Cemented all-poly tibia in resource constrained country, affordable and cost-effective care. Is it applicable at this era? Review article.

Abstract

Osteoarthritis of knee is a progressive disease requiring total knee replacement in advanced stage. TKR is being performed in high numbers in developing countries as well. It carries significant economic burden on health system including high cost of implants. Initially, tibial components were cemented all polyethylene monoblock constructs. Subsequent studies showed excellent long term follow up in terms of durability up to 20 years.Successive studies reported aseptic loosening as the cause of failure but such studies failed to address factors responsible for failure other than implant. Cemented metal-backed non-modular tibial components (MBT) are implants in current use. They provide modularity in terms of polyethylene thickness, stems wedges. A literature reported cost saving of $1.17 million, by operating 16,500 total joints using all poly-tibial tibial component rather than metal backed tibial component. studies have reported no significant difference in terms of survivorship, function and backside wear.MethodsFor this study only English written articles were included. Studies included case reports, case series, RCTs and systemic reviews related to all polyethylene tibial components. Articles reporting all levels of evidence – Level I to IV- were included as part of our research. PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane Reviews databases from 2000 to 2016 were searched for studies.ResultsInformation was gathered and thoroughly studied from 30 articles with overall result in favor of the APTC implant.ConclusionAll polyethylene tibial component (APTC) is an appealing and cost effective alternative, and is associated with the excellent survivorship and lower risk of revision. In light of the present-day economic evidence and long-term functional outcome, all-polyethylene should be in more use than metal backed especially in resource-constrained setting.