Pablo S Corona1,2,3, Maria Jurado1,3, Ana Scott-Tennent4, Rosa Fraile2,5, Luis Carrera1,2,3, Matías Vicente6,7,8. 1. Septic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Orthopaedic Surgery Department, Vall D'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Pg. Vall d'Hebron 119-129, 08035, Barcelona, Spain. 2. Septic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Orthopaedic Surgery Department, Vall D'Hebron University, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Musculoskeletal Tissue Engineering Group, Vall D'Hebron Research Institute, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain. 4. Orthopaedic Surgery Department, Arnau de Vilanova University Hospital, Lleida, Spain. 5. Surgical Nurse Team, Vall D'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. 6. Septic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Orthopaedic Surgery Department, Vall D'Hebron University Hospital, Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona, Pg. Vall d'Hebron 119-129, 08035, Barcelona, Spain. matias.vicente@vhebron.net. 7. Septic and Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Orthopaedic Surgery Department, Vall D'Hebron University, Barcelona, Spain. matias.vicente@vhebron.net. 8. Musculoskeletal Tissue Engineering Group, Vall D'Hebron Research Institute, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain. matias.vicente@vhebron.net.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: External fixator knee arthrodesis is a salvage procedure used primarily in cases of end-stage infected total knee replacement (iTKR). Stable fixation combined with bone-end compression is essential to achieve knee fusion, but providing sufficient stability can be challenging in the presence of severe bone loss. Our hypothesis is that using an external fixation biplanar configuration would bring about a fusion rate superior to that of a monolateral frame. METHODS: This study compares outcomes of biplanar external fixator knee fusion due to non-revisable iTKR with those of a historical cohort control study with patients managed with a monoplanar configuration. Primary endpoints were fusion rate, time to achieve bone fusion and infection eradication rate. Limb-length discrepancy, pain level, patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 29 knee fusion cases were included. In the biplanar group, infection was eradicated in 100% of the patients and fusion was achieved in all cases within an average of 5.24 months. In comparison, in the monolateral group, infection was eradicated in 86% of the cases and fusion was achieved in 81% of the patients after a mean of 10.3 months (p < 0.05). In both groups, postoperative pain was mild and patients expressed a high degree of satisfaction once fusion was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: According to our data, external fixation knee fusion is a useful limb-salvage procedure in end-stage cases of knee PJI. We conclude that a biplanar configuration can halve the time required to achieve solid bone fusion in such a complex scenario.
BACKGROUND: External fixator knee arthrodesis is a salvage procedure used primarily in cases of end-stage infected total knee replacement (iTKR). Stable fixation combined with bone-end compression is essential to achieve knee fusion, but providing sufficient stability can be challenging in the presence of severe bone loss. Our hypothesis is that using an external fixation biplanar configuration would bring about a fusion rate superior to that of a monolateral frame. METHODS: This study compares outcomes of biplanar external fixator knee fusion due to non-revisable iTKR with those of a historical cohort control study with patients managed with a monoplanar configuration. Primary endpoints were fusion rate, time to achieve bone fusion and infection eradication rate. Limb-length discrepancy, pain level, patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 29 knee fusion cases were included. In the biplanar group, infection was eradicated in 100% of the patients and fusion was achieved in all cases within an average of 5.24 months. In comparison, in the monolateral group, infection was eradicated in 86% of the cases and fusion was achieved in 81% of the patients after a mean of 10.3 months (p < 0.05). In both groups, postoperative pain was mild and patients expressed a high degree of satisfaction once fusion was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: According to our data, external fixation knee fusion is a useful limb-salvage procedure in end-stage cases of knee PJI. We conclude that a biplanar configuration can halve the time required to achieve solid bone fusion in such a complex scenario.
Authors: Javier Ariza; Javier Cobo; Josu Baraia-Etxaburu; Natividad Benito; Guillermo Bori; Javier Cabo; Pablo Corona; Jaime Esteban; Juan Pablo Horcajada; Jaime Lora-Tamayo; Oscar Murillo; Julián Palomino; Jorge Parra; Carlos Pigrau; José Luis Del Pozo; Melchor Riera; Dolores Rodríguez; Mar Sánchez-Somolinos; Alex Soriano; M Dolores Del Toro; Basilio de la Torre Journal: Enferm Infecc Microbiol Clin Date: 2017-02-16 Impact factor: 1.731
Authors: Sara Scarponi; Lorenzo Drago; Delia Romanò; Nicola Logoluso; Andrea Peccati; Enzo Meani; Carlo L Romanò Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2013-12-14 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: David Yeoh; Richard Goddard; Paul Macnamara; Nicholas Bowman; Kim Miles; Debra East; Adrian Butler-Manuel Journal: Knee Date: 2008-04-23 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Arnold J Suda; Xaver Brachtendorf; Marco Tinelli; Raed Wagokh; Ghaith Abou-Nouar; Oliver E Bischel Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2021-04-23 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: P L N Fernando; Aravinda Abeygunawardane; Pci Wijesinghe; Parakrama Dharmaratne; Pujitha Silva Journal: Med Eng Phys Date: 2021-11-04 Impact factor: 2.242