Cargando…

A systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up

Background: Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) is typically performed for non-reconstructible radial head fractures with or without valgus stability. The fixation methods can be divided into cemented rigid fixation, such as screw fixation, and uncemented micromovement fixation, including smooth stem, pr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yang, Guang, Li, Shangzhe, Zhang, Hailong, Lu, Yi
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36394008
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.1041531
_version_ 1784830963845431296
author Yang, Guang
Li, Shangzhe
Zhang, Hailong
Lu, Yi
author_facet Yang, Guang
Li, Shangzhe
Zhang, Hailong
Lu, Yi
author_sort Yang, Guang
collection PubMed
description Background: Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) is typically performed for non-reconstructible radial head fractures with or without valgus stability. The fixation methods can be divided into cemented rigid fixation, such as screw fixation, and uncemented micromovement fixation, including smooth stem, press-fit, expanded device, in-growth stem, and grit-blasted stem fixations. Different fixation methods may impact long-term clinical outcomes and cause complications. This study aimed to compare the long-term follow-up outcomes of cemented and uncemented radial head prostheses. Methods: A computerized literature search was performed in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for studies on radial head prostheses, replacement, and arthroplasty published from inception to April 2022. The prostheses fixation method was divided into cemented and uncemented fixation groups. The outcomes of interest included the participant characteristics, prostheses types, clinical outcomes, reoperation rates, and complication rates during long-term follow-up. Results: A total of 57 studies involving 2050 patients who underwent RHA were included in our analysis. Cemented fixation was used in 23 of these studies, uncemented fixation in 35 studies, and both cemented and uncemented fixations in one study. Both fixation groups showed significantly improved clinical outcomes after treatment. In particular, both the reoperation and complication rates were lower in the uncemented fixation group (12% and 22%, respectively) than that in the cemented fixation group (20% and 29%, respectively). Among the studies, uncemented monopolar fixation had the lowest reoperation rate (14%), while cemented monopolar fixation had the highest reoperation rate (36%). Regarding complication rates, uncemented bipolar fixation yielded the lowest rate (12%), while cemented bipolar fixation yielded the highest rate (34%). The range of motion and clinical outcome scores were good in both groups. Conclusion: Uncemented radial head prostheses had lower reoperation and complication rates than cemented prostheses. In particular, uncemented monopolar prostheses may yield the lowest reoperation rate, while uncemented bipolar prostheses may yield the lowest overall complication rate.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9663814
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96638142022-11-15 A systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up Yang, Guang Li, Shangzhe Zhang, Hailong Lu, Yi Front Bioeng Biotechnol Bioengineering and Biotechnology Background: Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) is typically performed for non-reconstructible radial head fractures with or without valgus stability. The fixation methods can be divided into cemented rigid fixation, such as screw fixation, and uncemented micromovement fixation, including smooth stem, press-fit, expanded device, in-growth stem, and grit-blasted stem fixations. Different fixation methods may impact long-term clinical outcomes and cause complications. This study aimed to compare the long-term follow-up outcomes of cemented and uncemented radial head prostheses. Methods: A computerized literature search was performed in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases for studies on radial head prostheses, replacement, and arthroplasty published from inception to April 2022. The prostheses fixation method was divided into cemented and uncemented fixation groups. The outcomes of interest included the participant characteristics, prostheses types, clinical outcomes, reoperation rates, and complication rates during long-term follow-up. Results: A total of 57 studies involving 2050 patients who underwent RHA were included in our analysis. Cemented fixation was used in 23 of these studies, uncemented fixation in 35 studies, and both cemented and uncemented fixations in one study. Both fixation groups showed significantly improved clinical outcomes after treatment. In particular, both the reoperation and complication rates were lower in the uncemented fixation group (12% and 22%, respectively) than that in the cemented fixation group (20% and 29%, respectively). Among the studies, uncemented monopolar fixation had the lowest reoperation rate (14%), while cemented monopolar fixation had the highest reoperation rate (36%). Regarding complication rates, uncemented bipolar fixation yielded the lowest rate (12%), while cemented bipolar fixation yielded the highest rate (34%). The range of motion and clinical outcome scores were good in both groups. Conclusion: Uncemented radial head prostheses had lower reoperation and complication rates than cemented prostheses. In particular, uncemented monopolar prostheses may yield the lowest reoperation rate, while uncemented bipolar prostheses may yield the lowest overall complication rate. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-11-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9663814/ /pubmed/36394008 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.1041531 Text en Copyright © 2022 Yang, Li, Zhang and Lu. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Bioengineering and Biotechnology
Yang, Guang
Li, Shangzhe
Zhang, Hailong
Lu, Yi
A systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up
title A systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up
title_full A systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up
title_fullStr A systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up
title_full_unstemmed A systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up
title_short A systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up
title_sort systematic review and meta-analysis on different stem fixation methods of radial head prostheses during long-term follow-up
topic Bioengineering and Biotechnology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9663814/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36394008
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.1041531
work_keys_str_mv AT yangguang asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisondifferentstemfixationmethodsofradialheadprosthesesduringlongtermfollowup
AT lishangzhe asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisondifferentstemfixationmethodsofradialheadprosthesesduringlongtermfollowup
AT zhanghailong asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisondifferentstemfixationmethodsofradialheadprosthesesduringlongtermfollowup
AT luyi asystematicreviewandmetaanalysisondifferentstemfixationmethodsofradialheadprosthesesduringlongtermfollowup
AT yangguang systematicreviewandmetaanalysisondifferentstemfixationmethodsofradialheadprosthesesduringlongtermfollowup
AT lishangzhe systematicreviewandmetaanalysisondifferentstemfixationmethodsofradialheadprosthesesduringlongtermfollowup
AT zhanghailong systematicreviewandmetaanalysisondifferentstemfixationmethodsofradialheadprosthesesduringlongtermfollowup
AT luyi systematicreviewandmetaanalysisondifferentstemfixationmethodsofradialheadprosthesesduringlongtermfollowup