Bone defect classifications in revision total knee arthroplasty, their reliability and utility: a systematic review
被引:8
作者:
Khan, Yasim
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Maulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
Lok Nayak Hosp, New Delhi 110002, IndiaMaulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
Khan, Yasim
[1
,2
]
Arora, Sumit
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Maulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
Lok Nayak Hosp, New Delhi 110002, IndiaMaulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
Arora, Sumit
[1
,2
]
Kashyap, Abhishek
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Maulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
Lok Nayak Hosp, New Delhi 110002, IndiaMaulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
Kashyap, Abhishek
[1
,2
]
Patralekh, Mohit Kumar
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Safdarjang Hosp, New Delhi 110029, India
Vardhman Mahavir Med Coll, New Delhi 110029, IndiaMaulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
Patralekh, Mohit Kumar
[3
,4
]
Maini, Lalit
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:
Maulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
Lok Nayak Hosp, New Delhi 110002, IndiaMaulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
Maini, Lalit
[1
,2
]
机构:
[1] Maulana Azad Med Coll, Dept Orthopaed Surg, New Delhi 110002, India
[2] Lok Nayak Hosp, New Delhi 110002, India
[3] Safdarjang Hosp, New Delhi 110029, India
[4] Vardhman Mahavir Med Coll, New Delhi 110029, India
Background There are various classification systems described in the literature for managing bone defects in revision knee arthroplasty (RTKA). We analysed the reliability and usefulness of these classification systems. Questions/purposes (1) To review and critique the various classification systems proposed for bone loss in RTKA. (2) Among all the proposed classifications which one is the most commonly used by surgeons to report their results. (3) What is the reliability of various bone defect classification systems for RTKA. In this review, we have assessed the studies validating those classifications with a detailed description of the limitations and the proposed modifications. Methods This systematic review was conducted following PRISMA guidelines. Pubmed/Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane databases and Web of Science databases were searched using multiple search terms and MeSH terms where possible. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were assessed for statistical parameters of reliability of a classification system. Results We found 16 classification systems for bone defects in RTKA. Six studies were found evaluating a classification system with reporting their reliability parameters. Fifty-four studies were found which classified bone loss using AORI classification in their series. AORI classification is most commonly reported for classifying bone defects. Type T2B and F2B are the most common bone defects in RTKA. The average kappa value for AORI classification for femoral bone loss was 0.38 (0.27-0.50) and 0.76 (0.63-1) for tibial bone loss assessment. Conclusion None of the available classification systems is reliably established in determining the bone loss and treatment plans in RTKA. Among all, AORI classification is the most widely used system in clinical practice. The reliability of AORI Classification is fair for femoral bone loss and substantial for tibial bone loss.
机构:
North Shore LIJ Heath Syst, Med Grp Orthopaed, New York, NY USASinai Hosp Baltimore, Ctr Joint Preservat & Replacement, Rubin Inst Adv Orthoped, Baltimore, MD 21215 USA
机构:
North Shore LIJ Heath Syst, Med Grp Orthopaed, New York, NY USASinai Hosp Baltimore, Ctr Joint Preservat & Replacement, Rubin Inst Adv Orthoped, Baltimore, MD 21215 USA