Joint registries classify all further arthroplasty procedures to a knee with an existing partial arthroplasty as revision surgery, regardless of the actual procedure performed. Relatively minor procedures, including bearing exchanges, are classified in the same way as major operations requiring augments and stems. A new classification system is proposed to acknowledge and describe the detail of these procedures, which has implications for risk, recovery, and health economics. Classification categories were proposed by a surgical consensus group, then ranked by patients, according to perceived invasiveness and implications for recovery. In round one, 26 revision cases were classified by the consensus group. Results were tested for inter-rater reliability. In round two, four additional cases were added for clarity. Round three repeated the survey one month later, subject to inter- and intrarater reliability testing. In round four, five additional expert partial knee arthroplasty surgeons were asked to classify the 30 cases according to the proposed revision partial knee classification (RPKC) system.Aims
Methods
Preservation of posterior condylar offset (PCO) has been shown to correlate with improved functional results after primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Whether this is also the case for revision TKA, remains unknown. The aim of this study was to assess the independent effect of PCO on early functional outcome after revision TKA. A total of 107 consecutive aseptic revision TKAs were performed by a single surgeon during an eight-year period. The mean age was 69.4 years (39 to 85) and there were 59 female patients and 48 male patients. The Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and Short-form (SF)-12 score were assessed pre-operatively and one year post-operatively. Patient satisfaction was also assessed at one year. Joint line and PCO were assessed radiographically at one year.Objectives
Methods
Orthopaedic surgeons use stems in revision knee surgery to obtain
stability when metaphyseal bone is missing. No consensus exists
regarding stem size or method of fixation. This A custom test rig using differential variable reluctance transducers
(DVRTs) was developed to record all translational and rotational
motions at the bone–implant interface. Composite femurs were used.
These were secured to permit variation in flexion angle from 0°
to 90°. Cyclic loads were applied through a tibial component based
on three peaks corresponding to 0°, 10° and 20° flexion from a normal
walking cycle. Three different femoral components were investigated
in this study for cementless and cemented interface conditions.Objectives
Methods
