Cargando…
Worth replacing a loss of medial meniscal tissue with a polyurethane substitute (Actifit®) when performing a valgus tibial osteotomy addition
INTRODUCTION: The addition tibial valgus osteotomy (ovat) is a common treatment of symptomatic genu varus. This frequently is accompanied by considerable loss of medial meniscal tissue. The aim was to evaluate, in the context of performing a ovat, restoring the functional impact of this lack of medi...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4595886/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967114S00253 |
_version_ | 1782393689103925248 |
---|---|
author | Gelber, Pablo E. Isart, Anna Erquicia, Juan I. Tey, Marc Pelfort, Xavier Abat, Ferran Monllau, Juan Carlos |
author_facet | Gelber, Pablo E. Isart, Anna Erquicia, Juan I. Tey, Marc Pelfort, Xavier Abat, Ferran Monllau, Juan Carlos |
author_sort | Gelber, Pablo E. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The addition tibial valgus osteotomy (ovat) is a common treatment of symptomatic genu varus. This frequently is accompanied by considerable loss of medial meniscal tissue. The aim was to evaluate, in the context of performing a ovat, restoring the functional impact of this lack of medial meniscal tissue with Actifit® compared with the simple meniscectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty patients with symptomatic genu varo operated with ovat were studied prospectively. In 30 patients we have left a medial meniscal defect> 25 mm (M) and in 30 a medial Actifit® was implanted(A). The evaluations were performed using Womet, IKDC, Kujala, EVA and satisfaction (0-4). RESULTS: Both groups were statistically comparable preoperatively, including follow-up time (31.2 months; range, 24-47.5; p = 0.35). 53.4 ± 8.4 Womet improved and 42.4 ± 17.2 points in M and A (p = 0.002), improved IKDC 56.7 ± 12 and 50.3 ± 15.6 points in M and A (p = 0.107), 50.4 ± 14.7 Kujala improved to 38.9 ± 21.6 points M and A (p = 0.02) and VAS decreased 6.9 ± 2.1 and 4.7 ± 2.8 points in M and A (p = 0.006). The satisfaction was 3.3 ± 0.8 and 3.3 ± 1 in M and A (p = 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: The symptomatic genu varus treated with OVAT associated to medial meniscectomy led, compared to when it was associated with the implantation of a medial Actifit®, to a marked improvement in most of the scales tested. There was no difference in the degree of satisfaction. Based on short-term results of this study, restitution replacement with polyurethane substitute can not be recommended to perform a ovat. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4595886 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45958862015-11-03 Worth replacing a loss of medial meniscal tissue with a polyurethane substitute (Actifit®) when performing a valgus tibial osteotomy addition Gelber, Pablo E. Isart, Anna Erquicia, Juan I. Tey, Marc Pelfort, Xavier Abat, Ferran Monllau, Juan Carlos Orthop J Sports Med Article INTRODUCTION: The addition tibial valgus osteotomy (ovat) is a common treatment of symptomatic genu varus. This frequently is accompanied by considerable loss of medial meniscal tissue. The aim was to evaluate, in the context of performing a ovat, restoring the functional impact of this lack of medial meniscal tissue with Actifit® compared with the simple meniscectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixty patients with symptomatic genu varo operated with ovat were studied prospectively. In 30 patients we have left a medial meniscal defect> 25 mm (M) and in 30 a medial Actifit® was implanted(A). The evaluations were performed using Womet, IKDC, Kujala, EVA and satisfaction (0-4). RESULTS: Both groups were statistically comparable preoperatively, including follow-up time (31.2 months; range, 24-47.5; p = 0.35). 53.4 ± 8.4 Womet improved and 42.4 ± 17.2 points in M and A (p = 0.002), improved IKDC 56.7 ± 12 and 50.3 ± 15.6 points in M and A (p = 0.107), 50.4 ± 14.7 Kujala improved to 38.9 ± 21.6 points M and A (p = 0.02) and VAS decreased 6.9 ± 2.1 and 4.7 ± 2.8 points in M and A (p = 0.006). The satisfaction was 3.3 ± 0.8 and 3.3 ± 1 in M and A (p = 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: The symptomatic genu varus treated with OVAT associated to medial meniscectomy led, compared to when it was associated with the implantation of a medial Actifit®, to a marked improvement in most of the scales tested. There was no difference in the degree of satisfaction. Based on short-term results of this study, restitution replacement with polyurethane substitute can not be recommended to perform a ovat. SAGE Publications 2015-01-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4595886/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967114S00253 Text en © The Author(s) 2014 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This open-access article is published and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - No Derivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/), which permits the noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction of the article in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this article without the permission of the Author(s). For reprints and permission queries, please visit SAGE’s Web site at http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav. |
spellingShingle | Article Gelber, Pablo E. Isart, Anna Erquicia, Juan I. Tey, Marc Pelfort, Xavier Abat, Ferran Monllau, Juan Carlos Worth replacing a loss of medial meniscal tissue with a polyurethane substitute (Actifit®) when performing a valgus tibial osteotomy addition |
title | Worth replacing a loss of medial meniscal tissue with a polyurethane substitute (Actifit®) when performing a valgus tibial osteotomy addition |
title_full | Worth replacing a loss of medial meniscal tissue with a polyurethane substitute (Actifit®) when performing a valgus tibial osteotomy addition |
title_fullStr | Worth replacing a loss of medial meniscal tissue with a polyurethane substitute (Actifit®) when performing a valgus tibial osteotomy addition |
title_full_unstemmed | Worth replacing a loss of medial meniscal tissue with a polyurethane substitute (Actifit®) when performing a valgus tibial osteotomy addition |
title_short | Worth replacing a loss of medial meniscal tissue with a polyurethane substitute (Actifit®) when performing a valgus tibial osteotomy addition |
title_sort | worth replacing a loss of medial meniscal tissue with a polyurethane substitute (actifit®) when performing a valgus tibial osteotomy addition |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4595886/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967114S00253 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gelberpabloe worthreplacingalossofmedialmeniscaltissuewithapolyurethanesubstituteactifitwhenperformingavalgustibialosteotomyaddition AT isartanna worthreplacingalossofmedialmeniscaltissuewithapolyurethanesubstituteactifitwhenperformingavalgustibialosteotomyaddition AT erquiciajuani worthreplacingalossofmedialmeniscaltissuewithapolyurethanesubstituteactifitwhenperformingavalgustibialosteotomyaddition AT teymarc worthreplacingalossofmedialmeniscaltissuewithapolyurethanesubstituteactifitwhenperformingavalgustibialosteotomyaddition AT pelfortxavier worthreplacingalossofmedialmeniscaltissuewithapolyurethanesubstituteactifitwhenperformingavalgustibialosteotomyaddition AT abatferran worthreplacingalossofmedialmeniscaltissuewithapolyurethanesubstituteactifitwhenperformingavalgustibialosteotomyaddition AT monllaujuancarlos worthreplacingalossofmedialmeniscaltissuewithapolyurethanesubstituteactifitwhenperformingavalgustibialosteotomyaddition |