The demands placed upon joint surgeons are perhaps greatest when treating the revision arthroplasty patient, who present with complications demanding skill in diagnosis and evaluation, interpersonal communication and the technical aspects of the revision procedure. However, little information exists identifying which specific tasks in revision arthroplasty are most difficult for surgeons to master, and whether the greatest challenges arise from clinical, cognitive or technical facets of patient treatment. This study was undertaken to identify which tasks associated with revision total knee replacement (TKR) are perceived as most challenging to young surgeons and trainees to guide future efforts in surgical training and curriculum development. We developed an online survey instrument consisting of 69 items encompassing pre-operative, intraoperative, and post-operative tasks that preliminary studies identified as the essential components of revision TKR. These tasks encompassed 4 domains: clinical decision-making skills (n=9), interpersonal assessment and communication (n=7), surgical decision-making (n=35) and procedural surgical tasks (n=18). Respondents rated the difficulty of each item on a 5-level Likert scale, with an ordinal score ranging from 1 (“very easy”) to 5 (“very difficult”. The survey instrument was administered to a cohort of 109 US surgeons: 31 trainees enrolled in a joint fellowship program (Fellows) and 78 surgeons who had graduated from a joint fellowship program within the previous 10 years (Joint Surgeons). Using appropriate parametric and non-parametric tests, the responses were analyzed to examine the variation of reported difficulty of each of the 69 items, in addition to the nature of the task (cognitive, surgical, clinical and interpersonal), and differences between Fellows and Surgeons.Introduction
Methods
Instability in flexion after total knee replacement
(TKR) typically occurs as a result of mismatched flexion and extension
gaps. The goals of this study were to identify factors leading to
instability in flexion, the degree of correction, determined radiologically,
required at revision surgery, and the subsequent clinical outcomes.
Between 2000 and 2010, 60 TKRs in 60 patients underwent revision
for instability in flexion associated with well-fixed components.
There were 33 women (55%) and 27 men (45%); their mean age was 65
years (43 to 82). Radiological measurements and the Knee Society
score (KSS) were used to assess outcome after revision surgery.
The mean follow-up was 3.6 years (2 to 9.8). Decreased condylar
offset (p <
0.001), distalisation of the joint line (p <
0.001)
and increased posterior tibial slope (p <
0.001) contributed
to instability in flexion and required correction at revision to regain
stability. The combined mean correction of posterior condylar offset
and joint line resection was 9.5 mm, and a mean of 5° of posterior
tibial slope was removed. At the most recent follow-up, there was
a significant improvement in the mean KSS for the knee and function
(both p <
0.001), no patient reported instability and no patient
underwent further surgery for instability. The following step-wise approach is recommended: reduction of
tibial slope, correction of malalignment, and improvement of condylar
offset. Additional joint line elevation is needed if the above steps
do not equalise the flexion and extension gaps. Cite this article:
