Literature DB >> 19130161

Limitations of structural allograft in revision total knee arthroplasty.

Ryan D Bauman1, David G Lewallen, Arlen D Hanssen.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Management of large bone defects in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) usually has involved modular prostheses with metal augments, structural allografts, and megaprostheses. We retrospectively reviewed the outcome of treatment of major bone defects for 74 patients (79 knees) who had revision TKAs with structural allografts; nine patients were lost to followup before 5 years, leaving 65 patients (70 knees, or 88%) followed for a minimum of 5 years or until revision or death. Medical records, radiographs, patient surveys, and correspondence were used for all data. Sixteen patients (22.8%) had failed reconstructions and underwent additional revision surgery; eight of the 16 were secondary to allograft failure, three were secondary to failure of a component not supported by allograft, and five were secondary to infection. In patients not requiring revision surgery, the Knee Society score improved from 49 preoperatively to 87 postoperatively. We observed revision-free survival of 80.7% (95% confidence interval, 71.7-90.8) at 5 years and 75.9% (95% confidence interval, 65.6-87.8) at 10 years. Our data support the selective use of structural allograft for large cavitary defects encountered during TKA. However, the rates of complications and reoperations suggest efforts to improve results or develop more durable alternative methods are warranted for these challenging reconstructions. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See the Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19130161      PMCID: PMC2635432          DOI: 10.1007/s11999-008-0679-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.176


  16 in total

Review 1.  Bone loss in total knee arthroplasty: graft augment and options.

Authors:  John M Cuckler
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 4.757

2.  Augments and allografts in revision total knee arthroplasty: usage and outcome using one modular revision prosthesis.

Authors:  David E Hockman; Deborah Ammeen; Gerard A Engh
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 4.757

3.  Allograft reconstruction in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  I Stockley; J P McAuley; A E Gross
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  1992-05

Review 4.  Results of revision total knee arthroplasty in the face of significant bone deficiency.

Authors:  C H Rorabeck; P N Smith
Journal:  Orthop Clin North Am       Date:  1998-04       Impact factor: 2.472

5.  Treatment of major defects of bone with bulk allografts and stemmed components during total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  G A Engh; P J Herzwurm; N L Parks
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Reconstruction of massive bone defects with allograft in revision total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  M T Ghazavi; I Stockley; G Yee; A Davis; A E Gross
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 5.284

7.  Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system.

Authors:  J N Insall; L D Dorr; R D Scott; W N Scott
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1989-11       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 8.  Bone loss with revision total knee arthroplasty: defect classification and alternatives for reconstruction.

Authors:  G A Engh; D J Ammeen
Journal:  Instr Course Lect       Date:  1999

9.  Correlation of patient questionnaire responses and physician history in grading clinical outcome following hip and knee arthroplasty. A prospective study of 201 joint arthroplasties.

Authors:  B J McGrory; B F Morrey; J A Rand; D M Ilstrup
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 4.757

10.  Arthroplasty with a composite of an allograft and a prosthesis for knees with severe deficiency of bone.

Authors:  A I Harris; S Poddar; S Gitelis; M B Sheinkop; A G Rosenberg
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  32 in total

1.  Distal femur and proximal tibia replacement with megaprosthesis in revision knee arthroplasty: a limb-saving procedure.

Authors:  Steffen Höll; Annabel Schlomberg; Georg Gosheger; Ralf Dieckmann; Arne Streitbuerger; Dino Schulz; Jendrik Hardes
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-03-06       Impact factor: 4.342

2.  Metaphyseal bone loss in revision knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Danielle Y Ponzio; Matthew S Austin
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2015-12

3.  Megaprostheses in the management of trauma of the knee.

Authors:  Scott Evans; Edward Laugharne; Amit Kotecha; Laura Hadley; Arul Ramasamy; Lee Jeys
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2015-12-07

4.  Distal tibial metaphyseal allograft cone for proximal tibial bone loss in revision knee arthroplasty - A novel technique.

Authors:  Rajesh Malhotra; Vijay Kumar Jain; Deepak Gautam
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2018-05-07

5.  Double metal tibial blocks augmentation in total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kyu Sung Chung; Jin Kyu Lee; Hee Jae Lee; Choong Hyeok Choi
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-10-10       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  CORR Insights®: No Difference between Trabecular Metal Cones and Femoral Head Allograft in Revision TKA: Minimum 5-year Followup.

Authors:  Douglas A Dennis
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-08-19       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  No Difference Between Trabecular Metal Cones and Femoral Head Allografts in Revision TKA: Minimum 5-year Followup.

Authors:  Nemandra A Sandiford; Peter Misur; Donald S Garbuz; Nelson V Greidanus; Bassam A Masri
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  Can Good Infection Control Be Obtained in One-stage Exchange of the Infected TKA to a Rotating Hinge Design? 10-year Results.

Authors:  Akos Zahar; Daniel O Kendoff; Till O Klatte; Thorsten A Gehrke
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.176

9.  Tantalum Cones Provide Durable Mid-term Fixation in Revision TKA.

Authors:  Ivan De Martino; Vincenzo De Santis; Peter K Sculco; Rocco D'Apolito; Joseph B Assini; Giorgio Gasparini
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Do porous tantalum implants help preserve bone?: evaluation of tibial bone density surrounding tantalum tibial implants in TKA.

Authors:  Alicia K Harrison; Terence J Gioe; Christine Simonelli; Penny J Tatman; Mary C Schoeller
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-01-12       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.