Stefano Marco Paolo Rossi1, Marta Medetti2, Loris Perticarini3, Matteo Ghiara2, Francesco Benazzo3,4. 1. Sezione di Chirurgia Protesica ad Indirizzo Robotico - Unità di Traumatologia dello Sport, U.O. Ortopedia e Traumatologia Fondazione Poliambulanza, Via Bissolati 57, Brescia, Italy. rossi.smp@gmail.com. 2. Clinica Ortopedica e Traumatologia, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, P.le Golgi 19, Pavia, Italy. 3. Sezione di Chirurgia Protesica ad Indirizzo Robotico - Unità di Traumatologia dello Sport, U.O. Ortopedia e Traumatologia Fondazione Poliambulanza, Via Bissolati 57, Brescia, Italy. 4. Università degli Studi di Pavia, Pavia, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of articulating spacers, molded or prefabricated, becomes difficult in case of severe bone losses. Our idea was to customize the Molded Articulating Cement Spacers with cement stem extensions and if necessary metaphyseal cement augmentations in order to use them also in case of major bone defects. METHODS: Fifty-four knees in fifty-three patients undergoing 2-stage exchange arthroplasty were divided in 4 groups, treated with 4 different types of spacers (Static, articulating molded, customized molded and metal on Poly) and evaluated in terms of Range of Motion (ROM), Knee Society Score (KSS), patients' related outcome measures (PROMs), rate of complication and ease of the surgical exposure at the time of reimplantation. RESULTS: At final follow-up, no statistical differences in terms of ROM and KSS were found between the articulating groups. Static Spacers showed statistically significant lower results both in terms of ROM and KSS comparing to the other 3 groups (P < 0.05). Considering PROMs, statistically better outcomes for all articulating spacers were found both when spacer was in place and at final follow-up comparing to the static spacers group (P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the 3 articulating spacers groups. Radiographic analysis did not show signs of loosening, migration or major bone loss. CONCLUSIONS: Customized Intraoperatively Molded Articulating Cement Spacers are a safe solution for two-stage revisions TKA with major bone defects and may provide a better quality of life for patients when in place comparing to static ones.
BACKGROUND: The use of articulating spacers, molded or prefabricated, becomes difficult in case of severe bone losses. Our idea was to customize the Molded Articulating Cement Spacers with cement stem extensions and if necessary metaphyseal cement augmentations in order to use them also in case of major bone defects. METHODS: Fifty-four knees in fifty-three patients undergoing 2-stage exchange arthroplasty were divided in 4 groups, treated with 4 different types of spacers (Static, articulating molded, customized molded and metal on Poly) and evaluated in terms of Range of Motion (ROM), Knee Society Score (KSS), patients' related outcome measures (PROMs), rate of complication and ease of the surgical exposure at the time of reimplantation. RESULTS: At final follow-up, no statistical differences in terms of ROM and KSS were found between the articulating groups. Static Spacers showed statistically significant lower results both in terms of ROM and KSS comparing to the other 3 groups (P < 0.05). Considering PROMs, statistically better outcomes for all articulating spacers were found both when spacer was in place and at final follow-up comparing to the static spacers group (P < 0.05). No statistically significant difference was found between the 3 articulating spacers groups. Radiographic analysis did not show signs of loosening, migration or major bone loss. CONCLUSIONS: Customized Intraoperatively Molded Articulating Cement Spacers are a safe solution for two-stage revisions TKA with major bone defects and may provide a better quality of life for patients when in place comparing to static ones.
Authors: Robert Pivec; Kimona Issa; Kristin Given; Steven F Harwin; Kenneth A Greene; Kirby D Hitt; Sarah Shi; Michael A Mont Journal: J Arthroplasty Date: 2014-10-17 Impact factor: 4.757