Literature DB >> 8934319

Conversion of failed modern unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty.

W N Levine1, R M Ozuna, R D Scott, T S Thornhill.   

Abstract

Between January 1983 and January 1991, 29 patients (31 knees) with a failed Robert Brigham metal-backed knee arthroplasty (Johnson & Johnson, Raynham, MA) underwent revision to a total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Twenty-five patients had osteoarthritis, three avascular necrosis, and one rheumatoid arthritis. The average patient age was 72.3 years (range, 49-88 years), and the average weight was 179 lb. (range, 112-242 lb.). The interval between the primary and secondary index procedures averaged 62 months (range, 7-106 months), and mean postrevision follow-up period was 45 months (range, 24-104 months). The primary mechanism of failure of the UKA was tibial polyethylene wear in 21 knees and opposite compartment progression of arthritis in 10 knees. Sixteen knees had particulate synovitis with dense metallic staining of the synovium. At revision, the posterior cruciate ligament was spared in 30 knees and substituted in 1 knee. Restoration of bony deficiency at revision required cancellous bone-graft for contained defects in seven knees, tibial wedges in four knees, and femoral wedges in two knees. No defects received structural allografts. The data suggest that failed, modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty can successfully be converted to TKA. In most cases, the posterior cruciate ligament can be spared and bone defects corrected with simple wedges or cancellous grafts. Moreover, the results of revision of failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty are superior to those of failed TKA and failed high tibial osteotomy and comparable to the authors' results of primary TKA with similar-length follow-up periods. Although these results are encouraging, longer-term follow-up evaluation is required to determine survivorship of these revision arthroplasties.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8934319     DOI: 10.1016/s0883-5403(96)80179-3

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


  22 in total

Review 1.  [Revision of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty].

Authors:  S Kirschner; J Lützner; S Fickert; K-P Günther
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 1.087

2.  The clinical outcome of revision knee replacement after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty versus primary total knee arthroplasty: 8-17 years follow-up study of 49 patients.

Authors:  Jaakko Järvenpää; Jukka Kettunen; Hannu Miettinen; Heikki Kröger
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2009-05-27       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Lateral tibial plateau autograft in revision surgery for failed medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Simone Cerciello; Brent Joseph Morris; Sebastien Lustig; Enrico Visonà; Giuliano Cerciello; Katia Corona; Philippe Neyret
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 4.342

4.  Total versus partial knee replacement in patients with medial compartment knee osteoarthritis: the TOPKAT RCT.

Authors:  David J Beard; Loretta J Davies; Jonathan A Cook; Graeme MacLennan; Andrew Price; Seamus Kent; Jemma Hudson; Andrew Carr; Jose Leal; Helen Campbell; Ray Fitzpatrick; Nigel Arden; David Murray; Marion K Campbell
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 4.014

5.  Rehabilitation outcomes following revision for failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Authors:  Wei Sheng Foong; Ngai Nung Lo
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2014-07-26

6.  Unicompartmental versus total knee arthroplasty database analysis: is there a winner?

Authors:  Matthew C Lyons; Steven J MacDonald; Lyndsay E Somerville; Douglas D Naudie; Richard W McCalden
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Partial or total replacement of a unicompartmental knee prosthesis by another unicompartmental knee prosthesis: a reasonable option? About 22 cases.

Authors:  F Lecuire; A Galland; M Basso; H Vinel; J Rubini
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2012-10-16

8.  Revision of 33 unicompartmental knee prostheses using total knee arthroplasty: strategy and results.

Authors:  Dominique Saragaglia; Gilles Estour; Charbel Nemer; Pierre-Emmanuel Colle
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-06-18       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Outcome of revision of unicompartmental knee replacement.

Authors:  Jacqueline R Hang; Tyman E Stanford; Stephen E Graves; David C Davidson; Richard N de Steiger; Lisa N Miller
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 3.717

Review 10.  Fixed- versus mobile-bearing unicondylar knee arthroplasty: are failure modes different?

Authors:  Tao Cheng; Daoyun Chen; Chen Zhu; Xiaoyun Pan; Xin Mao; Yongyuan Guo; Xianlong Zhang
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-09-25       Impact factor: 4.342

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.