Outcomes of Double-Mobility Prosthesis in Trapeziometacarpal Joint Arthritis With a Minimal 3 Years of Follow-Up: An Advantage for Implant Stability

Tchurukdichian, Alain; Gerenton, Brice; Moris, Vivien; See, Leslie-Ann; Stivala, Alessio; Garcı́a-Dorado, David

doi:10.1177/1558944719855690

Cited by 27 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 35 publications

(50 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Grip and pinch strength as well as mobility were comparable with the contralateral side. These clinical outcomes are comparable with published series on the Moovis® implant at a mean follow-up of 28 months (Dreant and Poumellec, 2019) and of 48 months (Tchurukdichian et al., 2019).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

“…It is semi-constrained with dual mobility of the cup. Dreant and Poumellec (2019) reported promising results after a follow-up of 28 months and Tchurukdichian et al. (2019) did the same for follow-ups after 48 months.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…The incidence of dislocation ranges from 0% (Dreant and Poumellec, 2019; Goubau et al., 2013; Hernández-Cortés et al., 2012; Seng and Chantelot, 2013) to 10% (Spaans et al., 2016). Tchurukdichian et al. (2019) reported one dislocation out of 200 cases with the Moovis ® prosthesis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, a failed TMC joint arthroplasty can successfully be converted to a secondary trapeziectomy with results that are comparable with primary trapeziectomy (Kaszap et al., 2013). Considerable improvements in implant design have been made, and recent series show encouraging results with lower incidences of dislocation and loosening, especially concerning implants with double mobility (Tchurukdichian et al., 2019). However, it is still an open question whether implant surgery for this joint has added benefit over simple trapeziectomy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Moovis® implant for trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis: results after 2 to 6 years

Martins

Charbonnel²,

Lecomte³

et al. 2020

J Hand Surg Eur Vol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this retrospective study we reviewed the outcomes of 46 trapeziometacarpal joint replacements with the Moovis® prosthesis in 46 patients with painful osteoarthritis. The dual mobility design of this prosthesis aims to reduce prosthetic dislocation and subsidence. At follow-up 2 to 6 years (mean 5 years) after operation, pain was reduced from 6 to 0 on a visual analogue scale from 0 to 10. The scores of the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire improved significantly. Thumb motion and grip and pinch strength did not differ significantly from the contralateral hand. There were no radiographical signs of implant subsidence or loosening. No implant required revision. Forty-five patients rated the result as excellent or good. We conclude the Moovis® is a reliable and effective implant at short- to mid-term follow-up. Level of evidence: IV

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Moovis® implant for trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis: results after 2 to 6 years

Martins

Charbonnel²,

Lecomte³

et al. 2020

J Hand Surg Eur Vol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 5 – 38 Comparable pre and post-operative values were reported in 12 studies. 7 , 9 , 10 , 13 , 16 , 17 , 19 , 23 , 27 , 29 , 32 , 33 The most commonly used patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were the Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand measure (DASH) or quick DASH which are general upper extremity scoring systems. Other measures included the Michigan Hand Questionnaire (MHQ) which is more specific to hand complaints, the Nelson score, which is specific to thumb outcomes, the Patient Related Wrist Evaluation (PRWE) score which is a wrist-specific measure, and the Sollerman score which is a measure of hand function.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thumb CMCJ prosthetic total joint replacement: a systematic review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thumb carpometacarpal joint (CMCJ) arthritis is a common and painful condition. Thumb CMCJ prosthetic replacement aims to restore thumb biomechanics and improve pain and function. Early reviews demonstrated a lack of high-quality studies, but more recently a significant number of higher-quality studies have been published. This review provides a concise and systematic overview of the evidence to date. A systematic review of several databases was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies evaluating the outcomes of thumb CMCJ prosthetic total joint replacement were included. Data extracted included patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), pain scores, range of motion, strength, survival rates and complications. A total of 56 studies met all inclusion criteria and were analysed. There was one randomized controlled trial, three prospective comparative cohort studies, five retrospective comparative cohort studies, and 47 descriptive cohort studies. The reported studies included 2731 patients with 3048 thumb total CMCJ prosthetic joint replacements. Follow up ranged from 12 months to 13.1 years. In general, good results were demonstrated, with improvements in PROMs, pain scores and strength. Failure rates ranged from 2.6% to 19.9% depending upon implant studied. Comparative studies demonstrated promising results for replacement when compared to resection arthroplasty, with modest improvements in PROMs but at a cost of increased rates of complications. Studies reporting outcomes in thumb CMCJ prosthetic total joint replacement are increasing in both number and quality. Failure, in terms of loosening and dislocation, remains a concern, although in the medium-term follow up for modern implants this issue appears to be lower when compared to their predecessors. Functional outcomes also look promising compared to resection arthroplasty, but further high-quality studies utilizing a standardized resection arthroplasty technique and modern implants, together with standardized core outcome sets, will be of value. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:316-330. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200152

show abstract