Abstract
We performed a systematic review to compare outcomes of cemented versus uncemented trapezio-metacarpal joint (TMCJ) replacement for treatment of base-of-thumb arthritis.
We assessed improvements in pain and function, range of movement (ROM), strength, complications and need for revision surgery. A thorough literature search was performed. A total of 481 studies were identified from the literature search (179 Medline, 253 Embase, 27 CINAHL, 22 Cochrane). Of 43 relevant titles 28 were selected for full-text review after assessment of the abstracts. Duplicate studies were removed. 18 studies met inclusion criteria on full-text review. All studies were of level IV evidence. There were no randomised controlled trials or meta-analyses. The studies were critically appraised using a validated scoring system.
Most studies reported good outcomes for pain and strength, and functional outcome was comparable for both groups. ROM was generally improved for both prosthetic types, however statistical calculation was lacking in many studies. Trapezial component loosening was the main problem for both cemented and uncemented prostheses, however radiological loosening did not necessarily correlate with implant failure.
This systematic review has found that both cemented and uncemented replacements generally give good outcomes for the treatment of TMCJ arthritis, however young, male, patients with manual occupations and with disease in the dominant hand and patients with poor trapezial bone stock appear to be at higher risk for implant failure due to cup loosening. We recommend the construction of a joint registry to record implantation and revision rates.
