Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Survivorship of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Use of a Constrained Condylar Knee Prosthesis

Low Risk of Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Aseptic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty With Intraosseous Vancomycin

BACKGROUND

Aseptic revisions are the most common reason for revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). Previous literature reports early periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) rates after aseptic rTKA to range from 3 to 9.4%. Intraosseous (IO) regional administration of vancomycin has previously been shown to produce high local tissue concentrations in primary and rTKA. However, no data exist on the effect of prophylactic IO vancomycin on early PJI rates in the setting of aseptic rTKA. The aim of this study was to determine the following: (1) what is the rate of early PJI during the first year after surgery in aseptic rTKA performed with IO vancomycin; and (2) how does this compare to previously published PJI rates after rTKA.

METHODS

A consecutive series of 117 cases were included in this study who underwent rTKA between January 2016 and March 2022 by 1 of 2 fellowship-trained adult reconstruction surgeons and received IO vancomycin at the time of surgery in addition to standard intravenous antibiotic prophylaxis. Rates of PJI at 3 months, 1 year, and the final follow-up were evaluated and compared to prior literature.

RESULTS

Follow-up at 3 months was available for 116 of the 117 rTKAs, with 1 lost to follow-up. The rate of PJI was 0% at 3 months postoperatively. Follow-up at 1 year was obtained for 113 of the 117 rTKAs, and the PJI rate remained 0%. The rate of PJI at the final follow-up of ≥ 1 year was 0.88% (95% confidence interval: -0.84 to 2.61). Previous literature reports PJI rates in aseptic rTKA to range from 3 to 9.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual prophylactic antibiotics with IO vancomycin in conjunction with intravenous cephalosporins or clindamycin were associated with a substantial reduction in early PJI compared to prior published literature. These data supplement the early evidence about the potential clinical benefits of IO vancomycin for infection prevention in high-risk cases.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Condylar constrained and rotating hinged implants in revision knee arthroplasty show similar survivorship and clinical outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

In revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) ligament instability and bone defects might require more constraint implants such as a condylar constrained knee (CCK) or rotating hinged knee (RHK). When both implants are suitable, the choice remains controversial. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the survivorship and clinical outcome between CCK and RHK in revision TKA.

METHODS

Systematic literature research was performed. Studies analysing the clinical outcome and/or survivorship of CCK and/or RHK in revision TKA were included. Clinical outcomes included the Knee Society Score, both clinical (KSCS) and functional (KSFS), range of motion (ROM) and reoperations. Survival was defined as the time free from removal or revision of the femoral and/or tibial component.

RESULTS

A total of 40 articles analysing 4.555 knees were included. Survival did not differ between RHK and CCK implants (p = 0.6058), with, respectively, 91.6% and 89.8% survival after 5 years. Postoperative KSCS and KSFS were, respectively, 79.2 (SD 10.7) and 61.1 (SD 21.8) for the CCK group. Similar scores were noted for the RHK group with a KSCS of 80.2 (SD 14.1) and KSFS of 58.5 (SD 17.3). Postoperative ROM was similar for CCK (105.3°, SD 17.1°) and RHK patients (104.1°, SD 16.9°).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis revealed that both survivorship and clinical outcome are similar for CCK and RHK patients for whom both designs are technically suitable and indicated.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

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.

Patient-relevant outcomes following elective, aseptic revision knee arthroplasty: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The aim of this systematic review was to summarise the evidence for the clinical effectiveness of revision knee arthroplasty (rKA) compared to non-operative treatment for the management of patients with elective, aseptic causes for a failed knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, AMED and PsychINFO were searched from inception to 1st December 2020 for studies on patients considering elective, aseptic rKA. Patient-relevant outcomes (PROs) were defined as implant survivorship, joint function, quality of life (QoL), complications and hospital admission impact.

RESULTS

No studies compared elective, aseptic rKA to non-operative management. Forty uncontrolled studies reported on PROs following elective, aseptic rKA (434434 rKA). Pooled estimates for implant survivorship were: 95.5% (95% CI 93.2-97.7%) at 1 year [seven studies (5524 rKA)], 90.8% (95% CI 87.6-94.0%) at 5 years [13 studies (5754 rKA)], 87.4% (95% CI 81.7-93.1%) at 10 years [nine studies (2188 rKA)], and 83.2% (95% CI 76.7-89.7%) at 15 years [two studies (452 rKA)]. Twelve studies (2382 rKA) reported joint function and/or QoL: all found large improvements from baseline to follow-up. Mortality rates were low (0.16% to 2% within 1 year) [four studies (353064 rKA)]. Post-operative complications were common (9.1 to 37.2% at 90 days).

CONCLUSION

Higher-quality evidence is needed to support patients with decision-making in elective, aseptic rKA. This should include studies comparing operative and non-operative management. Implant survivorship following elective, aseptic rKA was ~ 96% at 1 year, ~ 91% at 5 years and ~ 87% at 10 years. Early complications were common after elective, aseptic rKA and the rates summarised here can be shared with patients during informed consent.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020196922.

Midterm Survival of a Varus-Valgus Constrained Implant following One-Stage Revision for Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Single-Center Study

Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is challenging to perform in patients with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) due to the difficulty of eradicating the infection and potential for bone and ligamentous deficits. The current study aimed to evaluate the midterm survival of varus-valgus constrained (VVC) implants used in one-stage revision TKA for chronic PJI at our institution. This retrospective analysis included 132 patients with chronic PJI who underwent one-stage revision using a VVC implant. The average follow-up was 51.6 months (range: 24-85 months). Five-year survival analysis was performed to set recurrent infection and mechanical failure as the end point. Hospital for special surgery (HSS) as functional outcomes was evaluated preoperatively and at the latest follow-up. A total of 12 patients (9.1%) underwent retreatment for reinfection (nine patients) and mechanical failure (three patients). The overall 5-year revision-free survival was 82.7%, the infection-free survival was 91.1%, and the mechanical failure-free survival was 98.3%. The preoperative HSS knee score improved from 35.6 points (range: 24.3-47.7 points) preoperatively to 76.8 points (range: 57.2-87.6 points) at the latest follow-up. Complications were identified in 20 patients (15.2%) which included aseptic osteolysis in 4 cases, acceptable flexion instability in 3 cases, arthrofibrosis in 2 patients, hematomas in 2 cases, calf intermuscular venous thrombosis in 6 patients, and femoral stem tip pain in 3 cases. This is the first study to report the outcomes of one-stage revision using VVC implants for knee PJI. Improved functional outcomes and good midterm survival are demonstrated at an average follow-up of 51.6 months.

Similar outcomes of constrained condylar knee and rotating hinge prosthesis in revision surgery for extension instability after primary total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Instability is one of the most common reasons for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) failure. Constrained prosthesis can be used for significant ligamentous laxity, but there is not much evidence on the appropriate level of restriction for unstable varus-valgus TKA. The objective of this study was to compare the outcome and survival at a minimum follow-up of five years between rotating hinge knee prosthesis (RHK) and constrained condylar knee prosthesis (CCK) for extension instability following primary TKA.

HYPOTHESIS

For symptomatic extension instability after primary TKA, good functional outcomes and survival can be achieved with both designs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Consecutive patients with unstable primary TKA who underwent revision with either RHK (n=34) or CCK (n=30) were retrospectively compared. Assessments were performed by the Knee Society Scores (KSS), and visual analogue scales (VAS) for pain and patient satisfaction. Radiological evaluation was made. Complications and re-operations were analyzed.

RESULTS

Mean post-operative follow-up was 10.3 (range 5-16) years for both groups. At the final follow-up, there was no significant difference between groups in the KSS-knee (p=0.228) or KSS-function (p=0.324) score, VAS-pain (p=0.563), VAS-satisfaction (p=0.780), major complication rate (p=0.194), or TKA survival at 10 years (p=0.091).

CONCLUSION

The present study showed comparable good functional outcomes and survival at long-term between RHK and CCK arthroplasties. Both designs can be recommended for revision of total knee arthroplasty with symptomatic extension instability.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Patient-reported outcome measures following revision knee replacement: a review of PROM instrument utilisation and measurement properties using the COSMIN checklist

OBJECTIVES

To identify: (1) patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) used to evaluate symptoms, health status or quality of life following discretionary revision (or re-revision) knee joint replacement, and (2) validated joint-specific PROMs, their measurement properties and quality of evidence.

DESIGN

(1) Scoping review; (2) systematic review following the COnsensus-based Standards for selection of health status Measurement INstruments (COSMIN) checklist.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, Embase, AMED and PsycINFO were searched from inception to 1 July 2020 using the Oxford PROM filter unlimited by publication date or language.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Studies reporting on the development, validation or outcome of a joint-specific PROM for revision knee joint replacement were included.

RESULTS

51 studies reported PROM outcomes using eight joint-specific PROMs. 27 out of 51 studies (52.9%) were published within the last 5 years. PROM development was rated 'inadequate' for each of the eight PROMs studied. Validation studies were available for only three joint-specific PROMs: Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS) and Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC). 25 out of 27 (92.6%) measurement properties were rated insufficient, indeterminate or not assessed. The quality of supporting evidence was mostly low or very low. Each of the validated PROMs was rated 'B' (potential for recommendation but require further evaluation).

CONCLUSION

Joint-specific PROMs are increasingly used to report outcomes following revision knee joint replacement, but these instruments have insufficient evidence for their validity. Future research should be directed toward understanding the measurement properties of these instruments in order to inform clinical trials and observational studies evaluating the outcomes from joint-specific PROMs.

Infection and periprosthetic fracture are the leading causes of failure after aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty

AIM

The purpose of this study was to clarify the medium to long term survival of aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKAs) and identify the common modes of failure following RTKAs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multi-center, retrospective study included all aseptic RTKAs performed at three tertiary referral hospitals between 2003 and 2016. Patients were excluded if the revision was for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) or they had previously undergone revision surgery. Minor revisions not involving the tibial or femoral components were also excluded. Demographics, surgical data and post-operative outcomes were recorded and analyzed. Survival analysis was performed and the reasons for revision failure identified.

RESULTS

Of 235 aseptic RTKAs identified, 14.8% underwent re-revision at mean follow-up of 8.3 years. Survivorship of RTKA was 93% at 2 years and 83% at 8 years. Average age at revision was 72.9 years (range 53-91.5). The most common reasons for failure following RTKA were periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (40%), periprosthetic fracture (25.7%) and aseptic loosening (14.3%). Of those whose RTKA failed, the average survival was 3.33 years (8 days-11.4 years). No demographic or surgical factors were found to influence RTKA survival on univariate or multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

PJI and periprosthetic fracture are the leading causes of re-revision surgery following aseptic revision TKA. Efforts to improve outcomes of aseptic revision TKA should focus on these areas, particularly prevention of PJI.

Varus-Valgus Constrained Implants in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: Mean Clinical Follow-Up of Six Years

BACKGROUND

There is scant literature evaluating varus-valgus constrained (VVC) prostheses in contemporary revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the durability of VVC revision TKA with selective use of cones.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 194 revision TKAs with VVC was performed from August 2005 through February 2018 at a single institution. The final cohort consisted of 168 TKAs with a mean follow-up of 6 years. Stems were used in all but 1 TKA, tibial cones in 48%, and femoral cones in 19%. Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute classification in femurs was 1 in 57, 2A in 33, 2B in 62, 3 in 16, and in tibias, 1 in 42, 2A in 29, 2B in 81, and 3 in 16.

RESULTS

Survival analysis showed that 93% were free of revision for aseptic component loosening, 76% were free of revision for any reason, and 74% were free of reoperation at 6 years. Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute 3 femur or tibia, age <65 years, and progressive radiographic changes were associated with an increased risk of revision for aseptic loosening (P < .05). Progressive radiographic changes were seen in 19% of femoral and 16% of tibial constructs. The most common reason for re-revision was periprosthetic joint infection (65%).

CONCLUSION

VVC revision TKA with selective use of cones provided a reasonable outcome as 93% were free of revision for aseptic loosening at 6 years. However, given the rate of patients with progressive radiographic changes and survivorship free of reoperation of 74% at 6 years, long-term follow-up will help assess the durability of these constructs.

Rotating-hinge prosthesis for aseptic revision knee arthroplasty: A multicentre retrospective study of 127 cases with a mean follow-up of five years

BACKGROUND

The use of third-generation rotating-hinge knee prostheses has increased considerably in recent years. The more anatomical design of these prostheses, together with their controlled rotation system that reduces constraints generated by the single degree of liberty, have produced better outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of revision knee arthroplasty for aseptic failure using rotating-hinge prostheses.

HYPOTHESIS

The rotating-hinge knee prostheses currently used in France provide significant improvements in function and self-sufficiency of patients undergoing revision knee arthroplasty, with outcomes comparable to those reported with constrained condylar knees.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A multicentre retrospective study was conducted in 17 centres, under the auspices of the SoFCOT. The cohort consisted of 127 patients (127 knees) operated on before 2013. The main reasons for knee revision were aseptic loosening, major instability, mechanical failure, and extensor apparatus failure. Function and self-sufficiency were assessed using the International Knee Society (IKS) score and the Devane score, respectively. Survival was defined with all-cause surgical revision as the end point.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 67.3±11.8 months (range, 13-180 months). Significant improvements (p<0.001) were seen in the total IKS score (+42 points), the IKS function score (+12 points), and the knee IKS score (+30 points). Paradoxically, the Devane score decreased by 0.44 point. The 5-year survival rate was 77% (95% confidence interval, 0.70-0.85). Postoperative complications developed in 29% of patients (infection, n=12; aseptic loosening, n=11; and fracture, n=7).

DISCUSSION

Rotating-hinge prostheses provide satisfactory outcomes of knee arthroplasty revision and remain an effective option for complex cases, confirming our working hypothesis. Self-sufficiency diminishes slightly. The long-term outcomes obtained using rotating-hinge prostheses are, however, less satisfactory than those observed with constrained condylar knees for aseptic TKA revision, and the complication rate is higher, although the population and local circumstances are different. Discernment is therefore in order when determining the indications of rotating-hinge prostheses.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; retrospective cohort study.

Good clinical and radiological outcomes of the varus-valgus constrained mobile-bearing implant in revision total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

Knee instability is one of the most common indications for having to undergo revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA) and can be prevented with adequate implant selection and good surgical technique. Varus-valgus constrained implants (VVC) are indicated for cases of RTKA with absent ligament function in order to provide the necessary stability. While mobile-bearing articulations are thought to decrease the risk of aseptic loosening in comparison to their fixed-bearing counterparts, there is limited data on their outcomes. The purpose of our study is to present the clinical and radiological outcomes for patients undergoing an RTKA procedure with the mobile-bearing VVC implant.

METHODS

Between January 2008 to January 2018, 93 patients underwent RTKA with the use of varus-valgus mobile-bearing (VVCMB) prosthesis. The main indications for RTKA were instability 38.7% (n = 36), aseptic loosening 31.2% (n = 29), infection in 26.9% (n = 25), and other 3.3%. The mean follow-up time was 56 months. Clinical outcomes were assessed by knee society scores, range of motion, and rate of re-operation.

RESULTS

The mean knee society score increased significantly from 65.52 pre-operatively to 89.65 post-operatively (p < 0.001). The five year cumulative incidence of re-operation in our study was 7.53% (n = 7). Our study reported no cases of aseptic loosening or mobile-bearing spin-out. The number of flexion contractures decreased from n = 23 (24.7%) pre-operatively to n = 11 (11.8%) post-operatively (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The VVC mobile-bearing prosthesis demonstrated good clinical outcomes and mid-term survivorship in patients undergoing RTKA. Additional follow-up is required in the long term.

Satisfaction Rates Are Low following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in Asians Despite Improvements in Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

With the aging population in Asia and increase in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) utilization rates, the number of patients requiring revision TKA (rTKA) are expected to increase as well. The purpose of this study was to evaluate outcomes and satisfaction rates following rTKA in an Asian population that has unique cultural demands. Registry data of patients who underwent rTKA from 2006 to 2010 and had completed 5 years of follow-up were analyzed. Flexion range, Oxford Knee score (OKS), Knee Society score (KSS), the Short-Form 36 (SF-36), and satisfaction rates were assessed for improvement from preoperative values, as well as by the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) criterion. rTKA was performed in 163 patients. There were significant improvements seen at 2 years postoperatively and these were sustained up to 5 years. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) criterion for KSS, OKS, and SF-36 physical component score (PCS) was met at 2 and 5 years postoperatively. The overall complication rate was 3.7% at a mean follow-up of 8.4 years. A total of 121 patients (74.2%) were satisfied at 5 years postoperatively. Within our cohort, rTKA results in significantly improved patient-reported outcome measures with a low complication rate of 3.7% at a minimum of 5-year follow-up. Despite these encouraging results, satisfaction rates remain low.

Long-Term Outcome Following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty is Associated With Indication for Revision

BACKGROUND

There is limited information about long-term clinical outcomes following revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in relation to the indication for revision. Previously, a clear relation between indication for revision and clinical outcome was shown after 2 years. Present study evaluated (1) whether the reported association at 2 year remains present at 7.5 years, and (2) how clinical outcome at 7.5 years developed compared to baseline and 2-year follow-up, and (3) whether patients had additional adverse events.

METHODS

A cohort of 129 patients with a total system revision TKA was selected. Range of motion, Visual Analog Scale for pain and satisfaction, and clinical and functional Knee Society Score were obtained preoperatively, at 3 months, 1, 2, and 7.5 years. Reasons for revision were septic loosening, aseptic loosening, malposition, instability, and severe stiffness.

RESULTS

Patients revised for severe stiffness had significantly worse outcomes. No difference was found between the other indications. The clinical outcome after revision TKA at 7.5 years remained stable for septic and aseptic loosening, malposition, and instability but deteriorated slightly for the severe stiffness group. Visual Analog Scale satisfaction remained constant for all indications. There were 11 additional complications between 2- and 7.5-year follow-up, 9 of which necessitated reoperation.

CONCLUSION

All indications except severe stiffness had a similar clinical outcome which was maintained up to 7.5-year follow-up. The severe stiffness group had worse outcomes and deteriorated slightly at longer follow-up. Outcome at 3 months seems predictive for long-term outcome. Additional complications did not differ significantly for the different reasons for revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic study.

Management of periprosthetic fractures of knee arthroplasty with revision surgery

Objective

As periprosthetic knee fractures are becoming common with the increase in incidence of primary and revision total knee arthroplasty, their management and treatment have become important. The current study aims to evaluate the revision knee arthroplasty carried out due to the failure of primary treatment of periprosthetic femoral fractures.

Methods

The study was conducted from May 2012 to September 2019 at Orthopedics department of Xinjiang Medical University; out of 21 patients 11 were women and 10 men aged 44 to 80 (mean, 70.76 ± 8.31) years who underwent revision surgery for periprosthetic fractures of 19 distal femur, 1 patellar, and 1 proximal tibial fracture. Nineteen cases had definite trauma history leading to periprosthetic fracture, and 2 cases had fracture during post-operative functional exercise. All patients had revision surgery with extended stems with either constrained or limited condylar knee prosthesis.

Results

The duration of follow-up averaged 4.3 years. The Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee score before fracture averaged 91 + 7.01 points (89-95 points) and 85.5 + 6.18 points (81-90 points) at the last follow-up. The average range of motion of knee joint before fracture was 115.7 [+7.6] (110 [~126]), and 101.3 [+9.8] (85 [~115]) at the last follow-up. There was no significant statistical difference. No complications such as infection, component loosening or nonunion. 2 patients had lower extremity vein thrombosis.

Conclusion

Revision surgery of the knee for the periprosthetic fractures with proper prosthetic selection can attain good outcomes after primary total knee arthroplasty. Reasonable and correct procedure is the main principle for a successful operation. The benefits and applicability of revision TKA is the reconstructive solution for the issues of prosthetic knee fractures, is highly recommended.

Long-Term (Up to 21 Years) Survival of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty with Use of a Constrained Condylar Knee Prosthesis: A Concise Follow-up of a Previous Report

In our original report, 97 patients (114 knees) underwent revision total knee arthroplasty with use of a Legacy Constrained Condylar Knee prosthesis (LCCK; Zimmer), with a mean follow-up of 7.2 years (range, 5 to 10 years). The purpose of the present study was to determine the long-term clinical and radiographic results, with a focus on component fixation and the prevalence of osteolysis. At a mean follow-up of 19.2 years (range, 16 to 21 years), re-revision of the LCCK prosthesis had been performed in 10 knees (9%). The rate of survival at 19.2 years was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 94% to 100%) with reoperation for mechanical failure as the end point, and 91% (95% CI, 87% to 98%) with reoperation for any reason as the end point. One knee had circumferential osteolysis around the components. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Varus-Valgus Constrained Implants With a Mobile-Bearing Articulation: Results of 367 Revision Total Knee Arthroplasties

BACKGROUND

Varus-valgus constrained (VVC) implants are used for compromised ligamentous stability in revision total knee arthroplasties (TKAs). Mobile-bearing VVC implants may reduce rotational forces; yet, limited clinical data exist. The purpose of this study is to report mid-term risk of re-revision, complications, and clinical outcomes with a mobile-bearing VVC implant.

METHODS

Three hundred thirty-seven patients (367 TKAs) who underwent revision TKA with a mobile-bearing VVC implant between 1999 and 2013 at a single institution were reviewed. Mean age at revision was 67 years. Mean follow-up was 4 years. The main indications for revision were aseptic loosening in 158 cases (43%), reimplantation after 2-stage exchange arthroplasty in 120 (33%), instability in 61 (17%), and other in 28 (7%). Clinical outcomes were assessed by Knee Society Scores, and survivorship was analyzed with death as the competing risk.

RESULTS

The 5-year cumulative incidences of any re-revision or re-revision for aseptic loosening were 9% and 3%, respectively. Twenty-six knees (7%) were re-revised: 15 for infection, 6 for aseptic loosening, and 5 for other causes. There were 17 cases of irrigation and debridement, 10 cases of manipulations under anesthesia, and 9 cases of periprosthetic fractures. There were no bearing "spin-outs." The mean Knee Society Scores improved from 45 preoperatively to 77 at most recent follow-up (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The functional improvement and 5-year cumulative incidence of revision of a mobile-bearing VVC implant demonstrated acceptable outcomes with no unique complications related to the mobile-bearing construct. Additional follow-up will be needed to determine long-term implant survivorship.

Contemporary Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients Younger Than 50 Years: 1 in 3 Risk of Re-Revision by 10 Years

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of literature on contemporary aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty in patients ≤50 years. We sought to determine risk factors for failure in this population, with specific emphasis on survivorship free of (1) all-cause re-revision and (2) re-revision for instability.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 135 nononcologic revision total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) performed from 2000 to 2012 in patients ≤50 years. Mean age was 43 years, and mean body mass index was 31 kg/m². Mean follow-up was 7 years. There were 99 (73%) first-time revisions, and 36 (27%) with prior revisions. Indications for revision included instability (47%), aseptic loosening (29%), and arthrofibrosis (9%). Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to identify risk factors.

RESULTS

Survivorship free of all-cause re-revision was 66% at 10 years, with multiply revised TKAs (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.6, P = .008) having the poorest survivorship. Forty-three (32%) TKAs underwent re-revision including 10 (7%) for periprosthetic joint infection. Survivorship free of re-revision for instability was 88% at 10 years, with revision for instability (HR = 19, P = .03), male gender (HR = 3.0, P = .05), and multiply revised TKAs (HR = 3.5, P = .03) having poorer survival. Of the 64 TKAs revised for instability, 24 (38%) underwent re-revision, including 14 (22%) for recurrent instability.

CONCLUSION

Patients ≤50 years undergoing contemporary aseptic revision TKA had a 1 in 3 risk of re-revision. Patients specifically revised for instability or had prior TKA revisions had the highest risk of re-revision at 10 years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

No Differences in Outcomes Scores or Survivorship of Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty Between Patients Younger or Older than 55 Years of Age at Minimum 10-Year Followup

BACKGROUND

Although patients who have undergone unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) report improvements in functional outcomes, orthopaedic surgeons tend to avoid UKA in younger patients due to implant survivorship concerns. As a result, few studies specifically have examined the outcomes of patients 55 years and younger.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

Is there a difference between two cohorts of patients: those 55 years and younger and those 56 years and older who underwent UKA in terms of: (1) functional outcomes scores, (2) quality-of-life scores, and (3) implant survivorship free from all-cause revision.

METHODS

Between 2004 and 2007, 100 patients 55 years and younger underwent UKA at one institution. Of those, three (3%) died, and 13 (13%) were lost to followup before the 10-year minimum required for this study, leaving 84 patients available for propensity score matching. During that same period, 343 patients older than 56 years underwent UKA; 48 (14%) died, and 59 (17%) were lost to followup before 10 years, leaving 236 patients available in that group for potential inclusion. After propensity score matching to account for confounding preoperative variables (surgeon, patient's body mass index, and sex), the patients were divided into two groups based on age: (1) 55 years and younger, (2) 56 years and older. There were 71 patients in each group, with minimum followup of 10 years. The mean age in the group of patients 55 years and younger was 52 years (range, 45-55 years) and that of the older patients was 64 years (range, 56-80 years). The mean (range) followup in both groups was 13 years (range, 11-15 years). Patient functional outcomes, quality of life scores, and implant survivorship were assessed for both groups of patients. To detect a minimum clinically important difference of 5 points in the Oxford Knee Score (OKS), a sample size of at least 68 patients in each group would be required to achieve a power of 0.95.

RESULTS

With the numbers available, there were no differences between patients 55 years and younger and those 56 years and older in terms of OKS (18 ± 6 versus 20 ± 8, mean difference -1.8; 95% CI, -4.1 to 0.5; p = 0.133) and Knee Society Knee Score (84 ± 16 versus 79 ± 21, mean difference 4.7; 95% CI, -1.8 to 11.2; p = 0.157) at 10 years postoperatively. With the numbers available, there were no differences between patients 55 years and younger and those 56 years and older in terms of the physical component summary (PCS) (47 ± 10 versus 48 ± 11, mean difference -0.4; 95% CI, -4.0 to 3.2; p = 0.827) and the mental component summary (MCS) (52 ± 12 versus 51 ± 12, mean difference 1.4; 95% CI, -2.6 to 5.4; p = 0.491) of the SF-36 at 10 years postoperatively. Finally, we found no differences with the numbers available between patients 55 years and younger and those 56 years and older in terms of survivorship free from all-cause revision at a minimum of 10 years followup (both groups had the same 10-year revision-free rate of 0.96; 95% CI, 0.91-1.00).

CONCLUSIONS

Because we found few differences between patients 55 years and younger and those older than that in terms of functional outcomes, quality of life, and implant survivorship after UKA, we believe that appropriately selected younger patients should not be excluded from the potential benefits of undergoing UKA, especially in the hands of high-volume surgeons.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Factors affecting the choice of constrained prostheses when performing revision total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

The purposes of the present study were to assess the levels of prosthetic constraint chosen during revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and to identify factors influencing the choice of a constrained prosthesis.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed data on 274 revision TKAs. The mean follow-up period after revision TKA was 7.2 years. The femorotibial angle (FTA), joint line height (JLH), and Insall-Salvati ratio (ISR) were radiographically evaluated. Factors affecting the extent of constraint chosen were evaluated in terms of age, gender, body mass index, primary diagnosis, the cause of revision TKA, the Anderson Orthopedic Research Institute (AORI) classification, and changes in the JLH and ISR.

RESULTS

Totals of 247 (90.1%), 11 (4.0%), and 9 (3.4%) knees received posteriorly stabilized prostheses, constrained condylar knees, and rotating hinge prostheses, respectively. On multivariate analysis, the cause of revision TKA including loosening and instability and the changes in the JLH and ISR affected independently the choice of a constrained prosthesis.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of implantation of constrained prostheses was 7.4% in the present study. Consideration of various factors including the cause of revision TKA and changes in the JLH and ISR will aid the TKA surgeon in selecting prostheses with appropriate constraints when performing revision TKAs.

Mid-term clinical outcome of constrained condylar knee prosthesis for patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Objectives: This study retrospectively investigated the mid-term outcome of Legacy constrained condylar knee (LCCK) prosthesis in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) having severe varus/valgus deformity, instability, and/or bone loss. Methods: Between January 2000 and December 2015, LCCK prostheses had been performed in 32 knees of 25 patients with RA, and 23 knees of 17 patients of the postoperative follow-up minimum 2 years were analyzed in this study (Primary: 14 knees, Revision: 9 knees). The average of follow-up duration was 6.9 ± 2.7 years, all were female, and the average of age and RA duration at the surgery was 59.0 ± 9.5 years and 26.6 ± 13.5 years, respectively. Clinical result was analyzed by Knee Society Score (KSS) knee and function at preoperative time and final visit. Imaging outcome was investigated by femoral tibial angle (FTA), four component alignment angles, and radiolucent line at pre-/postoperative time. Results: KSS knee/function scores and radiographic FTAs were improved after operation. Radiolucent lines around components were seen in 17 knees (73.9%), of which only one knee (4.3%) has shown aseptic loosening. The seven-year Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis resulted in 91.7%. Conclusion: LCCK prosthesis in RA patients was achieved to the excellent mid-term clinical and radiographic result.

Short-term and mid-term results of lateral condyle sliding osteotomy in the treatment of valgus total knee arthroplasty: A successful therapy option in Grade 2 valgus total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Different methods exist for deformity correction and ligament balancing in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) of valgus knees, the sliding osteotomy being one of them. The objective of the current study was to analyze the clinical and radiological short-term and mid-term results of this technique in a larger series.

METHODS

Between June 2007 and May 2014, 98 patients were treated with 98 TKAs and a simultaneous sliding osteotomy. All of them had a Grade 2 fixed valgus deformity (between 10° and 20°). All patients received a mobile-bearing, non-constrained (CR) implant. After prospective inclusion (T1), patients were clinically assessed after one (T2) and 4.5years (±2.1years) (T3), and radiological and Oxford Knee Score (OKS), Knee Society Knee Score (KSS) and the Knee Society Function Score (KSF) were obtained.

RESULTS

All knees were corrected to a mechanical leg alignment within three degrees. Significant improvement of all scores could be measured at T2 and T3. Seven revisions needed to be performed; three of them were procedure-related. In two of them, a problem of capsular closure occurred, while in one the slided epicondyle dislocated after three months. All other revisions were performed because of non-procedure-related problems (e.g. infection).

CONCLUSIONS

Sliding osteotomy of the lateral condyle is a successful option for the treatment of Grade 2 fixed valgus deformity. Due to this technique, higher constraint could be avoided. The results stayed constant over time. The procedure-related complications need to be kept in mind. Long-term results still need to be awaited.

Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for the Management of Periprosthetic Fractures

Periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) can present reconstructive challenges. Not only is the procedure technically complex, but patients with these fractures may have multiple comorbidities, making them prone to postoperative complications. Early mobilization is particularly beneficial in patients with multiple comorbidities. Certain patient factors and fracture types may make revision TKA the ideal management option. Periprosthetic fractures around the knee implant occur most frequently in the distal femur, followed by the tibia and the patella. Risk factors typically are grouped into patient factors (eg, osteoporosis, obesity) and surgical factors (eg, anterior notching, implant malposition). Surgical options for periprosthetic fractures that involve the distal femur or proximal tibia include reconstruction of the bone stock with augments or metal cones or replacement with an endoprosthesis.

Mid-term outcomes of primary constrained condylar knee arthroplasty for severe knee deformity

This study aimed to examine the clinical and radiographic outcomes of primary total knee arthroplasy (TKA) with use of NexGen® Legacy® Constrained Condylar Knee (CCK) prosthesis for severe knee deformity. Clinical data of 46 patients (48 knees in total, aged 61 years on average) with severe knee deformity who underwent TKA with NexGen® Legacy® CCK prosthesis between December 2007 and February 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 34 knees with severe valgus with incompetent medial collateral ligament, 11 knees with severe flexion contracture with inability to achieve knee balancing in flexion and extension by posterior soft tissue release, 2 knees with Charcot arthritis with severe varus and bone loss, and 1 with traumatic osteoarthritis with severe varus and ligamentous instability. The mean duration of follow-up was 71 months (range 40-90 months). The New Knee Society scoring (NKSS) system and the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score were used to evaluate the functional and clinical outcomes. Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) was used for pain measurement and Knee Society criteria for evaluation of radiological images. The results showed that, in the total 48 knees, 1 case of loosening due to short-stem tibial component at 3 months post-operatively underwent revision. The 6-year prosthesis survival rate in this cohort was 97.9%. There was no component infection occurring within 6 years. Significant post-operative improvements were found in NKSS and HSS scores. Patient satisfaction was significantly increased. Pain score was decreased significantly. Total functional score was improved from 31.46±11.43 to 86.42±8.87, range of motion (ROM) from 42.42°±23.57° to 95.31°±23.45° and the flexion contracture from 5.31°±7.87° to 0.92°±1.80°. Preoperative radiographic study showed excessive valgus (≥7°) in 37 knees, and varus deformity in 3 knees. Post-operative femorotibial alignment was valgus 3.88°±1.76° in 48 knees. Antero/posterior (A/P) view of X-ray films showed 4 radiolucent lines (RLL) in 48 tibial components. It was concluded that TKA with CCK is effective for the treatment of the severe unstable knee that cannot be balanced by soft tissue.