Fixation of stem in revision of total knee arthroplasty: cemented versus cementless-a meta-analysis

Fixation options for total knee arthroplasty: a comprehensive literature review

Total knee arthroplasty is a consistently successful, cost-efficient, and highly effective surgical procedure for treating severe knee osteoarthritis. The success and longevity of total knee arthroplasty depend significantly on the fixation method used to secure the prosthetic components. This comprehensive review examines the primary fixation methods (cemented, cementless, and hybrid fixation), analysing their biomechanics, clinical outcomes, advantages, and disadvantages, focusing on recent advances and trends in total knee arthroplasty fixation.

Promising short-term outcomes of free-hand burring technique to implant second-generation metaphyseal cone in Asian knees - a case series

BACKGROUND

The second-generation metaphyseal cone was useful in managing bone defects in revision knee arthroplasty. However, due to the anatomical constraints in Asian osteometry, the authors utilized a novel free-hand burring technique instead of cannulated reaming for bone preparation. We reported the short-term outcomes of our surgical techniques specific to Asian osteometry.

METHODS

We conducted a case series by consecutively recruiting 13 female and 12 male patients (involving 25 knees), with a mean age of 71 years (range, 54-88 years). The patients underwent revision total knee arthroplasty during the period from April 2017 to June 2022. Twenty-three tibial cones and 4 femoral cones using free-hand burring technique were implanted. The mean follow-up duration was 51 months (range 18-80 months). Due to the relatively small bone size and meta-diaphyseal center mismatch in the Asian knees, the free-hand burring technique instead of the cannulated reaming technique was adopted in preparing for cone implantation. The clinical outcomes were knee ranges of motion, the Knee Society Knee scores (KSS), end-of-stem pain, infection, and the need for revision surgery. The radiological outcomes included osteointegration, fracture, and loosening.

RESULTS

Mean knee range of motion improved from 83 degrees (range 0°-120°) preoperatively to 106 degrees (range 60°-125°) postoperatively (P < 0.001). Mean KSS improved significantly from 29 (range 0-70) to 69 (range 5-100) (P < 0.001). All cones were osteointegrated. One case had transient end-of-stem pain, two developed intraoperative minor femoral fractures and one suffered from recurrent infection that did not require cone revision. Cone revision-free survivorship was 100%. There was no aseptic loosening.

CONCLUSIONS

The second-generation cone implanted with free-hand burring bone preparation yielded promising short-term outcomes in Asian knees.

Mid-term clinical radiological results of the constrained condylar knee prosthesis in total knee revision

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the present study is to analyze the clinical-radiological outcomes of patients undergoing knee prosthesis revision surgery using constrained condylar prosthesis (LCCK; Zimmer-Biomet).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective study of 89 patients operated on between the years 2008 and 2020 with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the WOMAC Index score and KOOS scales. Radiological results (radiolucent lines, osteolysis, and cortical hypertrophy) were evaluated by two independent observers. Implant survival was analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

At the end of follow-up, a mean WOMAC Index score of 78.67 and KOOS score of 68.8 were obtained. Radiolucent lines (both non-progressive and progressive) were detected in 83.3% of the patients in the sample. Areas of osteolysis > 5 mm around the components were present in 6.75%. Cortical hypertrophy was seen around the femoral stem in 20.3% of cases, around the tibial stem in 20.3% and around both components in 6.76%. No statistically significant relationship was found between the presence of radiolucent lines, osteolysis or cortical hypertrophy with functional results. Implant survival was 88.1% at 13 years.

CONCLUSION

The present study shows high survival of LCCK prosthesis in revision surgery. The progressive radiolucencies, were associated with worst clinical outcome.

The Effect of Cemented Implants Placed During Initial TKA on Surgical Time and Expenses in Revision TKA

INTRODUCTION

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a complex procedure that often requires the removal of previous implants. There is little information evaluating the difference between removing cemented or noncemented knee prostheses in revision surgeries. The purpose of this study was to determine whether removing cemented or noncemented implants would affect surgical time and expenses incurred during revision procedures.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used a single-institution database to identify 300 patients who underwent femoral and tibial implant rTKA from 2016 to 2022 because of mechanical complications (infection cases excluded). Radiographs and surgical reports were used to confirm whether the fixation technique was cemented (N = 243) or noncemented (N = 57). The primary outcomes were surgical time and surgery costs. Secondary outcomes included readmission rates, revision implants used, stem usage, and insurance type.

RESULTS

The average surgical time was 121 minutes for noncemented and 128 minutes for cemented procedures (P = 0.118). The 90-day readmission rates for each group were similar at 7.00% for the cemented cohort and 8.77% for the noncemented cohort (P = 0.643). For patients with Medicare Advantage, the respective surgery costs were $1,966 for noncemented and $1,968 for cemented TKA (P = 0.988). For patients with commercial insurance, the respective surgery costs were $4,854 for noncemented and $5,660 for cemented TKA (P = 0.330).

CONCLUSION

Primary knee fixation type, cemented or noncemented, did not appear to influence the surgical duration or surgical costs of both-implant revision knee surgery indicated for mechanical complications.

Cemented is not superior to cementless total knee arthroplasty for complications: a propensity score matched analysis

INTRODUCTION

There is continued debate regarding the survivorship and revision rate of cementless versus cemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) prostheses. This includes the assessment of early revision surgery due to aseptic loosenings and periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). Studies have not always taken into account the impact of comorbidities, such as diabetes, obesity, and tobacco. Therefore, we compared revisions in a large population of patients undergoing cemented or cementless TKAs at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years.

METHODS

A review of an administrative claims database was used to identify patients undergoing primary TKA, either cementless (n = 8,890) or cemented (n = 215,460), from October 1, 2015 to October 31, 2020. Revision surgery for PJI and aseptic loosening were identified with diagnosis and associated procedural codes at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years and then compared between groups. A propensity matched-analysis was performed for age, sex, Charles Comorbidity Index (CCI) > 3, alcohol abuse, tobacco use, obesity, and diabetes. Chi square tests assessed statistical significance of differences in the matched cohorts using odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A P < 0.05 was defined as statistically significant.

RESULTS

Cementless TKA was associated with similar revisions rates due to PJIs at 90 days (OR, 1.04, 95% CI 0.79-1.38, p = 0.83), 1 year (OR, 0.93, 95% CI 0.75-1.14, p = 0.53, and 2 years (OR, 0.87, 95% CI 0.73-1.05, p = 0.17) in comparison to the cemented TKA cohort. The odds ratio of revision due to aseptic loosening was similar as well at 90 days (OR, 0.67, 95% CI 0.34-1.31, 0.31), 1 year (OR, 1.09, 95% CI 0.73-1.61, p = 0.76), and 2 years (OR, 1.00, 95% CI 0.73-1.61, p = 0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

This study found a comparable risk of PJI and aseptic loosening in cementless and cemented TKA when controlling for several comorbidities, such as tobacco, diabetes, and alcohol. Therefore, with proper patient selection, cementless TKAs can be performed with expectation of low risks of infections and aseptic loosenings.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of hybrid vs. cemented stems - which method is more optimal for revision total knee arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION

The number of primary and revision Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) cases are expected to increase in future. There are various advantages and disadvantage to employing either of the two main types of stem fixation methods - cemented or hybrid technique. This review aimed to study the most optimal fixation method for revision TKAs by comparing radiological outcomes and re-revision rates.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using PubMed and Cochrane Library from 2010 to identify studies explicitly comparing outcomes between cemented against hybrid fixation revision TKA techniques, with a minimum follow up of at least 24 months. A total of 8 studies was included in this review. Egger's test and visual inspection of the funnel plot did not reveal publication bias.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in radiological failure and loosening (OR 0.79, CI 0.37-1.66, I2 = 29%, p = 0.22), all causes of re-revision (OR 1.03, CI 0.73-1.44, I2 = 0%, p = 0.56) and aseptic revision (OR 0.74, CI 0.27-2.02, I2 = 0%, p = 0.41) between cemented and hybrid techniques. Functional and pain outcomes compared between the two fixation techniques were largely similar across the studies included in this meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

Despite a trend favouring hybrid stems in revision TKA, current evidence revealed that radiological outcomes and re-revision rates are largely similar between cemented and hybrid fixation techniques.

The Current Epidemiology of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in the United States From 2016 to 2022

BACKGROUND

The number of revision total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) is projected to reach 268,200 cases annually by 2030 in the United States. The growing demand for revision TKA can be attributed to the successes of primary TKAs combined with an aging population, patient desires to remain active, as well as expanded indications for younger patients. Given the evolving nature of revision TKAs, an epidemiological analysis of: (1) etiologies; (2) demographics, including age and region; as well as (3) lengths of stay (LOS) offers a way to minimize the gap between appropriate understanding and effective intervention.

METHODS

From 2016 to 2022, a national, all-payer database was queried. Incidences and indications were analyzed for a total of 135,983 patients who had revision TKA procedures.

RESULTS

The most common etiologies for revision TKA procedures were infection (19.3%) and aseptic loosening (12.8%), followed by mechanical complications (7.9%). The largest age group was 65 to 74 years (34.9%) followed by 55 to 64 years (32.2%), then age >75 years (20.5%). The South had the largest total procedure cohort (39.8%), followed by the Midwest (28.6%), then the Northeast (18.6%), and the West (13.0%). The mean length of stay was 3.86 days (range, 1.0 to 15.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study details the current status of revision TKA through 2022. While infection and aseptic loosening remain leading causes, we found a low aseptic loosening rate of 12.8%.

Clinical Outcomes of Offset Stem Couplers with or without Cone Augmentation in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

Intramedullary stems are often required in patients undergoing revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) to achieve stable fixation. Significant bone loss may require the addition of a metal cone to maximize fixation and osteointegration. The purpose of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes in rTKA using different fixation techniques. We conducted a single-institution retrospective review of all patients who received a tibial and femoral stem during rTKA between August 2011 and July 2021. Patients were separated into three cohorts based on fixation construct: press-fit stem with an offset coupler (OS), fully cemented straight (CS) stem, and press-fit straight (PFS) stem. A subanalysis of patients who received tibial cone augmentation was also conducted. A total of 358 patients who underwent rTKA were included in this study, of which 102 (28.5%) had a minimum 2-year follow-up and 25 (7.0%) had a minimum 5-year follow-up. In the primary analysis, 194 patients were included in the OS cohort, 72 in the CS cohort, and 92 in the PFS cohort. When stem type alone was considered, there was no significant difference in rerevision rate (p = 0.431) between cohorts. Subanalysis of patients who received augmentation with a tibial cone demonstrated that OS implants led to significantly higher rates of rerevision compared with the other two stem types (OS: 18.2% vs. CS: 2.1% vs. PFS: 11.1%; p = 0.037). The findings of the present analysis demonstrate that CS and cones in rTKA may provide more reliable long-term outcomes compared with press-fit stems with OS. LEVEL III EVIDENCE:  Retrospective Cohort Study.

Midterm results of modular hinge total knee arthroplasty using cementless osseointegrating stems: low fixation associated complications and good functional outcome in primary and revision knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

This study aimed to investigate functional outcome and complications after primary and revision modular H-TKA using hybrid fixation with cementless stems.

METHODS

Between 2015 and 2018, 48 patients with 50 implants were included after hybrid implantation of a single design H-TKA system using cementless osseointegrating stems and modular components. Complications and clinical outcome were analysed using Knee Society Score (KSS), the Western Ontario McMasters Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and the Short-Form Health Survey 12 (SF-12) score.

RESULTS

Indications for implantation were aseptic revision (n = 29, 58%), primary TKA (n = 19, 38%) and two-stage septic revisions (n = 2, 4%). Complications were reported in 26% (n = 12), whereas complications associated with hybrid fixation occurred in 5 (10%) cases, with 2 (4%) requiring revision surgery for aseptic loosening and 3 (6%) treated with an adapted postoperative protocol for perioperative fractures. Implant survivorship was 84% after a mean follow-up of 54 months. Postoperative KSS significantly improved from 51.50 (12-100) to 78.36 (41-99; p < 0.001). The mean WOMAC score was 19.26 (0-55), SF-12 PCS was 41.56 points (22.67-57.66) and SF-12 MCS was 49.21 points (23.87-63.21).

CONCLUSION

Hybrid modular implantation in H-TKA provides satisfactory clinical and functional results in primary and revision TKA. Clinical outcomes significantly improve with reduced pain, increased mobility, and good-to-excellent functional scores after implantation. Whilst implant survival is comparable to previous studies and complications associated with hybrid fixation are low, general complication rates are comparably high.

High Survivorship of Hybrid Fixation Technique in Aseptic Condylar Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Minimal Metaphyseal Bone Loss: 5-10 Year Clinical Outcomes

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of hybrid fixation technique in aseptic condylar revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). A retrospective consecutive study of patients with minimal metaphyseal bone loss who underwent aseptic rTKA with press-fit cementless femoral stems and short cemented tibial stems. Primary outcome measure was mechanical failure. Surgical complications, reoperations and revision for any cause were collected and Knee society score at final follow-up. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were used to estimate implant survivorship. Seventy-three patients were included with minimum 5 years follow-up with a mean age of 74.5 years. At mean follow-up of 8.5 years (range 5-10), only two patients required revision, both for infection. Radiographic evaluation was undertaken for all remaining patients at final follow-up and showed no evidence of mechanical failure. Six patients (8.4%) showed non-progressive radiolucent lines around the cementless femoral stem with only one having a pedestal at the tip of the femoral stem and four patients (5.6%) showed non-progressive radiolucent lines around the cemented tibial stem. Mean KSS score was 80.6 (standard deviation 13.8) indicating satisfactory clinical outcomes. Using "any cause implant revision" as an end point, implant survivorship for this construct was 97.3% at mean 8.5 years. In our experience, a hybrid fixation technique with a press-fit cementless femoral stem and a short-cemented tibial stemmed construct achieves excellent medium- to long-term outcomes in aseptic condylar revision cases with minimal metaphyseal bone loss.

Cemented versus Cementless Stem Fixation in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The number of revision knee arthroplasties (rTKA) is growing significantly as is the use of intramedullary stems for optimized stability. The choice of the most appropriate stem fixation method is still controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare cemented versus cementless stem fixation in rTKA. Publications with patients undergoing rTKA with a follow-up > 24 months were systemically reviewed. Extracted parameters included total revision and failure rates for any reason, incidence of aseptic loosening, periprosthetic infection, and radiolucent lines, as well as the clinical outcome. A statistical regression analysis was then performed on all extracted clinical and radiological outcome data. A total of 35 publications met the inclusion criteria and were included and analyzed. Overall, 14/35 publications compared cementless versus cemented stem fixation, whereas 21/35 publications investigated only one stem fixation method. There were no significant differences in revision (p = 0.2613) or failure rates (p = 0.3559) and no differences in the incidence of aseptic loosening (p = 0.3999) or periprosthetic infection (p = 0.1010). The incidence of radiolucent lines was significantly higher in patients with cemented stems (26.2% versus 18.6%, p < 0.0001). However, no differences in clinical outcomes were observed. No superiority of a specific stem fixation method in rTKA was found. Rates of revision or failure for any reason as well as incidence of aseptic loosening and periprosthetic infection in cemented versus cementless stem fixation showed no significant difference. A higher incidence of radiolucent lines was observed in cemented stem fixation; however, no effect was observed on the clinical outcome.

Satisfactory medium- to long-term outcomes of cemented rotating hinge prosthesis in revision total knee arthroplasty

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate medium- to long-term outcomes and complications of the Stanmore Modular Individualised Lower Extremity System (SMILES) rotating hinge implant in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) at a tertiary unit. It is hypothesized that this fully cemented construct leads to satisfactory clinical outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective consecutive study of all patients who underwent a rTKA using the fully cemented SMILES rotating hinge prosthesis between 2005 to 2018. Outcome measures included aseptic loosening, reoperations, revision for any cause, complications, and survivorship. Patients and implant survivorship data were identified through both prospectively collected local hospital electronic databases and linked data from the National Joint Registry/NHS Personal Demographic Service. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used at ten years.

Results

Overall, 69 consecutive patients (69 knees) were included with a median age of 78 years (interquartile range 69 to 84), and there were 46 females (66.7%). Indications were septic revisions in 26 (37.7%), and aseptic aetiology in the remining 43 (62.3%). The mean follow-up was 9.7 years (4 to 18), and the overall complication was rate was 7.24%, all with patellofemoral complications. Failure rate with 'any cause revision' was 5.8%. There was one case of aseptic loosening of the femoral component. At ten years, 17/69 patients (24.63%) had died, and implant survivorship was 92.2%.

Conclusion

In our experience, the SMILES rotating hinge prosthesis achieves satisfactory long-term outcomes with ten-year implant survivorship of 92.2% and a patellofemoral complication rate of 7.24%.

Good Mid-Term Implant Survival of a Novel Single-Design Rotating-Hinge Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Rotating-hinge knee (RHK) implants are an option for knee arthroplasty in cases of instability or severe bone loss. However, the revision rate can be increased compared to unconstrained implants which mandate improvements in implant design. This study investigates a novel RHK design for total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a single design RHK TKA (GenuX MK, Implantcast) implanted between 2015 and 2019 including 133 patients (21 primary TKA, 112 revisions). The main indication for revision TKA was second-stage reimplantation following infection. The median follow-up amounted to 30 months (IQR 22-47).

RESULTS

In total, 13% (18/133) of patients underwent revision surgery after a mean time of 1 month (IQR 0-6). The main reason for the revision was (re-) infection in 8% of patients. All revisions were performed following revision TKA and none following primary TKA. There were no revision surgeries for loosening or instability. The revision-free implant survival of 83% was (95% CI 75-91%) after five years. A higher number of previous surgeries was associated with a greater revision risk (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Revision and complex primary TKA using a single-design RHK implant results in good implant survival at mid-term follow-up although infection remains a major concern.

Is hybrid fixation in revision TKA using LCCK prostheses reliable?

INTRODUCTION

The optimal technique for component fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) remains controversial: full cementation (FC) versus hybrid fixation (HF), which involves press-fit stem with cement fixation in the metaphyseal and epiphyseal zones. Previous series have either demonstrated the superiority of one or the other of these techniques or their equivalence. However, few studies have compared these 2 methods for rTKA using the Legacy® Constrained Condylar Knee (LCCK) prosthesis (Zimmer, Warsaw, Indiana, USA).

HYPOTHESIS

Our hypothesis was that HF of LCCK components is associated with a higher rate of aseptic loosening (AL) than FC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a single-center, multi-surgeon, retrospective study. Primary revisions between January 2010 and December 2014 were included for all indications. The only exclusion criterion was death without revision before the 5-year follow-up. The primary objective of this study was to compare the survivorship of 2 groups of LCCK components (femoral or tibial), depending on whether their stems had been cemented (HF versus FC), taking AL, revised or not, as the endpoint. The secondary objective was to look for other predictive factors of AL.

RESULTS

A total of 75 rTKAs (150 components) were included. The FC group (51 components) had more Anderson Orthopedic Research Institute (AORI) type 2B and type 3 bone defects (BDs) (p<0.001), more reconstructions using trabecular metal (TM) cones (19 FCs and 5 HFs; p<0.001), and bone allografts (p<0.001). At more than 5 years, none of the FC components were loose compared to 10 HF components (9.4%), with 4 of these stems revised. The only significant difference was survivorship without radiographic AL at 9 years (FC=100%; HF=78.6%; p=0.04). The only predictive factor of AL in the HF group was the filling of the diaphyseal canal (p<0.01). The detrimental effect of BD severity (p=0.78) and the protective effect of TM cones were not demonstrated (p=0.21).

DISCUSSION

Other series studying revisions using the same type of prosthesis also concluded the superiority of FC, not found for other revision prostheses. Despite this study's limitations (retrospective, multi-surgeon, limited sample size, and limited follow-up), all patient outcomes were known, and the difference in survivorship between the groups was very significant.

CONCLUSION

HF has not been proven effective for the LCCK prosthesis. Better diaphyseal filling, wider metaphyseal bone tunnels enabling better cement injections, and stem designs more appropriate for press-fit fixation could improve these results. TM cones are an interesting avenue for further research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; retrospective comparative study.

Megaprosthesis in Non-Oncologic Settings-A Systematic Review of the Literature

Modular megaprostheses (MPs) are commonly used after bone-tumor resection, but they can offer a limb salvage solution in massive bone defects. The aim of this systematic review of the Literature is to provide a comprehensive data collection concerning the use of MPs in non-oncologic cases, and to provide an overview of this topic, especially from an epidemiologic point of view. Three different databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science) were searched for relevant articles, and further references were obtained by cross-referencing. Sixty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting on cases of MP in non-oncologic cases. A total of 2598 MPs were retrieved. Among these, 1353 (52.1%) were distal femur MPs, 941 (36.2%) were proximal femur MPs, 29 (1.4%) were proximal tibia MPs and 259 (10.0%) were total femur MPs. Megaprostheses were most commonly used to treat periprosthetic fractures (1158 cases, 44.6%), in particular in the distal femur (859, 74.2%). Overall, complications were observed in 513 cases (19.7%). Type I (soft tissue failures) and type IV (infection) according to the Henderson classification were the most frequent (158 and 213, respectively). In conclusion, patients with severe post-traumatic deformities and/or significant bone loss who have had previous septic complications should be considered as oncologic patients, not because of the disease, but because of the limited therapeutic options available. The benefits of this treatment include relatively short operative times and immediate weight-bearing, thus making MP particularly attractive in the lower limb.

Uncemented Tibial Fixation Has Comparable Prognostic Outcomes and Safety Versus Cemented Fixation in Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Cemented and uncemented fixation are the primary methods of tibial prosthesis fixation in total knee arthroplasty. However, the optimal fixation method remains controversial. This article explored whether uncemented tibial fixation has better clinical and radiological outcomes, fewer complications, and revision rates compared to cemented tibial fixation.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases up to September 2022 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared uncemented total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and cemented TKA. The outcome assessment consisted of clinical and radiological outcomes, complications (aseptic loosening, infection, and thrombosis), and revision rate. Subgroup analysis was used to explore the effects of different fixation methods on knee scores in younger patients.

RESULTS

Nine RCTs were finally analyzed with 686 uncemented knees and 678 cemented knees. The mean follow-up time was 12.6 years. The pooled data revealed significant advantages of uncemented fixations over cemented fixations in terms of the Knee Society Knee Score (KSKS) (p = 0.01) and the Knee Society Score-Pain (KSS-Pain) (p = 0.02). Cemented fixations showed significant advantages in maximum total point motion (MTPM) (p < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between uncemented fixation and cemented fixation regarding functional outcomes, range of motion, complications, and revision rates. When comparing among young people (<65 years), the differences in KSKS became statistically insignificant. No significant difference was shown in aseptic loosening and the revision rate among young patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence shows better knee score, less pain, comparable complications and revision rates for uncemented tibial prosthesis fixation, compared to cemented, in cruciate-retaining total knee arthroplasty.

Bone loss in aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty: management and outcomes

Background

Although several techniques and implants have been developed to address bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), management of these defects remains challenging. This review article discusses the indications and management options of bone loss following total knee arthroplasty based on preoperative workup and intraoperative findings.

Main text

Various imaging modalities are available that can be augmented with intraoperative examination to provide a clear classification of a bony defect. For this reason, the Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute (AORI) classification is frequently used to guide treatment. The AORI provides a reliable system by which surgeons can classify lesions based on their size and involvement of surrounding structures. AORI type I defects are managed with cement with or without screws as well as impaction bone grafting. For AORI type IIA lesions, wedge or block augmentation is available. For large defects encompassing AORI type IIB and type III defects, bulk allografts, cones, sleeves, and megaprostheses can be used in conjunction with intramedullary stems.

Conclusions

Treatment of bone loss in rTKA continues to evolve as different techniques and approaches have been validated through short- and mid-term follow-up. Extensive preoperative planning with imaging, accurate intraoperative evaluation of the bone loss, and comprehensive understanding of all the implant options available for the bone loss are paramount to success.

Similar patient-reported outcomes for hybrid and cemented stem fixation for aseptic tibial revision total knee arthroplasty: a comparison of sequential prospective cohorts

PURPOSE

The tibial stem fixation in an aseptic revision of total knee arthroplasty is poorly studied and controversial. The objective of this study was to prospectively compare clinical outcomes between hybrid and cemented fixation of the stem in aseptic tibial revision after a minimum follow-up of 5 years.

METHODS

Two sequential prospective cohorts of patients who underwent aseptic tibial revision were compared after a minimum follow-up of five years: 31 had both tibial tray and stem cemented (cemented group), and 42 had a hybrid fixation with tibial tray cemented and stem cementless (hybrid group). Clinical assessment was performed by the Knee Society Scores and reduced Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index. Radiological assessment was also performed.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in preoperative data between groups. Postoperatively, no significant differences between groups in clinical scores or complication rate were found. Survival of the TKA revision at 5-year was 94% (95% CI 89-98%) in the cemented group, and 98% (95% CI 92-100%) in the hybrid group (ns).

CONCLUSION

Clinical outcomes and implant survival were comparable between hybrid and cemented tibial stem fixation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

No difference in long-term micromotion between fully cemented and hybrid fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial

AIMS

Both the femoral and tibial component are usually cemented at revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), while stems can be added with either cemented or press-fit (hybrid) fixation. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term stability of rTKA with cemented and press-fitted stems, using radiostereometric analysis (RSA).

METHODS

This is a follow-up of a randomized controlled trial, initially involving 32 patients, of whom 19 (nine cemented, ten hybrid) were available for follow-up ten years postoperatively, when further RSA measurements were made. Micromotion of the femoral and tibial components was assessed using model-based RSA software (RSAcore). The clinical outcome was evaluated using the Knee Society Score (KSS), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and visual analogue scale (pain and satisfaction).

RESULTS

The median total femoral translation and rotation at ten years were 0.39 mm (interquartile range (IQR) 0.20 to 0.54) and 0.59° (IQR 0.46° to 0.73°) for the cemented group and 0.70 mm (IQR 0.15 to 0.77) and 0.78° (IQR 0.47° to 1.43°) for the hybrid group. For the tibial components this was 0.38 mm (IQR 0.33 to 0.85) and 0.98° (IQR 0.38° to 1.34°) for the cemented group and 0.42 mm (IQR 0.30 to 0.52) and 0.72° (IQR 0.62° to 0.82°) for the hybrid group. None of these values were significantly different between the two groups and there were no significant differences between the clinical scores in the two groups at this time. There was only one re-revision, in the hybrid group, for infection and not for aseptic loosening.

CONCLUSION

These results show good long-term fixation with no difference in micromotion and clinical outcome between fully cemented and hybrid fixation in rTKA, which builds on earlier short- to mid-term results. The patients all had type I or II osseous defects, which may in part explain the good results. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(7):875-883.

Classification of Bone Loss With Failed Stemmed Components in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

With the increasing number of primary total knee arthroplasties (TKA) being performed annually there is also an expected increase in the number of revision TKA, as well as failed revision TKA with stemmed components. A new classification system based upon the location and degree of bone loss in the tibial and or femoral metaphysis and diaphysis is proposed. Type 1 has no bone loss in the metaphysis and diaphysis; Type 2 has a metaphyseal bone loss. Type 3 defects are subdivided into A and B, depending on the extent of the diaphyseal bone loss. Type 4 has extensive bone loss with an expansion of the diaphyseal cortex.

METHOD

An online survey with digital anteroposterior and lateral radiographs was sent to five arthroplasty surgeons. A total of 55 cases with stemmed femoral and tibial components, considered failures and pending revision, were reviewed. By using the proposed classification system, each femoral and tibial component was scored. Interobserver reliability was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient for pooled data.

RESULTS

Comparisons between each individual reviewer demonstrated moderate to strong agreement overall for the reviewers using the classification, with an average correlation coefficient of 0.67 (95% CI [0.57 to 0.77]) for all cases, signifying a low variation in the scores of each case. Looking specifically at the femoral components, the ICC was 0.62 (95% CI [0.477 to 0.76]), while the ICC for the tibial components was 0.71 (95% CI [0.58 to 0.83]).

DISCUSSION

This classification, which has demonstrated moderate to strong interobserver reliability, can help surgeons determine the degree of anticipated bone loss and approach these complex cases with a preoperative plan based upon the radiographic images. This classification system will also allow standardized communication among surgeons, categorization of procedures for comparative research, and anticipated prognosis.

Cemented Versus Hybrid Technique of Fixation of the Stemmed Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Literature Review

Stems are required during revision total knee arthroplasty to bypass damaged periarticular bone and transfer stress to healthier diaphyseal bone. The mode of stem fixation, whether fully cemented or hybrid, remains controversial. Improvements in surgical technique and implant and instrument technology have improved our ability to deal with many of the challenges of revision total knee arthroplasty. Recent publications that reflect contemporary practice has prompted this review of literature covering the past 20 years to determine whether superiority of one fixation mode over the other can be demonstrated. We reviewed single studies of each type of fixation, studies directly comparing both types of fixation, systematic reviews, international registry data, and studies highlighting the pros and cons of each mode of stem fixation. Based on the available literature, we conclude that using both methods of fixation carries comparable outcomes with marginal superiority of the hybrid fixation method, which is of nonstatistical significance, although on an individual case basis, all fixation methods should be kept in mind and the appropriate method implemented when suitable.

Long-term survival of fully cemented stem in re-revision total knee arthroplasty performed on femur with diaphyseal deformation due to implant loosening

PURPOSE

The study aims to analyze long-term clinical and radiographic results, and survival of re-revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using fully cemented stems performed on femurs with diaphyseal deformation.

METHODS

Thirty-seven re-revision TKAs using fully cemented stems performed in femoral diaphyseal deformations, characterized as diaphyseal canal enlargement and cortex deformation due to aseptic loosening of previously implanted stems, between 2003 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. The mean follow-up period was 10.0 years. Clinically, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and range of motion (ROM) were evaluated. Radiographically, mechanical axis (MA) and component positions were measured. Complications and survival rates were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Clinically, the WOMAC significantly improved at final follow-up (61.2 vs 47.2, p < 0.001), but not the ROM (95.5 vs 102.5, p = 0.206). Radiographically, the MA and component positions were appropriate, with no changes in component positions from immediately post-operative to final follow-up, but with MA change from varus 2.9° to 3.7° (p = 0.020). Two cases (5.4%) with history of previous infections developed periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Debridement with polyethylene insert exchange following antibiotic suppression were performed in those cases because of concern for difficult implant-cement removal. The five and ten year survival rates were 100% and 93.2%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Fully cemented stems are viable in providing long-term satisfactory survival after re-revision TKA in patients with femoral diaphyseal deformation. However, it should be used carefully for those with previous infections.

Comparing Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Stems at a High-Volume Revision Center

Introduction

Hybrid fixation and fully cemented fixation are commonly used in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). These two techniques are typically done based on surgeon preference and one has not demonstrated superiority over the other. The purpose of this study was to examine if there was a difference in survivorship between the two different techniques.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients undergoing rTKA (CPT 27487) from January 1, 2011 to January 1, 2018 at a single academic center was performed. Patients were divided into cemented and hybrid rTKA groups with comparison of patient demographic, clinical and radiological outcomes, reoperation, change in post-operative hemoglobin (HgB), and length of stay (LOS).

Results

A total of 133 rTKA for 122 patients were identified: 30.1% in the cemented and 69.9% in the hybrid groups. There was no significant difference in age (p = 0.491), sex (p = 0.250), laterality (p = 0.421), or body mass index (BMI) (p = 0.609) between the two groups. Mean LOS (hybrid 4.13 days, cemented 3.65 days; p = 0.356) and change in Hgb (hybrid 2.95 mg/dL, cemented 2.62mg/dL; p = 0.181) were not statistically different between the groups. Mean follow up for the hybrid (25.4 months, range 2–114 months) and cemented (24.6 months, range 3–75.5 months) rTKA was not statistically significant (p = 0.825). Overall survival rates were 80.9% in the hybrid and 84.6% in the cemented groups (p = 0.642).

Conclusions

Hybrid and fully cemented rTKA techniques have similar survival rates at a minimum followup of 2 years. Additionally, in our cohort, age, gender, and BMI were not associated with failure in either group. Furthermore, we did not observe differences in LOS or change in hemoglobin suggesting early postoperative complications may not differ between cemented and hybrid stemmed groups. Continued long-term research is required for defining the best rTKA technique.

The use of tantalum cones and diaphyseal-engaging stems in tibial component revision: a consecutive series

INTRODUCTION

Revision knee arthroplasty presents a number of challenges, including management of bone loss. The goal in managing moderate to large bone defects is fixation that is sufficient enough to allow early weight-bearing. The purpose of this study was to describe the surgical technique and clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients treated with porous tantalum metaphyseal cones in combination with long uncemented diaphyseal-engaging stems to manage tibial bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-six aseptic revision TKAs were performed at our institution between 2016 and 2019 by two senior authors. A single trabecular metal tantalum cone combined with a long (100 or 155 mm) press fit, diaphyseal-engaging stem was used in all cases to reconstruct metaphyseal bone defects and to augment tibial fixation. Cemented stems were excluded. The tibiofemoral angle was measured along the tibial and femoral shaft axes on the weight-bearing anteroposterior radiograph at final follow-up (range 15-56 months). All clinical and surgical complications, reoperations, and revisions of any component were recorded. Survivorship free of revision was evaluated at the time of the latest follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean Knee Society Score (KSS) and Knee Society Function Score (KSS-F) improved significantly from 29.7 points preoperatively (range 11-54 points) to 86 points (range 43-99 points) and from 20.4 points preoperatively (range 0-55 points) to 72.3 points (range 30-90 points) (p < 0.05), respectively. Eleven tibial constructs (30.5%) had incomplete, nonprogressive radiolucent lines (≤ 2 mm). All tibial cones demonstrated osteointegration. One patient underwent a full revision for periprosthetic joint infection, and survivorship free of any component revision was 91.7% at final follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Hybrid fixation with uncemented diaphyseal-engaging stems and porous tantalum metaphyseal cones resulted in radiographic lack of osteolysis, good clinical outcomes, and survivorship of 91.7% at a median follow-up of 33 months when considering all-cause revision as the endpoint.

Superior Survival of Fully Cemented Fixation Compared to Hybrid Fixation in a Single Design Rotating Hinge Knee Implant

BACKGROUND

Clinical observations revealed higher rates of aseptic loosening for hybrid fixated rotating hinge knee implants compared to fully cemented ones. We hypothesize that the use of a fully cemented fixation technique had a higher survival rate for aseptic loosening compared to a hybrid fixation technique in a rotating hinge knee implant.

METHODS

All procedures of patients who were treated with the RT-PLUS rotating hinge knee implant (Smith & Nephew, Memphis, TN) between 2010 and 2018 were included. Primary outcome was revision for aseptic loosening. Kaplan-Meier survivorship and Cox proportional hazard regression analysis were performed to calculate survival rates and hazard ratios.

RESULTS

A total of 275 hinge knee implants were placed in 269 patients (60 primary procedures, 215 revisions). Median follow-up was 7.3 ± 3.9 years. In total, 24 components (16 hybrid femur, 2 fully cemented femur, 6 hybrid tibia; all revision procedures) in 19 patients were revised for aseptic loosening. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis showed superior survival rates of fully cemented components (femur 97.1%; tibia 100%) compared to hybrid fixated components (femur 89.5%; tibia 95.9%) at the 10-year follow-up. Multivariate Cox hazard analysis showed a significantly higher risk of aseptic loosening for hybrid fixated components, a prior stemmed component and the femoral component.

CONCLUSION

Fully cemented fixation showed superior survival rates for aseptic loosening compared to hybrid fixation in a single design rotating hinge knee implant. A prior stemmed component appears to be a risk factor for aseptic loosening and the femoral component seems to be more prone to loosening.

Revision TKA with a distal femoral replacement is at high risk of reinfection after two-stage exchange for periprosthetic knee joint infection

PURPOSE

Megaprosthetic distal femoral reconstruction (DFR) is a limb-salvage procedure to address bone loss following two-stage revision for periprosthetic knee joint infection (PJI). The purpose of this study was to analyze the survival of DFR compared to hinged total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It was hypothesized that DFR was associated with a poorer survival.

METHODS

In this retrospective single-center study, 97 subjects who underwent two-stage revision of chronic knee PJI were included. Among these, 41 were DFR. The diagnosis of PJI was established using the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. Implant survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier method and compared with the log-rank test as well as multivariate Cox regression at a minimum follow-up period of 24 months.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 59 (interquartile range (IQR) 45-78) months. Overall, 24% (23/97) of patients required revision surgery for infection. The infection-free survival of rotating hinge revision TKA was 93% (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 86-100%) at five years compared to 50% (95% CI 34-66%) for DFR. In multivariate analysis, the risk factors for reinfection were DFR reconstruction (HR 4.7 (95% CI 1-22), p = 0.048), length of megaprosthesis (HR 1.006 (95% CI 1.001-1.012), p = 0.032) and higher BMI (HR 1.066, 95% CI 1.018-1.116), p = 0.007). 10% (4/41) of patients undergoing DFR underwent amputation to treat recurrent infection.

CONCLUSION

Megaprosthetic DFR as part of a two-stage exchange for PJI is a salvage treatment that has a high risk for reinfection compared to non-megaprosthetic TKA. Patients must therefore be counseled accordingly.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective observational study, Level IV.

A Comparison Between Unstemmed and Stemmed Constrained Condylar Knee Prostheses in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

Objective

To compare and analyze the clinical outcomes between unstemmed and stemmed constrained condylar knees (CCK) in complex primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in terms of implant survivorship, change in outcome evaluations, and complications.

Methods

We reviewed 156 consecutive patients who received primary TKA using PFC®SIGMA®TC3 (TC3) of constrained condylar design between January 2009 and January 2017 at our institution. After removing patients who met exclusion criteria, 25 patients were identified as unstemmed TC3 cases and 81 as stemmed TC3 cases. Propensity score matching was used to select 25 stemmed cases as a control group for the unstemmed group with comparable preoperative conditions including preoperative demographics, preoperative diagnosis, preoperative range of motion, main reason to use TC3, ASA score (American Society of Anesthesiologists), and follow‐up duration. Preoperative and postoperative clinical evaluations including Knee Society Score (KSS), Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score, the 12‐Item Short‐Form Health Survey (SF‐12), and the range of motion (ROM) were obtained and compared. The instability, periprosthetic fracture, radiolucent lines, polyethylene wear, and heterotrophic ossification were assessed according to the anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of the knee. The complications and implant survivorship between the two groups were also recorded and compared.

Results

3After the index surgery, both groups showed substantial improvement in KSS (knee and function), HSS score, SF‐12, and ROM compared with baseline. There was no significant difference in the mean KSS scores (knee and function), HSS score, SF‐12, and ROM between the unstemmed and stemmed group postoperatively. No statistically significant difference was found in the overall complication rate between the two groups. The overall Kaplan–Meier survivorship was 98.0% (95% confidence interval 94.1%–100.0%) at 7 years. No significant difference was found in the survival rate between the unstemmed group (100.0%) and the stemmed group (96.0%) at 7 years (log rank, P = 0.317). The mean duration of follow‐up was 7.0 years for unstemmed group and 7.7 years for stemmed group.

Conclusions

In patients with adequate bone stock receiving complex primary TKA, unstemmed CCK could achieve similar clinical outcomes at mid‐term follow‐up as stemmed CCK.

Cement Loaded With High-Dose Gentamicin and Clindamycin Reduces the Risk of Subsequent Infection After One-Stage Hip or Knee Arthroplasty Exchange for Periprosthetic Infection: A Preliminary Study

BACKGROUND

The use of antibiotic-loaded acrylic cement for treating periprosthetic joint infections remains controversial. We hypothesized that the raw rate of surgical site infection (SSI) is lower after using cement loaded with high-dose gentamicin and clindamycin than after using cement loaded with standard-dose gentamicin for implant fixation during 1-stage hip and knee revision arthroplasty for infection.

METHODS

One hundred seventy-one continuous patients operated by 2 experienced surgeons during a 2-year period were included in the study. All patients were followed for 24 months. The primary endpoint was the raw rate of SSI after 2 years of follow-up time.

RESULTS

The raw rate of SSI after 2 years of follow-up time was significantly lower in the study group (13%) than in the control group (26%) (P = .03) with an odds ratio of 0.42 (P = .03). These SSIs were new infections rather than a recurrence/persistence of the initial infection.

CONCLUSION

The cement used in the study group significantly reduced the risk of SSI relative to the cement used in the control group. Routine use of this high-dose dual antibiotic-loaded cement can be considered during 1-stage knee or hip revision arthroplasty for infection.

Long-term effects of cemented and cementless fixations of total knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis and systematic review of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To determine the long-term effects (a minimum follow-up time 8.8 years) of cemented and cementless fixations used for total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, China National Knowledge Infrastructure and China Wangfang database were interrogated for appropriate randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through July 2020. Data were extracted and assessed for accuracy by 2 of the authors acting independently. Any controversial discrepancies were resolved after discussion with a third author.

RESULT

Eight RCTs were included with low to moderate bias risks. The cemented fixation of TKA was comparable to cementless fixation in terms of implant survival (relative risk, 1.016; 95% CI 0.978 to 1.056; P = 0.417), Knee Society (KS) knee score (standardized mean difference (SMD), - 0.107; 95% CI - 0.259 to 0.045; P = 0.168), KS function score (SMD - 0.065; 95% CI - 0.238 to 0.109; P = 0.463), KS pain score (SMD - 0.300; 95% CI - 0.641 to 0.042; P = 0.085), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score (SMD - 0.117; 95% CI - 0.307 to 0.073; P = 0.227), HSS score (SMD - 0.027; 95% CI - 0.270 to 0.217; P = 0.829), range of motion (SMD 0.061; 95% CI - 0.205 to 0.327; P = 0.652) at ≥ 8.8 years of follow-up. In terms of radiographic outcomes at ≥ 8.8 years of follow-up, the incidence of a radiolucent line in the cementless group was lower than for the cemented group (SMD 3.828; 95% CI 2.228 to 6.576; P < 0.001). However, the maximum total point motion (MTPM) of the cementless group was greater than for the cemented group (SMD - 0.739; 95% CI - 1.474 to - 0.005; P = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term follow-up verified that cementless and cemented fixation have similar prosthesis survival rates, clinical scores and mobility. However, radiography suggested that each technique had an advantage with regard to the radiolucent line and MTPM.

High Survivorship of Short-Cemented Femoral Stems in Condylar Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty Without Significant Metaphyseal Bone Loss: Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of hybrid fixation technique in condylar revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) using cementless metaphyseal tibial sleeves and short-cemented femoral stems with a rotating platform articulation.

METHODS

Retrospective consecutive study of all condylar rTKAs with a cemented femoral stem between 2009 and 2016 was conducted. Patients were identified using a local prospective database and linkable data obtained from the National Joint Registry for rTKA. Demographic, clinical, and surgical data were collected from patients' electronic health records. The primary outcome measure was mechanical failure and implant survivorship using a nationally collected data, complications, re-operations, and "any-cause revision" were also recorded.

RESULTS

There were 72 consecutive patients (72 knees) with minimum 5-year follow-up: 33 (45.8%) females and 39 (54.2%) males with a median age of 70 years (range 47-88). The indication for revision surgery was aseptic loosening (n = 34, 47.2%), instability (n = 17, 23.6%), infection (n = 14, 19.5%) with 10 patients having 2-stage approach and 4 patients with single-stage approach, stiffness (n = 4, 5.6%), and malalignment (n = 3, 4.1%). At mean follow-up of 6.87 years (median 6.7; range 5-11.8), only 2 patients required revision for infection. Using "any-cause implant revision" as an end point, implant survivorship for this construct was 97.2% at median 6.7 years. To date, none of the femoral stems have been revised for mechanical failure.

CONCLUSION

In rTKA with good femoral condylar bone stock, we have shown excellent survivorship with a short-cemented femoral stem, in conjunction with a mobile-bearing and a tibial sleeve. This has the advantage of reducing the length of the revision construct of this complex surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

A Prophylactic Tibial Stem Reduces Rates of Early Aseptic Loosening in Patients with Severe Preoperative Varus Deformity in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Patients with a preoperative varus deformity >8 degrees are at increased risk of aseptic loosening after total knee arthroplasty. This study analyzes the effect of a tibial stem on the rate of aseptic loosening in patients with a severe preoperative varus deformity.

METHODS

Patients with a preoperative varus deformity of >8 degrees and 2-year minimum follow-up with a stemmed tibial component (n = 67) were matched 1:2 to patients with a similar preoperative varus deformity with a standard tibial component (n = 134). Radiolucent lines were measured on the tibia at 6 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively using the Knee Society Radiographic Evaluation System. Failure was defined as revision due to aseptic loosening of the tibial component. Outcomes were evaluated using Student's t-tests and log-rank tests.

RESULTS

Patients with tibial stems had greater preoperative deformity (12.9 vs 11.3 degrees, P = .004). There was no difference in postoperative alignment (1.7 vs 2.1 degrees varus, P = .25) or tibial component angle (1.8 vs 2.1 degrees varus, P = .33). Patients with stems were more likely to have more constraint (44.8% vs 1.5%, P < .001). Progression of radiolucent lines >2 mm was observed in 17.6% (23/134) vs 5.97% (4/67) of patients in the stem group (P = .03). Rates of aseptic loosening were lower in the stem group (0% vs 5.15%, P = .05).

CONCLUSION

Despite worse preoperative deformity and higher utilization of constraint, tibial stem use in patients with severe preoperative varus deformity resulted in lower rates of aseptic loosening. Prophylactic use of stems in these patients may help increase implant survival.

Individual Revision Knee Arthroplasty Is a Safe Limb Salvage Procedure

Introduction: Revision total knee arthroplasty after multiple pre-surgeries is challenging. Due to severe bone defects, standard implants for metaphyseal and diaphyseal anchoring may no longer be suitable. The primary aim of this case series is to evaluate the early complication rate for individual knee implants with custom-made cones and stems after two-stage revision with severe bone defects. Methods: Ten patients who were treated with custom-made 3D-printed knee revision implants were included. Inclusion criteria were a two-stage revision due to late-onset or chronic periprosthetic joint infection as well as aseptic loosening. All severe bone defects were AORI type III. All procedure-related complications were evaluated. Postoperative range of motion after one year was measured. The time between the two surgeries was evaluated. Results: The mean follow-up was 21 months (range: 12–40). The mean time between the two-stage surgeries was 71.6 days. No fractures were observed intra- and postoperatively. Two patients were revised without changing metal components due to persistent hematoma (three weeks post-surgery) and persistent PJI (three months post-surgery). The mean passive postoperative range of motion was 92° (range: 80–110°). Conclusions: Individual custom-made implants for rTKA provide a safe procedure for patients with huge bone defects after several pre-surgeries. If standard knee systems with standard cones or sleeves are not suitable anymore, custom-made treatment offers the patient the last option for limb preservation. However, this is associated with increased costs.

TKA-Revision with maintenance of well-fixed metaphyseal sleeves: Indications and surgical technique

Due to the compromised bone situation revision implants need extended fixation options in order to achieve good long-term survival. Over decades this has been achieved with stems, either cemented or uncemented. In the last decade additional fixation options in terms of cementless metaphyseal sleeves or metaphyseal cones have been introduced and widely accepted. Revision of such implants is challenging, in particular if those porous coated parts are well integrated. Therefore, partial revision leaving the well-fixed parts in place can be an option if the indication is allowing it. This can help to preserve bone. In this study we show 2 cases with metaphyseal sleeves, in which we demonstrate when and how revision can be performed leaving sleeves in place. Meticulous pre-Op analysis of the failure mechanism is mandatory to find those few cases in which a partial revision can be recommended. In our cases, it was one patient with persistent tibia stem pain and another patient with secondary instability. In both cases implant fixation was not the problem, and therefore leaving the well-fixed sleeves in place was considered. Before final decision was made, specific information on implants sizes and constraint are needed. In our tibial revision stem thickness was less than 14 mm decision, in this situation the stem can be removed through the sleeve, leaving the sleeve in place. The technique how to do it, is shown in this study. In the second case a traumatic MCL rupture was leading to a secondary instability, needing a revision from a VVC constraint to a rotating hinge. Again, pre-Op analysis and the surgical technique of femoral component removal are described. In the great majority of cases a full revision with complete implant removal is required. In a few cases a partial revision with maintenance of implant parts can be considered but only after careful analysis of the failure mode. Even if the failure mode allows a partial revision specific implant information need to be obtained to clarify whether it is really possible. If it is possible, a specific surgical technique is recommended and described in this study.

Is stemless implant fixation a valid option in total knee revision arthroplasty - Review of in vitro and in vivo studies

Metaphyseal sleeves have shown an improved fixation in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty (R-TKA) leading to a reduced aspetic loosening rate compared to other stem based fixation options. In the majority of these studies sleeve have been used with stems. Due to that is was not clear how much of this improved fixation could be rated to the sleeve and how much to the additional sleeves. In this review article we analysed the results of sleeve-only obtained in in-vitro or in-vivo studies. In Vitro models showed independent of the set-up a dominant fixation of the sleeve, an additional stem was not adding a lot to the overall fixation. Undersized additional stems showed an increased micromotion and the stem tip, while distal engaging stems showed a proximal stress shielding effect. Very interestingly an increased BMI had not a significant effect on primary fixation of the sleeve. Reduced bone quality on the other hand had and this effect was increased in cases with an increased BMI. In vivo results of sleeve-only patients showed comparable good results to sleeve and stem constructs. In particular on the femoral side the use of an additional stem is required only in a few scenarios. It has to be stated that the numbers of sleeves-only in rotating hinges is too low, to give any recommendation for this high constraint implants. Majority of cases was done with PS and VVC constraint. So far no in vivo data exist on the limitations of sleeve-only in patients with reduced bone quality and increased body weight. In conclusion we can state, that Sleeve-only is an option for R-TKA. In majority of cases the aspetic loosening rate is as low as with additional stems. The borderlines in terms of constraint, bone quality and body weight need to be investigated in future in vivo studies. The in vitro results look so far encouraging.

The use of cement in revision total knee arthroplasty

Despite the availability of modern implants and techniques, Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty (R-TKA) still poses a challenge to surgeons, particularly the management of bone loss/defects and the secure fixation of implants. Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) bone cement plays an important role for fixation as fully uncemented fixation in RTKA is rarely used. Cement can be employed as part of a full cementing construct or as a hybrid construct. While in fully cemented implants, the diaphyseal stem as well as any couplers or connectors in the metaphysis are cemented, in hybrid cementing, only the component parts at the joint surface and metaphysis are cemented, while the diaphyseal stem is fixed in a press-fit manner. In this article the literature on the in vitro as well on the in vivo results of both fixation options is reviewed. Although the fixation mechanism of both constructs are different, radiographic and clinical survivorship appear similar for both techniques. Although there appears to be a trend towards a hybrid fixation method, the choice of which technique to employ in revision total knee arthroplasty will depend on the surgeons' familiarity with each technique as well as the factors peculiar to each patients anatomy.

Micromotion Analysis of Various Tibial Constructs in Moderate Tibial Defects in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to compare the micromotion of various tibial reconstruction strategies including short cemented and long cementless stems with or without metaphyseal augmentation.

METHODS

A moderate tibial bone defect was milled into dual density polyurethane test blocks. Mechanical testing was performed on 4 test constructs: (1) short cemented stem (75-mm total length) alone; (2) short cemented stem with a symmetric metaphyseal cone; (3) a press-fit (175-mm total length) diaphyseal engaging tibial construct without a cone, and (4) the same press-fit tibial construct with a metaphyseal cone augment. Micromotion of the baseplate/cone construct with respect to the tibia block was measured during a stair descent loading profile for 10,000 cycles. The peak-to-peak micromotion of these various tibial constructs was compared. Unpaired t-tests were used to evaluate differences in peak-to-peak micromotion among the various tibial constructs tested. An analysis of variance was performed for final validation.

RESULTS

The cemented short stem demonstrated similar varus/valgus displacement, internal/external rotation, compression, and lift-off micromotion values under loading compared to a cementless long stem. A tibial cone improved compression and lift-off micromotion for both cemented and cementless constructs. A short 50-mm cemented stem with a cone demonstrated a lower micromotion at the anterior SI location compared to a press-fit 150-mm cementless stem without a tibial cone.

CONCLUSIONS

A short cemented tibial component with a cone achieved similar micromotion during simulated stair descent compared to a cementless diaphyseal press-fit implant in cases of moderate tibial defects.

Increased survival rate for primary TKA with tibial short extension stems for severe varus deformities at a minimum of 2 years follow-up

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical results, radiographic loosening and early complications between patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty (TKA) with tibial short stem extension and those with standard stem for gross varus deformities at minimum two years after surgery.

METHODS

From a prospective TKA database of 4216 patients, patients with a primary TKA with a tibial short stem extension (30 mm) for severe varus deformity (hip-kneeankle angle, HKA < 170°) and a minimum follow-up of 2 years, were reviewed and compared to a matched control group with tibial components with a standard stem, in a 1:3 ratio. Demographics, surgical parameters, pre- and postoperative alignment and outcome parameters were collected for all patients. The primary outcome was aseptic loosening of the tibial component. Secondary outcomes were knee society scores (KSS), postoperative HKA, general postoperative complications and implant survival rates.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients with tibial short stem extensions (mean HKA 166.2°) were compared in a 1:3 ratio to a matched case-control group of 135 patients with standard stems (mean HKA 167.1°) at a mean follow-up of 57 and 64 months respectively after primary TKA. In the extension stem group, 4 patients encountered complications (8.9%) versus 12 patients in the standard stem group (8.9%). There were no cases of tibial component loosening in the short extension stem versus four cases in the standard stem group (3%). This difference was significant between groups, p = 0.04.

CONCLUSION

In patients with varus deformities > 10°, undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty, prophylactic use of a tibial short extension stem may lead to less loosening of the tibial component. In this study, 3% of patient with big varus deformity without stemmed TKA had a tibial implant loosening versus 0% in the stemmed TKA group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, case-control study.

Comparative Biomechanical In Vitro Study of Different Modular Total Knee Arthroplasty Revision Stems With Bone Defects

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to investigate the effects of different stem lengths and types including cones on primary stability in revision total knee arthroplasty with different femoral bone defects and fixation methods in order to maximize bone preservation. It is hypothesized that longer stems provide little additional mechanical stability.

METHODS

Thirty-five human femurs were investigated. A distal bone defect, Anderson Orthopedic Research Institute classification (s. 33) type-F2a, was created in group 1-3 and type-F3 in group 4-6. A cemented, rotating hinge femoral component was combined with different stems (100 and 160 mm total or hybrid cemented cones, or a 100-mm custom-made anatomical cone stem). The femora were loaded according to in vivo loading during gait. Relative movements were measured to investigate primary stability. Pull-out testing was used to obtain a parameter for the primary stability of the construct.

RESULTS

Relative movements were small and similar in all groups (<40 μm). For small defect, the pull-out forces of cemented long (4583 N) and short stems (4650 N) were similar and about twice as high as those of uncemented stems (2221 N). For large defects, short cemented stems with cones showed the highest pull-out forces (5500 N). Long uncemented stems (3324 N) and anatomical cone stems (3990 N) showed similar pull-out forces.

CONCLUSION

All tested stems showed small relative movements. Long cemented stems show no advantages to short cemented stems in small bone defects. The use of cones or an anatomical cone stem with hybrid cementation seems to offer good stability even for larger bone defects. The use of a short cemented stem (with or without cone) may be a suitable choice with a high potential for bone preservation in total knee arthroplasty revision with respective bone defects.

Metaphyseal sleeves in arthroplasty of the knee : A suitable tool in management of major metaphyseal bone loss

Background

This study examined the clinical outcome following revision arthroplasty of the knee joint and severe arthrosis with metaphyseal bone defects and instability using metaphyseal sleeves. We analyzed the results based on established scores and recorded the complications occurring on revision arthroplasty.

Material and methods

Patients with revision arthroplasty of the knee and metaphyseal bone defects grade III according to the Anderson Orthopedic Research Institute (AORI) classification were included (16 patients, 9 females and 7 males). In all cases, surgery was performed using an endoprosthesis COMPLETE™ revision knee system with metaphyseal sleeves.

Results

All patients had a significant reduction in pain level after revision surgery. The median HSS score in the cohort with primary arthroplasty was 84 and in the cohort with revision arthroplasty 73 and the KSS was 83 and 55, respectively. According to the HSS an excellent result was achieved by 50% of the patients in the primary arthroplasty group and 25% in the revision group. Only three patients were considered to have an insufficient result. Postoperative pain was significantly reduced in both groups. The median ROM was 112° flexion in the primary arthroplasty group and 95° in the revision group. An extension deficit was observed in three patients and four patients showed prolonged wound healing postoperatively (25%), which was treated conservatively and did not lead to septic changes.

Conclusion

The use of metaphyseal sleeves in patients with bone defects is a suitable instrument with no negative impact on the outcome both in primary and revision arthroplasty. Further studies with larger study groups and analysis of long-term results after use of such endoprosthetic components should be conducted.

Cementless Metaphyseal Sleeve Fixation in Revision Knee Arthroplasty: Our Experience with an Arabic Population at the Midterm

OBJECTIVE

Metaphyseal sleeve (MS) fixation in revision knee arthroplasty (RKA) among Western populations has been reported with very encouraging outcomes. The aim of this study was to report our experience with the use of MS in RKA among an Arabic population. Clinical and radiographic outcomes and implant survivorship were reported at a minimum follow-up of 2 years and a mean follow-up of 4.1 years.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on prospectively collected data of patients who underwent RKA with a MS in combination with a cementless stem (femoral or tibial). Range of motion (ROM) and Knee Society Score (KSS) were obtained pre- and postoperatively. Complications, occurrence of stem-tip pain, and implant survival were documented. Knee radiographs were obtained to evaluate the alignment and osseointegration or loosening of the MS.

RESULTS

A total of 52 sleeves (27 tibial and 25 femoral) implanted in 27 RKAs (27 patients) were included. The mean follow-up period was 4.1 ± 1.8 (2-7.5) years. Postoperatively, the ROM improved from 89.3 ± 9.2 to 106.3 ± 11.4 (p = 0.19) and the KSS also significantly improved, from 102.9 ± 35.6 to 130.2 ± 33.7 (p < 0.001). One patient (3.7%) developed heterotopic ossification, and another one (3.7 %) had a stem-tip pain on the tibial side; both were managed conservatively. One patient (3.7 %) sustained a fracture and required reoperation. None of the sleeves showed progressive radiolucent lines, and none required revision. The aseptic survivorship and overall survivorship at a mean of 4.1 years were 100% and 96.3%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

MS provided successful midterm outcomes that were maintained in obese patients with different levels of constraint. Our series supports their use as a viable option in RKA.

Modified hybrid cementing technique reduces stem tip pain and improves patient's satisfaction after revision total knee arthroplasty

Background

There have been no studies comparing patient-reported outcome measures including end-of-stem tip pain and patient satisfaction based on the use of cementing techniques in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to compare end-of-stem tip pain and PROMs with hybrid and modified hybrid cementing techniques in revision TKAs.

Method

Sixty-two cases of revision TKA performed by a single surgeon were divided into two groups based on the cementing technique with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Two types of cementing technique for femoral and tibial stems were used as follows: (1) a hybrid cementing technique (33 cases), in which cement was applied immediately distal to the modular junction of the stem and the component while the distal stem was press-fitted into the diaphysis without using cement; and (2) a modified hybrid cementing technique (29 cases), in which cement was applied to the tip of femoral and tibial stems. The thigh and shin were assessed for the end-of-stem tip pain. Patient satisfaction was evaluated based on the satisfaction items of New Knee Society Score.

Results

Modified hybrid cementing significantly lowered the percentage of patients manifesting shin pain (3.4% vs. 24.2%, p = 0.029). Patients treated with the modified hybrid cementing technique showed a higher satisfaction rate (p = 0.003). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed an increase in the odds of satisfaction 32.686-fold (p = 0.004) in patients without pain at the end-of-stem tip in the shin and 9.261-fold (p = 0.027) in patients treated with the modified hybrid cementing technique.

Conclusion

The modified hybrid cementing technique for fixation of long-stem in revision TKAs reduced the end-of-stem tip pain in the shin, leading to significantly higher satisfaction compared with the hybrid cementing technique after revision TKA.

Level of evidence

Level III

Clinical and radiological results of a stemmed medial pivot revision implant in aseptic total knee revision arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Constraint choice in revision total knee arthroplasty depends on the stability of the collateral ligaments and on the severity of bone loss, but the least degree of constraint necessary is recommended. The purpose of this retrospective matched-paired study was to compare clinical results, radiographic outcome and the survival of a stemmed medial pivot revision implant in aseptic revision TKA vs. medial pivot implant in primary TKA.

METHODS

Records were reviewed for 69 cases of aseptic revision TKA using Advance® Medial Pivot Stemmed Revision Knee system between 2002 and 2016. These patients were then matched in a 1:2 ratio control group of patients who received a primary TKA with Advance® Medial Pivot system. American Knee Society Score and Visual Analogue Scale pain score were recorded. Alignment, loosening, and incidence of radiolucent lines were evaluated on X-rays. Implant survival was assessed by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

The primary TKA group had significant superior AKSS clinical and functional score at baseline (52.3 and 68.2 points, respectively) and at last follow up (84.6 and 68.6 points) compared with the revision TKA group (47.9 and 40.9 points; 78.4 and 59.9 points; P < 0.05). No significant difference was observed in the mean change from baseline to last follow up of AKSS score between the two groups (P > 0.05). Radiographical outcome and implant survival were similar in the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The authors support the use of this revision system in knees with collateral ligaments competence and mild-to-moderate bone defect.

Hybrid stems are superior to cemented stems in revision total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis of recent comparative studies

INTRODUCTION

The demand for revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has grown significantly in recent years. The two major fixation methods for stems in revision TKA include cemented and 'hybrid' fixation. We explore the optimal fixation method using data from recent, well-designed comparative studies.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of comparative studies published within the last 10 years with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. To allow for missing data, a random-effects meta-analysis of all available cases was performed. The odds ratio (OR) for the relevant outcome was calculated with 95% confidence intervals. The effects of small studies were analyzed using a funnel plot, and asymmetry was assessed using Egger's test. The primary outcome measure was all-cause failure. Secondary outcome measures included all-cause revision, aseptic revision and radiographic failure.

RESULTS

There was a significantly lower failure rate for hybrid stems when compared to cemented stems (p = 0.006) (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.87). Heterogeneity was 4.3% and insignificant (p = 0.39). There was a trend toward superior hybrid performance for all other outcome measures including all-cause re-revision, aseptic re-revision and radiographic failure.

CONCLUSION

Recent evidence suggests a significantly lower failure rate for hybrid stems in revision TKA. There is also a trend favoring the use of hybrid stems for all outcome variables assessed in this study. This is the first time a significant difference in outcome has been demonstrated through systematic review of these two modes of stem fixation. We therefore recommend the use, where possible, of hybrid stems in revision TKA.

Rotating Hinge Implants in Knee Arthroplasty

Due to demographic transition an increasing number of primary knee arthroplasty is expected. A consequence is a rise in frequency in revision knee arthroplasty. Rotating hinge prostheses are a development of former hinge prostheses, due to changes in implant design the outcome of modern rotating hinge implants clearly improved in comparison to former models. Interpretation of outcome in present literature is difficult due to the small number of cases and the heterogeneous indications. Nevertheless the use of rotating hinge knee prostheses in primary and revision arthroplasty is associated with good clinical outcomes, when indicated appropriately.

The role of rotating hinge implants in revision total knee arthroplasty

Hinged implants are the most constrained knee replacement prostheses. They are very useful in complex cases of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revision.

Hinged implants have evolved with rotating bearings and modularity that allows local joint reconstruction or segmental bone replacement.

They are required when significant instability persists in cases with inadequate collateral ligaments and significant flexion laxity.

They are now used when a large bone defect is reconstructed, or when bone fixation of the implant is questionable especially in the metaphyseal zone.

The use of hinged implants in TKA revision is associated with high complication rates. Published outcomes differ based on the patients’ aetiology.

The outcomes of rotating-hinged implants used in septic revisions or salvage situations are poorer than other types of revision and have a higher complication rate.

The poor general health of these patients is often a limitation.

Despite these relatively poor results, hinged implants continue to have a place in revision surgery to solve major instability or to obtain stable bone fixation of an implant when the metaphysis is filled with bone grafts or porous devices.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180070

Stem Fixation in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: Indications, Stem Dimensions, and Fixation Methods

Although stems improve initial mechanical stability in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA), ideal indications, proper lengths and diameters, and appropriate fixation methods remain controversial. The topics of the present article include the indications, selection of lengths and diameters, and fixation methods of stems in revision TKA. The use of a stem in revision TKA can protect the juxta-articular bone. A stem cannot be a substitute for optimal component fixation; it plays an adjunctive role in transferring the loads from the compromised metaphysis to the stronger diaphysis. Proper bone surface preparation and appropriate use of the stem based on a great store of knowledge are required to support the stemmed components effectively in revision TKA. The balance between overshielding and overloading the juxta-articular bone would provide excellent structural protection. The stem length and diameter should be tailored according to patients’ anatomical characteristics and determined fixation strategy. There are two traditional methods of stem fixation including the total cementation technique and the hybrid technique with a cementless press-fit stem. Selection of a cementation technique should be based on thorough consideration of advantages and disadvantages of each technique.

Revision total knee arthroplasty: hybrid vs standard cemented fixation

Introduction

Modular systems with stems are necessary for the stability of revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), but controversy remains as to the best fixation method: cemented or hybrid (noncemented stem). The aim of this study was to assess the clinical, X-ray, life-quality and survival results obtained with each fixation method.

Materials and methods

During the period 2000–2013, rTKA was performed on 67 patients (29 cemented arthroplasty and 38 hybrid fixation). The average follow-up was 7 years (range 2–15). All patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically using the American Knee Society Score (AKSS), the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC), and the Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). A survival study was performed via Kaplan–Meier analysis.

Results

There were no differences between the cemented and hybrid fixation groups in the preoperative and postoperative AKSS clinical evaluation indices and the SF-36 health index. However, the WOMAC assessment scale did reveal statistically significant differences between the groups, with a global classification of 64.9 points weighted at 100 (SD 16.8) for cemented fixation versus 78.9 (SD 9.0) for hybrid fixation (p = 0.001). The corresponding values for stiffness were 61.6 (SD 12.9) and 80.5 (SD 14.7) (p = 0.001), and those for function were 61.3 (SD 19.4) and 78.1 (SD 10.5) (p = 0.001). No significant differences between the groups were recorded with respect to the pain score (p = 0.4) or the results of the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis.

Conclusion

Although the results were similar for the two groups, hybrid fixation tended to produce better results than cemented fixation. In view of the risk of further loosening, we prefer the more conservative approach, i.e. hybrid fixation.

Level evidence

Level III.