Abstract
Abstract
Introduction
Active, middle-aged patients with symptomatic cartilage or osteochondral defects can find themselves in a treatment gap when they have failed conservative measures but are not yet eligible for conventional arthroplasty. Data from various cohort studies suggests that focal knee resurfacing implants such as HemiCAP, UniCAP, Episealer or BioBoly are cost-effective solutions to alleviate pain, improve function and delay or eliminate the need for conventional replacement. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in order to(i) evaluate revision rates and implant survival of focal resurfacing; (ii) explore surgical complications; and (iii) evaluate various patient reported clinical outcome measures.
Methodology
PubMED, Cochrane Library and Medline databases were searched in February 2022 for prospective and retrospective cohort studies evaluating any of the available implant types. Data on incidence of revision, complications and various patient reported outcome measures was sourced.
Results
A total of 24 unique studies were identified with a total of 1465 enrolled patients. A revision rate of 12.97% over a 5.9 year weighted mean follow-up period was observed across all implant types. However, in one series a Kaplan-Meir survival as high as 92.6% at a 10-year follow-up period was noted. A statistically significant improvement was documented across multiple subjective clinical outcomes scores. There was a low reported incidence of post-operative complications such as aseptic loosening or deep wound infection.
Conclusions
Focal femoral resurfacing appears to be a viable treatment option for focal symptomatic chondral lesions in patients beyond biological reconstruction, with low revision rates and high patient satisfaction.
