TY - JOUR
T1 - Silicone radial head prostheses revisited
T2 - do they have a role in today’s practice? A systematic review of literature on clinical outcomes
AU - van Bussel, Erik M.
AU - Lindenhovius, Anneluuk L.
AU - The, Bertram
AU - Eygendaal, Denise
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society.
PY - 2023/9
Y1 - 2023/9
N2 - Background: Silicone radial head prostheses (SRHP) are considered obsolete due to reports of frequent failure and destructive silicone-in-duced synovitis. Considering the good outcomes of modern non-radial silicone joint implants, the extent of scientific evidence for this neg-ative view is unclear. The aim of this research was to systematically analyze the clinical evidence on complications and outcomes of SRHP and how SRHP compare to both non-SRHP and silicone prostheses of other joints. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted through the Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase databases. Results: Eight cohort studies were included, consisting of 142 patients and follow-up periods ranging from 23 months to 8 years. Average patient satisfaction was 86%, range of 71%–100%, and 58 complications were seen, but no cases of synovitis. These outcomes were in line with non-SRHP. Four case series with 11 cases of synovitis were found, all due to implant fractures years to decades after implantation. Six systematic reviews of currently used non-radial silicone joint implants showed excellent outcomes with low complication rates. Conclusions: Since SRHP have satisfactory clinical results and an acceptable complication rate when selecting a patient group in suitable condition for surgical indications, it is considered that SRHP can still be chosen as a potential surgical treatment method in current clinical practice.
AB - Background: Silicone radial head prostheses (SRHP) are considered obsolete due to reports of frequent failure and destructive silicone-in-duced synovitis. Considering the good outcomes of modern non-radial silicone joint implants, the extent of scientific evidence for this neg-ative view is unclear. The aim of this research was to systematically analyze the clinical evidence on complications and outcomes of SRHP and how SRHP compare to both non-SRHP and silicone prostheses of other joints. Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted through the Cochrane, PubMed, and Embase databases. Results: Eight cohort studies were included, consisting of 142 patients and follow-up periods ranging from 23 months to 8 years. Average patient satisfaction was 86%, range of 71%–100%, and 58 complications were seen, but no cases of synovitis. These outcomes were in line with non-SRHP. Four case series with 11 cases of synovitis were found, all due to implant fractures years to decades after implantation. Six systematic reviews of currently used non-radial silicone joint implants showed excellent outcomes with low complication rates. Conclusions: Since SRHP have satisfactory clinical results and an acceptable complication rate when selecting a patient group in suitable condition for surgical indications, it is considered that SRHP can still be chosen as a potential surgical treatment method in current clinical practice.
KW - Elbow
KW - Prosthesis and implant
KW - Radius fracture
KW - Silicone
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85188935499&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.5397/cise.2022.00990
DO - 10.5397/cise.2022.00990
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85188935499
SN - 2383-8337
VL - 26
SP - 312
EP - 322
JO - Clinics in shoulder and elbow
JF - Clinics in shoulder and elbow
IS - 3
ER -