Literature DB >> 30233952

Porous Tantalum Femoral Metaphyseal Cones for Large Femoral Bone Defects in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

O Brant Nikolaus1, Matthew P Abdel1, Arlen D Hanssen1, David G Lewallen1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones provides reliable metaphyseal support and fixation to help restore the joint line in difficult revision total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) in patients with large femoral bone defects. STEP 1 PREOPERATIVE PLANNING: Adequate preoperative radiographs are important to determine the approximate size of the femoral bone defect prior to surgery. STEP 2 INCISION AND EXPOSURE: Adequate exposure during revision knee surgery is key for the safe removal of implants and to minimize bone loss. STEP 3 COMPONENT REMOVAL: It is essential to disrupt the prosthesis-cement interface before attempting to extract well-fixed components. STEP 4 ESTABLISHING A TIBIAL PLATFORM: The first step in revision knee reconstruction is to establish a stable tibial platform. STEP 5 RECONSTRUCTION OF THE FEMUR: Restoring the joint line and posterior condylar offset are the goals of femoral reconstruction. STEP 6 INTRAOPERATIVE ASSESSMENT OF FEMORAL BONE LOSS: Thoroughly assess the quality, quantity, and location of the remaining cancellous and cortical bone to determine the proper technique for reconstruction. STEP 7 SELECTING THE APPROPRIATE METAPHYSEAL CONE AND SHAPING THE FEMORAL METADIAPHYSIS FOR THE FEMORAL CONE: There are different sizes and shapes of metaphyseal cones that can be used when addressing large femoral bone defects. STEP 8 IMPLANTING THE ACTUAL POROUS METAPHYSEAL CONE: During the final impaction of the femoral metaphyseal cone, take care to not cause a fracture. STEP 9 FINAL TRIAL AND CEMENTING OF THE FINAL STEMMED FEMORAL COMPONENT: Place the final stemmed femoral component through the metaphyseal cone and cement it into place. STEP 10 POSTOPERATIVE PROTOCOL: If a stable construct was achieved, the patient may bear weight as tolerated with no specific restrictions on range of motion. We recently performed a retrospective review of the midterm outcomes at mean of 5 years (range, 2 to 10 years) after 159 consecutive revision TKAs with a porous metal femoral metaphyseal cone in 157 patients with large bone defects 4.

Entities:  

Year:  2017        PMID: 30233952      PMCID: PMC6132599          DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.16.00096

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JBJS Essent Surg Tech        ISSN: 2160-2204


  6 in total

1.  Impaction grafting for bone defects in revision total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Paul A Lotke; Gregory F Carolan; Neil Puri
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.176

2.  Midterm Results of Porous Tantalum Femoral Cones in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  G David Potter; Matthew P Abdel; David G Lewallen; Arlen D Hanssen
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2016-08-03       Impact factor: 5.284

Review 3.  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

4.  Early results of the use of tantalum femoral cones for revision total knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  James L Howard; Jeremy Kudera; David G Lewallen; Arlen D Hanssen
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2011-03-02       Impact factor: 5.284

5.  Use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss during revision total knee replacement.

Authors:  R Michael Meneghini; David G Lewallen; Arlen D Hanssen
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Use of porous tantalum metaphyseal cones for severe tibial bone loss during revision total knee replacement. Surgical technique.

Authors:  R Michael Meneghini; David G Lewallen; Arlen D Hanssen
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2009-03-01       Impact factor: 5.284

  6 in total
  3 in total

Review 1.  Metaphyseal cones and sleeves are similar in improving short- and mid-term outcomes in Total Knee Arthroplasty revisions.

Authors:  Umile Giuseppe Longo; Sergio De Salvatore; Giovanni Intermesoli; Francesco Pirato; Ilaria Piergentili; Roland Becker; Vincenzo Denaro
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2022-03-02       Impact factor: 4.342

Review 2.  Bone loss in aseptic revision total knee arthroplasty: management and outcomes.

Authors:  Thomas Bieganowski; Daniel B Buchalter; Vivek Singh; John J Mercuri; Vinay K Aggarwal; Joshua C Rozell; Ran Schwarzkopf
Journal:  Knee Surg Relat Res       Date:  2022-06-20

3.  Early Survivorship of Newly Designed Highly Porous Metaphyseal Tibial Cones in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Brian P Chalmers; Christina M Malfer; David J Mayman; Geoffrey H Westrich; Peter K Sculco; Mathias P Bostrom; Seth A Jerabek
Journal:  Arthroplast Today       Date:  2021-02-23
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.