Literature DB >> 30224100

Septic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: Treatment of Metaphyseal Bone Defects Using Metaphyseal Sleeves.

Sebastian M Klim1, Florian Amerstorfer1, Gerwin A Bernhardt1, Patrick Sadoghi1, Gerald Gruber1, Roman Radl1, Andreas Leithner1, Mathias Glehr1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Bone loss is a severe problem in septic revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA). The use of porous coated metaphyseal sleeves is a promising treatment option for metaphyseal bone defects. The currently published midterm results remain limited and no study has been focused exclusively on septic cases. Our aim was to determine the implant survivorship (with special focus on osseointegration) and the clinical and radiological midterm outcome of metaphyseal sleeve fixation in septic RTKA surgery (minimum follow-up of 2 years).
METHODS: We performed a clinical and radiographic examination of 56 patients with a history of prosthetic joint infection who underwent 2-stage RTKA with the use of porous coated metaphyseal sleeves. These examinations included evaluation of the American Knee Society Score, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, the Short Form (SF-36) Health survey as well as radiographic measurement to determine whether successful osseointegration had been achieved.
RESULTS: Nine patients (16%) had to be re-revised at the time of follow-up (mean, 5.3 years; range, 2-11.2), all due to reinfection. We did not encounter any cases of aseptic loosening. The mean range of motion (92°, SD ± 21°), subjective satisfaction score (7, SD ± 2), American Knee Society Score (76, SD ± 19), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (70, SD ± 20), SF-36 mental component summary (55, SD ± 14), and SF-36 physical component summary (35, SD ± 9) have shown satisfying results.
CONCLUSION: Metaphyseal sleeves have shown very promising midterm results regarding clinical scores, osseointegration, and aseptic loosening. Our results are the first analyzing exclusively septic indications and indicate that they are a reliable fixation option in all bone defect types in septic RTKA patients.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bone defect; metaphyseal fixation; osseointegration; revision total knee arthroplasty; septic; sleeves

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30224100     DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.08.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  5 in total

1.  Metaphyseal cones and sleeves in revision total knee arthroplasty: Two sides of the same coin? Complications, clinical and radiological results-a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  A Zanirato; M Formica; L Cavagnaro; S Divano; G Burastero; L Felli
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2019-03-16

2.  Medium term clinical outcomes of tibial cones in revision knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Roger Erivan; Robert Tracey; Aurélien Mulliez; Guillaume Villatte; Wayne Paprosky
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2020-10-10       Impact factor: 3.067

3.  Porous-coated metaphyseal sleeves and MBT implant for severe bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty: a mean 2.4-year follow-up.

Authors:  Yushun Wu; Eryou Feng; Yiyuan Zhang; Feitai Lin; Liqiong Lin; Zhanglai Li; Lili Xiao
Journal:  Arthroplasty       Date:  2020-04-20

Review 4.  Prostheses option in revision total knee arthroplasty, from the bench to the bedside: (1) basic science and principles.

Authors:  Jun Zhang; Erhu Li; Yuan Zhang
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2022-02-15

5.  Results of 'two-in-one' single-stage revision total knee arthroplasty for infection with associated bone loss : prospective five-year follow up.

Authors:  Andrew C C Brunt; Matthew Gillespie; George Holland; Ivan Brenkel; Phil Walmsley
Journal:  Bone Jt Open       Date:  2022-02
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.