Roger Erivan1, Robert Tracey2,3, Aurélien Mulliez4, Guillaume Villatte5, Wayne Paprosky2,3. 1. CNRS, SIGMA Clermont, ICCF, Université Clermont Auvergne, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France. rerivan@chu-clermontferrand.fr. 2. Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA. 3. Central DuPage Hospital, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL, USA. 4. Délégation à la Recherche Clinique et aux Innovations (DRCI), CHU Clermont-Ferrand, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France. 5. CNRS, SIGMA Clermont, ICCF, Université Clermont Auvergne, CHU Clermont-Ferrand, 63000, Clermont-Ferrand, France.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Trabecular metal cones are a relatively new option for reconstruction of major bone defects during revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively assess medium-term results for tibial cones in revision TKA with a severe proximal tibial bone defect. We hypothesized that revision TKA patients with bone defects treated with trabecular metal cones have excellent medium-term clinical and radiological results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective review included all consecutive cases of tibial revision using trabecular metal cones. All patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included in the study. There were no exclusion criteria. The primary endpoint was tibial cone survivorship. The secondary endpoints were revision TKA all-cause survivorship, patient-reported outcome measures with a Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), SF 12, and radiographic analysis. RESULTS: Five of the 57 patients alive at last follow-up (8.77%) had undergone revision (4 for infection and 1 for instability). Complications comprised four cases (7.02%) of infection, 2 cases (3.51%) of tibial and femoral implant aseptic loosening that did not require revision surgery, 1 of which (1.75%) with associated patellar loosening, and 1 case (1.75%) of instability. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed 100% 5-year survivorship with tibial cone revision for aseptic loosening and 93.44% (95% CI 83.47-97.49%) for all-cause revision. DISCUSSION: The present study of cones used for tibial revision supports shows excellent results; however, longer and larger follow-up is needed to better assess results in revision TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4, retrospective study.
INTRODUCTION: Trabecular metal cones are a relatively new option for reconstruction of major bone defects during revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively assess medium-term results for tibial cones in revision TKA with a severe proximal tibial bone defect. We hypothesized that revision TKA patients with bone defects treated with trabecular metal cones have excellent medium-term clinical and radiological results. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A single-center retrospective review included all consecutive cases of tibial revision using trabecular metal cones. All patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included in the study. There were no exclusion criteria. The primary endpoint was tibial cone survivorship. The secondary endpoints were revision TKA all-cause survivorship, patient-reported outcome measures with a Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), SF 12, and radiographic analysis. RESULTS: Five of the 57 patients alive at last follow-up (8.77%) had undergone revision (4 for infection and 1 for instability). Complications comprised four cases (7.02%) of infection, 2 cases (3.51%) of tibial and femoral implant aseptic loosening that did not require revision surgery, 1 of which (1.75%) with associated patellar loosening, and 1 case (1.75%) of instability. Kaplan-Meier estimates showed 100% 5-year survivorship with tibial cone revision for aseptic loosening and 93.44% (95% CI 83.47-97.49%) for all-cause revision. DISCUSSION: The present study of cones used for tibial revision supports shows excellent results; however, longer and larger follow-up is needed to better assess results in revision TKA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4, retrospective study.
Entities:
Keywords:
Aseptic loosening; Tibial cone; Total knee revision; Trabecular metal
Authors: Alexander Maslaris; Frank Layher; Matthias Bungartz; Timo Zippelius; Emmanouil Liodakis; Olaf Brinkmann; Georg Matziolis Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2019-03-29 Impact factor: 3.067
Authors: Ahmad Faizan; Manoshi Bhowmik-Stoker; Vincent Alipit; Amanda E Kirk; Viktor E Krebs; Steven F Harwin; R Michael Meneghini Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2017-01-18 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Nemandra A Sandiford; Peter Misur; Donald S Garbuz; Nelson V Greidanus; Bassam A Masri Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2017-01 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Daniel D Bohl; Nicholas M Brown; Mitchell A McDowell; Brett R Levine; Scott M Sporer; Wayne G Paprosky; Craig J Della Valle Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2017-07-28 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Tyler S Watters; John R Martin; Daniel L Levy; Charlie C Yang; Raymond H Kim; Douglas A Dennis Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2017-06-20 Impact factor: 4.757
Authors: Ittai Shichman; Christian Oakley; Jore H Willems; Gijs G van Hellemondt; Petra Heesterbeek; Joshua Rozell; Scott Marwin; Ran Schwarzkopf Journal: Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Date: 2022-10-15 Impact factor: 2.928