Literature DB >> 28455474

Contemporary failure aetiologies of the primary, posterior-stabilised total knee arthroplasty.

M P Abdel1, C K Ledford2, A Kobic1, M J Taunton1, A D Hanssen1.   

Abstract

AIMS: The number of revision total knee arthroplasties (TKA) that are performed is expected to increase. However, previous reports of the causes of failure after TKA are limited in that they report the causes at specific institutions, which are often dependent on referral patterns. Our aim was to report the most common indications for re-operations and revisions in a large series of posterior-stabilised TKAs undertaken at a single institution, excluding referrals from elsewhere, which may bias the causes of failure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 5098 TKAs which were undertaken between 2000 and 2012 were included in the study. Re-operations, revisions with modular component exchange, and revisions with non-modular component replacement or removal were identified from the medical records. The mean follow-up was five years (two to 12).
RESULTS: The Kaplan-Meier ten-year survival without a re-operation, modular component revision and non-modular component revision was 95.7%, 99.3% and 95.3%, respectively. The most common indications for a re-operation were: post-operative stiffness (58%), delayed wound healing (21%), and patellar clunk (11%). The indications for isolated modular component revision were acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (64%) and instability (36%). The most common indications for non-modular component revision were chronic PJI (52%), aseptic loosening (17%), periprosthetic fracture (10%), and instability (10%).
CONCLUSION: Post-operative stiffness remains the most common indication for re-operation after TKA. Infection is the most common indication for modular and non-modular component revision. Aseptic loosening was not an uncommon cause of failure, however, it was much less common than in national registry and non-registry data. Focusing on posterior-stabilised TKAs initially performed at our institution allowed for an accurate assessment of the causes of failure in a contemporary specialty practice. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:647-52. ©2017 The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aseptic loosening; Deep periprosthetic infection; Failure; Revision total knee arthroplasty; Total knee arthroplasty

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28455474     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B5.BJJ-2016-0617.R3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone Joint J        ISSN: 2049-4394            Impact factor:   5.082


  10 in total

Review 1.  Robotic technology in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Authors:  Babar Kayani; Sujith Konan; Atif Ayuob; Elliot Onochie; Talal Al-Jabri; Fares S Haddad
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2019-10-01

2.  Inhibition of COX-2 Pathway as a Potential Prophylaxis Against Arthrofibrogenesis in a Rabbit Model of Joint Contracture.

Authors:  Christopher G Salib; Nicolas Reina; William H Trousdale; Afton K Limberg; Megan E Tibbo; Anthony G Jay; Joseph X Robin; Travis W Turner; Carter R Jones; Christopher R Paradise; Eric A Lewallen; Brad Bolon; Jodi M Carter; Daniel J Berry; Mark E Morrey; Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo; Andre J van Wijnen; Matthew P Abdel
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2019-08-26       Impact factor: 3.494

3.  Absence of signature inflammatory markers in synovial fluid for total knee arthroplasties revised for arthrofibrosis.

Authors:  Christopher G Salib; Nicolas Reina; Andre J van Wijnen; Arlen D Hanssen; Daniel J Berry; Matthew P Abdel
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2021-02-24       Impact factor: 2.256

4.  Factors affecting range of motion following two-stage revision arthroplasty for chronic periprosthetic knee infection.

Authors:  Doo-Yeol Kim; Young-Chae Seo; Chang-Wan Kim; Chang-Rack Lee; Soo-Hwan Jung
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2022-07-18

5.  Molecular pathology of total knee arthroplasty instability defined by RNA-seq.

Authors:  Eric A Lewallen; Christopher G Salib; William H Trousdale; Charlotte E Berry; Gabrielle M Hanssen; Joseph X Robin; Meagan E Tibbo; Anthony Viste; Nicolas Reina; Mark E Morrey; Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo; Arlen D Hanssen; Daniel J Berry; Andre J van Wijnen; Matthew P Abdel
Journal:  Genomics       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 5.736

6.  Robotic total knee arthroplasty: clinical outcomes and directions for future research.

Authors:  B Kayani; F S Haddad
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2019-11-02       Impact factor: 5.853

7.  Why do knees after total knee arthroplasty fail in different parts of the world?

Authors:  Dominic T Mathis; Michael T Hirschmann
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2020-12-31

8.  Patient Interest in Robotic Total Joint Arthroplasty Is Exponential: A 10-Year Google Trends Analysis.

Authors:  Joseph C Brinkman; Zachary K Christopher; M Lane Moore; Jordan R Pollock; Jack M Haglin; Joshua S Bingham
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2022-03-24

9.  Accuracy in the Execution of Pre-operative Plan for Limb Alignment and Implant Positioning in Robotic-arm Assisted Total Knee Arthroplasty and Manual Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Observational Study.

Authors:  Jai Thilak; Balu C Babu; Mohan Thadi; Vipin Mohan; T Arun Kumar; Prajwal P Mane; Greeshma C Ravindran
Journal:  Indian J Orthop       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 1.251

10.  Primary and Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients With Pulmonary Hypertension: High Perioperative Mortality and Complications.

Authors:  Courtney E Baker; Brian P Chalmers; Michael J Taunton; Hilal Maradit Kremers; Adam W Amundson; Daniel J Berry; Matthew P Abdel
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2021-07-16       Impact factor: 4.435

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.