Literature DB >> 29789904

Revision knee arthroplasty with rotating hinge systems in patients with gross ligament instability.

Sebastian P Boelch1, Joerg Arnholdt2, Boris M Holzapfel2,3, Axel Jakuscheit2, Maximilian Rudert2, Maik Hoberg2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The clinical and radiographic outcomes after revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for instability with two rotating hinge knee prostheses were compared.
METHODS: Fifty-one patients revised for TKA instability were prospectively randomized to either the Link Endo-Model (N = 26) or the EnduRo (N = 25). Clinical and radiographic outcome scores were compared pre-operatively and at 12 months' follow-up. Failure mechanisms were recorded.
RESULTS: Age, BMI, operation, and tourniquet-time did not differ significantly between groups. Radiographic evaluation demonstrated correct implant alignment. The Endo-Model was implanted with a higher slope (p = 0.0001) and the mechanical lower extremity axis was straighter (p = 0.0323). Except for the patient function Knee Society Score and the Physical Health Component Summary Score in the EnduRo group, all clinical scores (range of motion/knee function Knee Society Score/Oxford Knee Score/Visual Analog Scale/Mental Health Component Summary Score) improved significantly for both prosthesis designs during the follow-up period. The Visual Analog Scale and Mental Health Component Summary score were significantly better (p = 0.045 and p = 0.0148) in the Endo-Model group at the 12 months' follow-up. In the EnduRo group 2 patients (8%) and in the Endo-Model group 1 patient (3.8%) had to be revised for infection.
CONCLUSION: Both prosthetic designs provide significant improvement in pain and function scores after TKA revision for gross instability. We found slight advantages in favor of the Endo-Model; however, no design yielded superior results throughout the study.

Entities:  

Keywords:  EnduRo; Instability; Link Endo-Model; Revision; Rotating hinge; Total knee arthroplasty

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29789904     DOI: 10.1007/s00264-018-3982-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  25 in total

1.  Level of constraint in revision knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Pier Francesco Indelli; Nick Giori; William Maloney
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2015-12

Review 2.  The management of bone loss in revision total knee replacement.

Authors:  J P Whittaker; R Dharmarajan; A D Toms
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2008-08

3.  Revision knee arthroplasty for bone loss: choosing the right degree of constraint.

Authors:  Chao Shen; Paul M Lichstein; Matthew S Austin; Peter F Sharkey; Javad Parvizi
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2013-06-03       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Implant survival and outcome after rotating-hinge total knee revision arthroplasty: a minimum 6-year follow-up.

Authors:  Asgeir Gudnason; Jan Milbrink; Nils P Hailer
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2011-06-09       Impact factor: 3.067

5.  Computer navigation for revision of unicompartmental knee replacements to total knee replacements: the results of a case-control study of forty six knees comparing computer navigated and conventional surgery.

Authors:  Dominique Saragaglia; Jérémy Cognault; Ramsay Refaie; Brice Rubens-Duval; Roch Mader; René Christopher Rouchy; Stephane Plaweski; Régis Pailhé
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-07-02       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Computer-assisted navigation is beneficial both in primary and revision surgery with modular rotating-hinge knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Björn G Ochs; Anna J Schreiner; Peter M de Zwart; Ulrich Stöckle; Christoph Emanuel Gonser
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2014-09-20       Impact factor: 4.342

7.  Revision knee arthroplasty with a rotating-hinge design in elderly patients with instability following total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  E Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán; Primitivo Gómez-Cardero; Ángel Martínez-Lloreda
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2014-11-20

8.  [Methodological views on the SF-36 summary scores based on the adult German population].

Authors:  U Ellert; B-M Kurth
Journal:  Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 1.513

9.  The epidemiology of revision total knee arthroplasty in the United States.

Authors:  Kevin J Bozic; Steven M Kurtz; Edmund Lau; Kevin Ong; Vanessa Chiu; Thomas P Vail; Harry E Rubash; Daniel J Berry
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-06-25       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Early results of a new rotating hinge knee implant.

Authors:  Alexander Giurea; Hans-Joachim Neuhaus; Rolf Miehlke; Reinhard Schuh; Richard Lass; Bernd Kubista; Reinhard Windhager
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-06-25       Impact factor: 3.411

View more
  4 in total

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

Authors:  Cheol Hee Park; Jung Kwon Bae; Sang Jun Song
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-10-16       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Patient-reported outcome measures following revision knee replacement: a review of PROM instrument utilisation and measurement properties using the COSMIN checklist.

Authors:  Shiraz A Sabah; Elizabeth A Hedge; Simon G F Abram; Abtin Alvand; Andrew J Price; Sally Hopewell
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-10-21       Impact factor: 2.692

3.  Long Term Results of a Rotating Hinge Total Knee Prosthesis With Carbon-Fiber Reinforced Poly-Ether-Ether-Ketone (CFR-PEEK) as Bearing Material.

Authors:  Klemens Vertesich; Kevin Staats; Christoph Böhler; Richard Koza; Richard Lass; Alexander Giurea
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-03-04

Review 4.  Total knee arthroplasty using hinge joints: Indications and results.

Authors:  E Carlos Rodríguez-Merchán
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2019-04-25
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.