首页> 外文期刊>Acta orthopaedica. >Comparison of survival and cost-effectiveness between unicondylar arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in patients with primary osteoarthritis: a follow-up study of 50,493 knee replacements from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register.
【24h】

Comparison of survival and cost-effectiveness between unicondylar arthroplasty and total knee arthroplasty in patients with primary osteoarthritis: a follow-up study of 50,493 knee replacements from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register.

机译:原发性骨关节炎患者单icon和全膝关节置换术的生存率和成本效益比较:芬兰人工关节置换术对50493例膝关节置换术的随访研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Both unicondylar arthroplasty (UKA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are commonly used for the treatment of unicompartmental osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee. The long-term survivorship and cost-effectiveness of these two treatments have seldom been compared on a nationwide level, however. We therefore compared the survival of UKA with that of TKA and conducted a cost-benefit analysis comparing UKA with TKA in patients with primary OA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed 1,886 primary UKAs (3 designs) and 48,607 primary TKAs that had been performed for primary OA and entered in the Finnish Arthroplasty Register between 1980 and 2003 inclusive. RESULTS: UKAs had a 60% (95% CI: 54-66) survival rate and TKAs an 80% (95% CI: 79-81) survival rate at 15 years with any revision taken as the endpoint. Overall survival of UKAs was worse than that of TKAs (p < 0.001). All 3 UKA designs had poorer overall survival than the corresponding TKA designs. In the theoretical cost-benefit analysis, the cost saved by lower implant prices and shorter hospital stay with UKA did not cover the costs of the extra revisions. INTERPRETATION: At a nationwide level, UKA had significantly poorer long-term survival than TKA. What is more, UKA did not even have a theoretical cost benefit over TKA in our study. Based on these results, we cannot recommend widespread use of UKA in treatment of unicompartmental OA of the knee.
机译:背景与目的:单icon关节置换术(UKA)和全膝关节置换术(TKA)都普遍用于治疗膝关节单室骨关节炎(OA)。但是,很少在全国范围内比较这两种疗法的长期生存率和成本效益。因此,我们比较了UKA和TKA的生存率,并进行了成本效益分析,比较了UKA和TKA在原发性OA患者中的生存率。病人和方法:我们分析了1980年至2003年(含)之间针对原发性OA进行的1,886例原发性UKA(3个设计)和48,607例原发性TKA。结果:UKA的15年生存率达到60%(95%CI:54-66),而TKAs达到80%(95%CI:79-81),以任何修订为终点。 UKA的总生存期比TKA的总生存期差(p <0.001)。与相应的TKA设计相比,所有3个UKA设计的总体生存期均较差。在理论成本效益分析中,UKA降低了植入物价格并缩短了住院时间所节省的成本并未涵盖额外修订的成本。解释:在全国范围内,UKA的长期生存远低于TKA。而且,在我们的研究中,UKA甚至没有比TKA具有理论上的成本优势。基于这些结果,我们不建议广泛使用UKA治疗膝关节单室OA。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号