Mid-Term Follow Up of the Nexel Total Elbow Arthroplasty
Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc..
INTRODUCTION: Aseptic loosening is one of the most common complications of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Modern implants, such as the Nexel, have been designed in an attempt to decrease loosening. The present study aims to report implant survivorship, radiographic assessment of loosening and lucency, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients treated with the Nexel TEA at mid-term follow-up.
METHODS: Consecutive series of adult patients underwent TEA using the Nexel by a single surgeon via standardized technique. Patients with minimum 3 year follow-up with radiographic and PROM data were included. Survivorship was defined by the absence of revision. Loosening was assessed via Wrightington method by three independent fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeons. Lucency was analyzed across individual radiographic zones on orthogonal radiographs. PROMs included the Quick Dash (QDASH), Patient Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE), and EuroQoL (EQ5D).
RESULTS: 38 consecutive patients (22 female, 16 male) with mean age of 67 underwent TEA via triceps-sparing isolated medial window approach. Mean follow-up was 5.5 years (range 3-9). Primary diagnoses were: 19 osteoarthritis (OA), 9 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 9 post-traumatic arthritis (PA), 1 conversion of elbow arthrodesis. Overall survivorship was 97.4%, with one patient undergoing revision for infection. Loosening was found in 5.3% of elbows, averaged across three observers. Lucency was most pronounced at the level of the humeral condyles. PROMs demonstrated significant and clinically meaningful improvements in 76%, 92%, and 73% of patients for QDASH, PREE, and EQ5D, respectively. No significant correlations were found between patient age, gender, loosening, lucency, and PROMs.
CONCLUSION: At mid-term follow-up, the Nexel TEA demonstrated excellent overall survivorship and low rate of implant loosening. The single failure requiring revision for infection was conversion of a prior elbow arthrodesis. PROMs overall exhibited marked and consistent improvement from preop to final postop follow-up. Although promising, these results should be interpreted with some caution as long term data regarding this prosthesis are still lacking.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2024 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery - (2024) vom: 22. März |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Ahmed, Adil Shahzad [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Case Series |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 24.03.2024 published: Print-Electronic Citation Status Publisher |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1016/j.jse.2024.02.017 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM370123425 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000naa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM370123425 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240325235741.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 240325s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.jse.2024.02.017 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1347.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM370123425 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)38522777 | ||
| 035 | |a (PII)S1058-2746(24)00214-3 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Ahmed, Adil Shahzad |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Mid-Term Follow Up of the Nexel Total Elbow Arthroplasty |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 24.03.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Print-Electronic | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status Publisher | ||
| 520 | |a Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc. | ||
| 520 | |a INTRODUCTION: Aseptic loosening is one of the most common complications of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). Modern implants, such as the Nexel, have been designed in an attempt to decrease loosening. The present study aims to report implant survivorship, radiographic assessment of loosening and lucency, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients treated with the Nexel TEA at mid-term follow-up | ||
| 520 | |a METHODS: Consecutive series of adult patients underwent TEA using the Nexel by a single surgeon via standardized technique. Patients with minimum 3 year follow-up with radiographic and PROM data were included. Survivorship was defined by the absence of revision. Loosening was assessed via Wrightington method by three independent fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeons. Lucency was analyzed across individual radiographic zones on orthogonal radiographs. PROMs included the Quick Dash (QDASH), Patient Rated Elbow Evaluation (PREE), and EuroQoL (EQ5D) | ||
| 520 | |a RESULTS: 38 consecutive patients (22 female, 16 male) with mean age of 67 underwent TEA via triceps-sparing isolated medial window approach. Mean follow-up was 5.5 years (range 3-9). Primary diagnoses were: 19 osteoarthritis (OA), 9 rheumatoid arthritis (RA), 9 post-traumatic arthritis (PA), 1 conversion of elbow arthrodesis. Overall survivorship was 97.4%, with one patient undergoing revision for infection. Loosening was found in 5.3% of elbows, averaged across three observers. Lucency was most pronounced at the level of the humeral condyles. PROMs demonstrated significant and clinically meaningful improvements in 76%, 92%, and 73% of patients for QDASH, PREE, and EQ5D, respectively. No significant correlations were found between patient age, gender, loosening, lucency, and PROMs | ||
| 520 | |a CONCLUSION: At mid-term follow-up, the Nexel TEA demonstrated excellent overall survivorship and low rate of implant loosening. The single failure requiring revision for infection was conversion of a prior elbow arthrodesis. PROMs overall exhibited marked and consistent improvement from preop to final postop follow-up. Although promising, these results should be interpreted with some caution as long term data regarding this prosthesis are still lacking | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Case Series | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Level IV | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Level of evidence | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Nexel | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Total elbow arthroplasty | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Treatment Study | |
| 650 | 4 | |a elbow replacement | |
| 650 | 4 | |a loosening | |
| 650 | 4 | |a lucency | |
| 650 | 4 | |a survivorship | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Clifton, Thomas |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Subbiah, Kushalappa |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Spasojevic, Milos |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Young, Allan |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Cass, Benjamin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Marmen, Andréanne |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yu, Raymond |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Burton, Codey |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Smith, Margaret M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Hughes, Jeffery |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery |d 1992 |g (2024) vom: 22. März |w (DE-627)NLM07528877X |x 1532-6500 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2024 |g day:22 |g month:03 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2024.02.017 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |j 2024 |b 22 |c 03 | ||