spekenbrink-Spooren
Peter A Nolte
author_sort Raymond Puijk
collection DOAJ
description Background and purpose: While registry studies have suggested a higher risk of revision for posterior-stabilized (PS) compared with posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee replacements (TKR) using cement, it is unknown whether this is also the case for uncemented TKR. We aimed to compare the revision rates of PS and CR designs in patients receiving primary uncemented TKR. Patients and methods: Data from the Dutch arthroplasty register (LROI) was analyzed, comprising 12,226 uncemented primary CR TKRs and 750 uncemented PS TKRs registered between 2007 and 2022. Competing risk and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to compare revision rates, risks of revision, and reasons for revision between groups. Sensitivity analyses were performed to analyze the risk, concerning the 5 most commonly used implants and performing hospitals for each group. Results: Uncemented PS TKRs had higher 10-year revision rates for any reason and aseptic loosening (6.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.6–9.2 and 3.9%, CI 2.6–6.7) compared with uncemented CR TKRs (4.2%, CI 3.8–4.7 and 1.4%, CI 1.2–1.7). PS TKRs were 1.4 and 2.5 times more likely to be revised for any reason and aseptic loosening, respectively. These results remained consistent after adjustment for age, sex, BMI, previous surgeries, bearing mobility, and surface modification, with sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: We found that uncemented PS implants have a higher rate of revision than uncemented CR implants, mainly due to a higher risk of aseptic loosening.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T23:34:24Z
format Article
id doaj.art-f54a71cfa596453e96376c930358ec79
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1745-3674
1745-3682
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T23:34:24Z
publishDate 2023-12-01
publisher Medical Journals Sweden
record_format Article
series Acta Orthopaedica
spelling doaj.art-f54a71cfa596453e96376c930358ec792023-12-14T08:12:09ZengMedical Journals SwedenActa Orthopaedica1745-36741745-36822023-12-019410.2340/17453674.2023.33283Increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior stabilized compared with posterior cruciate-retaining uncemented total knee replacements: a cohort study of 13,667 knees from the Dutch Arthroplasty RegistryRaymond Puijk0Inger N Sierevelt1Bart G C W Pijls2Anneke Spekenbrink-Spooren3Peter A Nolte4Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spaarne Gasthuis, HoofddorpDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spaarne Gasthuis, Hoofddorp; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Xpert Clinics Orthopedic Amsterdam/Specialized Center of Orthopedic Research and Education, AmsterdamLandelijke Registratie Orthopedische Interventies (LROI; Dutch Arthroplasty Register), Bruistensingel 230, 5232 AD, ’s Hertogenbosch; Department of Orthopaedics, Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), LeidenLandelijke Registratie Orthopedische Interventies (LROI; Dutch Arthroplasty Register), Bruistensingel 230, 5232 AD, ’s HertogenboschDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spaarne Gasthuis, Hoofddorp; Department of Oral Cell Biology, Academic Centre for Dentistry (ACTA), University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands Background and purpose: While registry studies have suggested a higher risk of revision for posterior-stabilized (PS) compared with posterior cruciate-retaining (CR) total knee replacements (TKR) using cement, it is unknown whether this is also the case for uncemented TKR. We aimed to compare the revision rates of PS and CR designs in patients receiving primary uncemented TKR. Patients and methods: Data from the Dutch arthroplasty register (LROI) was analyzed, comprising 12,226 uncemented primary CR TKRs and 750 uncemented PS TKRs registered between 2007 and 2022. Competing risk and multivariable Cox regression analyses were used to compare revision rates, risks of revision, and reasons for revision between groups. Sensitivity analyses were performed to analyze the risk, concerning the 5 most commonly used implants and performing hospitals for each group. Results: Uncemented PS TKRs had higher 10-year revision rates for any reason and aseptic loosening (6.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.6–9.2 and 3.9%, CI 2.6–6.7) compared with uncemented CR TKRs (4.2%, CI 3.8–4.7 and 1.4%, CI 1.2–1.7). PS TKRs were 1.4 and 2.5 times more likely to be revised for any reason and aseptic loosening, respectively. These results remained consistent after adjustment for age, sex, BMI, previous surgeries, bearing mobility, and surface modification, with sensitivity analyses. Conclusion: We found that uncemented PS implants have a higher rate of revision than uncemented CR implants, mainly due to a higher risk of aseptic loosening. https://actaorthop.org/actao/article/view/33283CementlessCruciate-retainingPosterior stabilizedRegistry studyRevisionTotal Knee Replacement
spellingShingle Raymond Puijk
Inger N Sierevelt
Bart G C W Pijls
Anneke Spekenbrink-Spooren
Peter A Nolte
Increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior stabilized compared with posterior cruciate-retaining uncemented total knee replacements: a cohort study of 13,667 knees from the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry
Acta Orthopaedica
Cementless
Cruciate-retaining
Posterior stabilized
Registry study
Revision
Total Knee Replacement
title Increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior stabilized compared with posterior cruciate-retaining uncemented total knee replacements: a cohort study of 13,667 knees from the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry
title_full Increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior stabilized compared with posterior cruciate-retaining uncemented total knee replacements: a cohort study of 13,667 knees from the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry
title_fullStr Increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior stabilized compared with posterior cruciate-retaining uncemented total knee replacements: a cohort study of 13,667 knees from the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry
title_full_unstemmed Increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior stabilized compared with posterior cruciate-retaining uncemented total knee replacements: a cohort study of 13,667 knees from the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry
title_short Increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior stabilized compared with posterior cruciate-retaining uncemented total knee replacements: a cohort study of 13,667 knees from the Dutch Arthroplasty Registry
title_sort increased risk of aseptic loosening for posterior stabilized compared with posterior cruciate retaining uncemented total knee replacements a cohort study of 13 667 knees from the dutch arthroplasty registry
topic Cementless
Cruciate-retaining
Posterior stabilized
Registry study
Revision
Total Knee Replacement
url https://actaorthop.org/actao/article/view/33283
work_keys_str_mv AT raymondpuijk increasedriskofasepticlooseningforposteriorstabilizedcomparedwithposteriorcruciateretaininguncementedtotalkneereplacementsacohortstudyof13667kneesfromthedutcharthroplastyregistry
AT ingernsierevelt increasedriskofasepticlooseningforposteriorstabilizedcomparedwithposteriorcruciateretaininguncementedtotalkneereplacementsacohortstudyof13667kneesfromthedutcharthroplastyregistry
AT bartgcwpijls increasedriskofasepticlooseningforposteriorstabilizedcomparedwithposteriorcruciateretaininguncementedtotalkneereplacementsacohortstudyof13667kneesfromthedutcharthroplastyregistry
AT annekespekenbrinkspooren increasedriskofasepticlooseningforposteriorstabilizedcomparedwithposteriorcruciateretaininguncementedtotalkneereplacementsacohortstudyof13667kneesfromthedutcharthroplastyregistry
AT peteranolte increasedriskofasepticlooseningforposteriorstabilizedcomparedwithposteriorcruciateretaininguncementedtotalkneereplacementsacohortstudyof13667kneesfromthedutcharthroplastyregistry