Download PDF
J Knee Surg 2019; 32(09): 919-923
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1672124
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

All-Polyethylene Tibial Components in Total Knee Replacement: Early Failures

Zaki Suliman Alhifzi
1   Department of Orthopedics, King Faisal Medical City, Abha, ‘Asir Region, Saudi Arabia
,
Yousef Tawfik Khoja
2   Division of Orthopaedics, Department of Surgery, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
3   Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Al-Nada College of Medicine, Al-Imam Mohamed bin Saud Islamic University (IMSIU), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
,
Gavin C. Wood
2   Division of Orthopaedics, Department of Surgery, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

21 June 2018

19 August 2018

Publication Date:
03 October 2018 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

In total primary knee replacement surgery, the use of all-polyethylene tibial (APT) components has many advantages, including no backside wear and no linear dissociation. In addition, the greater polyethylene thickness permits more conservative bone resection compared with that for metal-backed components, with a lower unit cost and similar functional results. Thus, the use of an APT in primary total knee arthroplasty remains an attractive option. This is a review of 158 patients who underwent primary knee replacement using APT components from a single manufacturer. Data collection included age, American Society of Anesthesiology physical status classification, body mass index (BMI), type of deformity, the presence of diabetes mellitus, rate of revision, and characteristics associated with early failure of the components. Average follow-up time was 40 months. The revision rate for any reason was 5.6%, and the average BMI in revision cases was 37.6. Patients with a higher BMI (≥ 37.6) were significantly more likely to require revision surgery than patients with a lower BMI (p = 0.04). In our sample, high BMI was a contributing factor for early failures in total knee replacements using an APT component. Generally, polyethylene tibial components used for primary knee replacements are safe and effective, with good outcomes and subsequent lower costs to the health care system.

Keywords

total knee replacement - polyethylene - tibia
 

  • References

  • 1 Doran J, Yu S, Smith D, Iorio R. The role of all-polyethylene tibial components in modern TKA. J Knee Surg 2015; 28 (05) 382-389
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Nouta KA, Verra WC, Pijls BG, Schoones JW, Nelissen RG. All-polyethylene tibial components are equal to metal-backed components: systematic review and meta-regression. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (12) 3549-3559
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Turow A, Campbell D. Knee replacement survival rates with all-polyethylene or metal-backed tibial components—what do the registries say?. Reconstr Rev 2013 Doi: 10.15438/rr.v3i2.41
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Font-Rodriguez DE, Scuderi GR, Insall JN. Survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1997; (345) 79-86
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Railton GT, Waterfield A, Nunn D, Freeman MA. The effect of a metal-back without a stem upon the fixation of a tibial prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 1990; 5 (Suppl): S67-S71
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Regnér L, Carlsson L, Kärrholm J, Herberts P. Clinical and radiologic survivorship of cementless tibial components fixed with finned polyethylene pegs. J Arthroplasty 1997; 12 (07) 751-758
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Bek J, Vavrík P, Landor I. Evaluation of the survival of the Walter-Motorlet TKA: long-term outcomes [in Czech]. Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech 2005; 72 (04) 221-227
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Dojcinovic S, Ait Si Selmi T, Servien E, Verdonk PC, Neyret P. A comparison of all-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components in total knee arthroplasty. [in French]. Rev Chir Orthop Repar Appar Mot 2007; 93 (04) 364-372
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Najibi S, Iorio R, Surdam JW, Whang W, Appleby D, Healy WL. All-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components in total knee arthroplasty: a matched pair analysis of functional outcome. J Arthroplasty 2003; 18 (07) (Suppl. 01) 9-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 O'Rourke MR, Callaghan JJ, Goetz DD, Sullivan PM, Johnston RC. Osteolysis associated with a cemented modular posterior-cruciate-substituting total knee design : five to eight-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002; 84-A (08) 1362-1371
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Rodriguez JA, Baez N, Rasquinha V, Ranawat CS. Metal-backed and all-polyethylene tibial components in total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001; (392) 174-183
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Bettinson KA, Pinder IM, Moran CG, Weir DJ, Lingard EA. All-polyethylene 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 (07) 1587-1594
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Gioe TJ, Stroemer ES, Santos ER. All-polyethylene and metal-backed tibias have similar outcomes at 10 years: a randomized level I [corrected] evidence study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2007; 455 (455) 212-218
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Adalberth G, Nilsson KG, Byström S, Kolstad K, Milbrink J. Low-conforming all-polyethylene tibial component not inferior to metal-backed component in cemented total knee arthroplasty: prospective, randomized radiostereometric analysis study of the AGC total knee prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 2000; 15 (06) 783-792
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Udomkiat P, Dorr LD, Long W. Matched-pair analysis of all-polyethylene versus metal-backed tibial components. J Arthroplasty 2001; 16 (06) 689-696
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Hyldahl H, Regnér L, Carlsson L, Kärrholm J, Weidenhielm L. All-polyethylene vs. metal-backed tibial component in total knee arthroplasty-a randomized RSA study comparing early fixation of horizontally and completely cemented tibial components: part 1. Horizontally cemented components: AP better fixated than MB. Acta Orthop 2005; 76 (06) 769-777
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Robinson RP, Green TM. Eleven-year implant survival rates of the all-polyethylene and metal-backed modular Optetrak posterior stabilized knee in bilateral simultaneous cases. J Arthroplasty 2011; 26 (08) 1165-1169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Johnston L, MacLennan G, McCormack K, Ramsay C, Walker A. ; KAT Trial Group. The Knee Arthroplasty Trial (KAT) design features, baseline characteristics, and two-year functional outcomes after alternative approaches to knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2009; 91 (01) 134-141
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Shen B, Yang J, Zhou Z, Kang P, Wang L, Pei F. Survivorship comparison of all-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components in cruciate-substituting total knee arthroplasty--Chinese experience. Int Orthop 2009; 33 (05) 1243-1247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Gudnason A, Hailer NP, W-Dahl A, Sundberg M, Robertsson O. All-polyethylene versus metal-backed tibial components—an analysis of 27,733 cruciate-retaining total knee replacements from the Swedish knee arthroplasty register. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96 (12) 994-999
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Mohan V, Inacio MC, Namba RS, Sheth D, Paxton EW. Monoblock all-polyethylene tibial components have a lower risk of early revision than metal-backed modular components. Acta Orthop 2013; 84 (06) 530-536
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Cheng T, Pan X, Liu T, Zhang X. Tibial component designs in primary total knee arthroplasty: should we reconsider all-polyethylene component?. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2012; 20 (08) 1438-1449
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Toman J, Iorio R, Healy WL. All-polyethylene and metal-backed tibial components are equivalent with BMI of less than 37.5. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2012; 470 (01) 108-116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Blumenfeld TJ, Scott RD. 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 (06) 412-416
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Houdek MT, Wagner ER, Wyles CC, Watts CD, Cass JR, Trousdale RT. All-polyethylene tibial components: an analysis of long-term outcomes and infection. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (07) 1476-1482
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Kalisvaart MM, Pagnano MW, Trousdale RT, Stuart MJ, Hanssen AD. Randomized clinical trial of rotating-platform and fixed-bearing total knee arthroplasty: no clinically detectable differences at five years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94 (06) 481-489
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Kremers HM, Sierra RJ, Schleck CD. , et al. Comparative survivorship of different tibial designs in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2014; 96 (14) e121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar