Metal-backed versus all-polyethylene tibial components in primary total knee arthroplasty: A meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Acta Orthopaedica

Volumn 82, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 589-595

  Cheng, Tao ^a   Zhang, Guoyou ^b,c   Zhang, Xianlong ^a  

^a SHANGHAI JIAO TONG UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (China)

^b WENZHOU MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (China)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

POLYETHYLENE;

ARTICLE; COCHRANE LIBRARY; EMBASE; HUMAN; KNEE; MEDLINE; META ANALYSIS; METAL IMPLANTATION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RANGE OF MOTION; RATING SCALE; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TOTAL KNEE REPLACEMENT;

ARTHROPLASTY, REPLACEMENT, KNEE; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; KNEE JOINT; KNEE PROSTHESIS; METALS; POLYETHYLENE; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; PROSTHESIS FAILURE; TIBIA;

EID: 80054086522     PISSN: 17453674     EISSN: 17453682     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2011.618913     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Adalberth G, Nilsson K G, Byström S, Kolstad K, Milbrink J. Low-conform-ing all-polyethylene tibial component not inferior to metal-backed compo-nent in cemented total knee arthroplasty: Prospective, randomized radioste-reometric analysis study of the AGC total knee prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 2000; 15 (6): 783-92.
2. Adalberth G, Nilsson K G, Byström S, Kolstad K, Milbrink J. All-polyethyl-ene versus metal-backed and stemmed tibial components in cemented total knee arthroplasty. A prospective, randomised RSA study. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2001; 83 (6): 825-31. (Pubitemid 32785550)
3. Apel D M, Tozzi J M, Dorr L D. Clinical comparison of all-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1991; (273): 243-52.
4. Bach C M, Mayr E, Liebensteiner M, Gstöttner M, Nogler M, Thaler M. Correlation between radiographic assessment and quality of life after total knee arthroplasty. Knee 2009; 16 (3): 207-10.
5. Bartel D L, Burstein A H, Santavicca E A, Insall J N. Performance of the tibial component in total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 1982; 64 (7): 1026-33.
6. Bartel D L, Burstein A H, Toda M D, Edwards D L. The effect of conformity and plastic thickness on contact stresses in metal-backed plastic implants. J Biomech Eng 1985; 107 (3): 193-9. (Pubitemid 15048557)
7. Bettinson K A, Pinder IM, Moran C G, Weir D J, Lingard E A. All-poly-ethylene compared with metal-backed tibial components in total knee arthroplasty at ten years. A prospective, randomized controlled trial. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 2009; 91 (7): 1587-94.
8. Blumenfeld T J, Scott R D. The role of the cemented all-polyethylene tibial component in total knee replacement A 30-year patient follow-up and review of the literature. Knee 2010; 17 (6): 412-6.
9. Detsky A S, Naylor C D, O'Rourke K, McGeer A J, L'Abbé K A. Incorpo-rating variations in the quality of individual randomized trials into meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45 (3): 255-65.
10. Dojcinovic S, Ait Si Selmi T, Servien E, Verdonk P C, Neyret P. A compari-son of all-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components in total knee arthroplasty. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 2007; 93 (4): 364-72.
11. Forster M C. Survival analysis of primary cemented total knee arthroplasty: Which designs last? J Arthroplasty 2003; 18 (3): 265-70. (Pubitemid 36542581)
12. Garcia R M, Kraay M J, Messerschmitt P J, Goldberg V M, Rimnac C M. Analysis of retrieved ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene tibial components from rotating-platform total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2009; 24 (1): 131-8.
13. Gioe T J, Bowman K R. A randomized comparison of all-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components. Clin Orthop 2000; (380): 108-15.
14. Gioe T J, Maheshwari A V. The all-polyethylene tibial component in primary total knee arthroplasty.J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 2010; 92 (2): 478-87.
15. Gioe T J, Killeen K K, Mehle S, Grimm K.Implementation and application of a community total joint registry: A twelve-year history. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 2006; 88 (6): 1399-404. (Pubitemid 43837139)
16. Gioe T J, Stroemer E S, Santos E R. All-polyethylene and metal-backed tibias have similar outcomes at 10 years: A randomized level I[corrected] evi-dence study. Clin Orthop 2007a; (455): 212-8. (Pubitemid 46213734)
17. Gioe T J, Sinner P, Mehle S, Ma W, Killeen K K. Excellent survival of all-polyethylene tibial components in a community joint registry. Clin Orthop 2007b; (464): 88-92. (Pubitemid 350059951)
18. Hyldahl H, Regnér L, Carlsson L, Kärrholm J, Weidenhielm L. All-polyethyl-ene vs. metal-backed tibial component in total knee arthroplasty-a random-ized RSA study comparing early fixation of horizontally and completely cemented tibial components: Part 1. Horizontally cemented components: AP better fixated than MB. Acta Orthop 2005a; 76 (6): 769-77.
19. Hyldahl H, Regnér L, Carlsson L, Kärrholm J, Weidenhielm L. All-polyethyl-ene vs. metal-backed tibial component in total knee arthroplasty-a random-ized RSA study comparing early fixation of horizontally and completely cemented tibial components: Part 2. Completely cemented components: MB not superior to AP components. Acta Orthop 2005b; 76 (6): 778-84.
20. KAT Trial Group, Johnston L, MacLennan G, McCormack K, Ramsay C, Walker A. The Knee Arthroplasty Trial (KAT) design features, base-line characteristics, and two-year functional outcomes after alternative approaches to knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 2009; 91 (1): 134-41.
21. Li S, Scuderi G, Furman B D, Bhattacharyya S, Schmieg J J, Insall J N. Assessment of backside wear from the analysis of 55 retrieved tibial inserts. Clin Orthop 2002; (404): 75-82. (Pubitemid 35351052)
22. L'Insalata J L, Stern S H, Insall J N. Total knee arthroplasty in elderly patients. Comparison of tibial component designs. J Arthroplasty 1992; 7 (3): 261-6.
23. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman D G; PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009; 6 (7): E1000097.
24. Muller S D, Deehan D J, Holland J P, Outterside S E, Kirk L M, Gregg P J, McCaskie A W. Should we reconsider all-polyethylene tibial implants in total knee replacement? J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 2006; 88 (12): 1596-602. (Pubitemid 44970686)
25. Najibi S, Iorio R, Surdam J W, Whang W, Appleby D, Healy W L. All-poly-ethylene and metal-backed tibial components in total knee arthroplasty: A matched pair analysis of functional outcome. J Arthroplasty (Suppl 1) 2003; 18 (7): 9-15. (Pubitemid 37259659)
26. Norgren B, Dalén T, Nilsson K G. All-poly tibial component better than metal-backed: A randomized RSA study. Knee 2004; 11 (3): 189-96. (Pubitemid 38759635)
27. Pagnano M W, Levy B A, Berry D J. Cemented all polyethylene tibial com-ponents in patients age 75 years and older. Clin Orthop 1999; (367): 73-80. (Pubitemid 29503680)
28. Pomeroy D L, Schaper L A, Badenhausen W E, Suthers K E, Smith M W, Empson J A, Curry J I. Results of all-polyethylene tibial components as a cost-saving technique. Clin Orthop 2000; (380): 140-3.
29. Ranawat C S, Flynn W F Jr., Saddler S, Hansraj K K, Maynard M J. Long-term results of the total condylar knee arthroplasty. A 15-year survivorship study. Clin Orthop 1993; (286): 94-102. (Pubitemid 23059473)
30. Rand J A. Comparison of metal-backed and all-polyethylene tibial compo-nents in cruciate condylar total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 1993; 8 (3): 307-13. (Pubitemid 23173324)
31. Ritter M A, Gioe T J, Stringer E A. Radiolucency surrounding the posterior cruciate condylar total knee prosthetic components. Clin Orthop 1981; (160): 149-52. (Pubitemid 11014244)
32. Ritter M A, Herbst S A, Keating E M, Faris P M, Meding J B. Long-term survival analysis of a posterior cruciate-retaining total condylar total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop 1994a; (309): 136-45.
33. Ritter M A, Herbst S A, Keating E M, Faris P M. Radiolucency at the bone-cement interface in total knee replacement. The effects of bone-surface preparation and cement technique. J Bone Joint Surg (Am) 1994b; 76 (1): 60-5. (Pubitemid 24081805)
34. Rodriguez J A, Baez N, Rasquinha V, Ranawat C S. Metal-backed and all-polyethylene tibial components in total knee replacement. Clin Orthop 2001; (392): 174-83. (Pubitemid 33054942)
35. Scuderi G R, Insall J N, Windsor R E, Moran M C. Survivorship of cemented knee replacements. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 1989; 71 (5): 798-803. (Pubitemid 19282571)
36. Shen B, Yang J, Zhou Z, Kang P, Wang L, Pei F. Survivorship comparison of all-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components in cruciate-substitut-ing total knee arthroplasty-Chinese experience. Int Orthop 2009; 33 (5): 1243-7.
37. Small S R, Berend M E, Ritter M A, Buckley C A. A comparison in proximal tibial strain between metal-backed and all-polyethylene anatomic gradu-ated component total knee arthroplasty tibial components. J Arthroplasty 2010; 25 (5): 820-5.
38. Taylor M, Tanner K E, Freeman M A.Finite element analysis of the implanted proximal tibia: A relationship between the initial cancellous bone stresses and implant migration. J Biomech 1998; 31 (4): 303-10. (Pubitemid 28322904)
39. Udomkiat P, Dorr L D, Long W. Matched-pair analysis of all-polyethylene versus metal-backed tibial components. J Arthroplasty 2001; 16 (6): 689-96. (Pubitemid 32803635)
40. Willie B M, Foot L J, Prall M W, Bloebaum R D. Surface damage analysis of retrieved highly crosslinked polyethylene tibial components after short-term implantation. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2008; 85 (1): 114-24. (Pubitemid 351458234)