Puijk R, Rassir R, Sierevelt IN, Spekenbrink-Spooren A, Nelissen RGHH, Nolte PA. Association Between Surface Modifications for Biologic Fixation and Aseptic Loosening of Uncemented Total Knee Arthroplasties.
J Arthroplasty 2023;
38:2605-2611.e1. [PMID:
37295622 DOI:
10.1016/j.arth.2023.05.094]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/27/2023] [Revised: 05/30/2023] [Accepted: 05/31/2023] [Indexed: 06/12/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Various surface modifications are used in uncemented total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) to enhance bony ingrowth and longevity of implants. This study aimed to identify which surface modifications are used, whether they are associated with different revision rates for aseptic loosening, and which are underperforming compared to cemented implants.
METHODS
Data on all cemented and uncemented TKAs used between 2007 and 2021 were obtained from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register. Uncemented TKAs were divided into groups based on their surface modifications. Revision rates for aseptic loosening and major revisions were compared between groups. Kaplan-Meier, Competing-Risk, Log-rank tests, and Cox regression analyses were used. In total, 235,500 cemented and 10,749 uncemented primary TKAs were included. The different uncemented TKA groups included the following: 1,140 porous-hydroxyapatite (HA); 8,450 Porous-uncoated; 702 Grit-blasted-uncoated; and 172 Grit-blasted-Titanium-nitride (TiN) implants.
RESULTS
The 10-year revision rates for aseptic loosening and major revision of the cemented TKAs were 1.3 and 3.1%, and for uncemented TKAs 0.2 and 2.3% (porous-HA), 1.3 and 2.9% (porous-uncoated), 2.8 and 4.0% (grit-blasted-uncoated), and 7.9% and 17.4% (grit-blasted-TiN), respectively. Both type of revision rates varied significantly between the uncemented groups (log-rank tests, P < .001, P < .001). All grit-blasted implants had a significantly higher risk of aseptic loosening (P < .01), and porous-uncoated implants had a significantly lower risk of aseptic loosening than cemented implants (P = .03) after 10 years.
CONCLUSION
There were 4 main uncemented surface modifications identified, with different revision rates for aseptic loosening. Implants with porous-HA and porous-uncoated had the best revision rates, at least equal to cemented TKAs. Grit-blasted implants with and without TiN underperformed, possibly due to the interaction of other factors.
Collapse