Cargando…

The clinical outcome of the different HemiCAP and UniCAP knee implants: A systematic and comprehensive review

The focal metallic cartilage resurfacing is a surgical method that offers an appropriate step between the biological techniques and arthroplasty in middle-aged patients with full-thickness cartilage defects. The advantages of this technique are that it addresses the defect, respects healthy tissues...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Malahias, Michael-Alexander, Chytas, Dimitrios, Thorey, Fritz
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6042054/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30057721
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/or.2018.7531
_version_ 1783339088231792640
author Malahias, Michael-Alexander
Chytas, Dimitrios
Thorey, Fritz
author_facet Malahias, Michael-Alexander
Chytas, Dimitrios
Thorey, Fritz
author_sort Malahias, Michael-Alexander
collection PubMed
description The focal metallic cartilage resurfacing is a surgical method that offers an appropriate step between the biological techniques and arthroplasty in middle-aged patients with full-thickness cartilage defects. The advantages of this technique are that it addresses the defect, respects healthy tissues and provides stability and contoured surface similar to a full arthroplasty. A systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two reviewers (MM and DC) independently conducted the search using the MEDLINE/PubMed database and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). These databases were searched for the terms hemicap knee implant and unicap knee implant and knee focal metallic implant. From the initial 21 studies that were evaluated, 10 were eligible for analysis. Considering both the HemiCAP focal implant and the HemiCap(®) Wave patellofemoral prosthesis, we found a lack of mid- to long-term clinical outcomes in well-designed prospective clinical studies. No Level I or II studies were found, while the limited number of patients who were included undermines the overall clinical results of these studies. The progression of osteoarthritis, the persisting pain and the subsequent high revision or failure rates in the limited available studies with long-term follow-up, seem to be the major drawbacks of these partial resurfacing techniques. Utilization of partial resurfacing for femoral or patellofemoral compartments results in good short-term outcome for middle-aged patients as a step between biological technique and total knee arthroplasty. The surgeon should be cognizant and also notify the patient of the high failure rates that are reported in the literature in mid- to longterm follow-up and ultimately, the decision to perform partial resurfacing should be taken by both the patient and the orthopedic surgeon.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6042054
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60420542018-07-27 The clinical outcome of the different HemiCAP and UniCAP knee implants: A systematic and comprehensive review Malahias, Michael-Alexander Chytas, Dimitrios Thorey, Fritz Orthop Rev (Pavia) Review The focal metallic cartilage resurfacing is a surgical method that offers an appropriate step between the biological techniques and arthroplasty in middle-aged patients with full-thickness cartilage defects. The advantages of this technique are that it addresses the defect, respects healthy tissues and provides stability and contoured surface similar to a full arthroplasty. A systematic review was conducted according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two reviewers (MM and DC) independently conducted the search using the MEDLINE/PubMed database and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR). These databases were searched for the terms hemicap knee implant and unicap knee implant and knee focal metallic implant. From the initial 21 studies that were evaluated, 10 were eligible for analysis. Considering both the HemiCAP focal implant and the HemiCap(®) Wave patellofemoral prosthesis, we found a lack of mid- to long-term clinical outcomes in well-designed prospective clinical studies. No Level I or II studies were found, while the limited number of patients who were included undermines the overall clinical results of these studies. The progression of osteoarthritis, the persisting pain and the subsequent high revision or failure rates in the limited available studies with long-term follow-up, seem to be the major drawbacks of these partial resurfacing techniques. Utilization of partial resurfacing for femoral or patellofemoral compartments results in good short-term outcome for middle-aged patients as a step between biological technique and total knee arthroplasty. The surgeon should be cognizant and also notify the patient of the high failure rates that are reported in the literature in mid- to longterm follow-up and ultimately, the decision to perform partial resurfacing should be taken by both the patient and the orthopedic surgeon. PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy 2018-06-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6042054/ /pubmed/30057721 http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/or.2018.7531 Text en ©Copyright M-A. Malahias et al., 2018 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review
Malahias, Michael-Alexander
Chytas, Dimitrios
Thorey, Fritz
The clinical outcome of the different HemiCAP and UniCAP knee implants: A systematic and comprehensive review
title The clinical outcome of the different HemiCAP and UniCAP knee implants: A systematic and comprehensive review
title_full The clinical outcome of the different HemiCAP and UniCAP knee implants: A systematic and comprehensive review
title_fullStr The clinical outcome of the different HemiCAP and UniCAP knee implants: A systematic and comprehensive review
title_full_unstemmed The clinical outcome of the different HemiCAP and UniCAP knee implants: A systematic and comprehensive review
title_short The clinical outcome of the different HemiCAP and UniCAP knee implants: A systematic and comprehensive review
title_sort clinical outcome of the different hemicap and unicap knee implants: a systematic and comprehensive review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6042054/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30057721
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/or.2018.7531
work_keys_str_mv AT malahiasmichaelalexander theclinicaloutcomeofthedifferenthemicapandunicapkneeimplantsasystematicandcomprehensivereview
AT chytasdimitrios theclinicaloutcomeofthedifferenthemicapandunicapkneeimplantsasystematicandcomprehensivereview
AT thoreyfritz theclinicaloutcomeofthedifferenthemicapandunicapkneeimplantsasystematicandcomprehensivereview
AT malahiasmichaelalexander clinicaloutcomeofthedifferenthemicapandunicapkneeimplantsasystematicandcomprehensivereview
AT chytasdimitrios clinicaloutcomeofthedifferenthemicapandunicapkneeimplantsasystematicandcomprehensivereview
AT thoreyfritz clinicaloutcomeofthedifferenthemicapandunicapkneeimplantsasystematicandcomprehensivereview