Aims

Endoprosthetic reconstruction with a distal femoral arthroplasty (DFA) can be used to treat distal femoral bone loss from oncological and non-oncological causes. This study reports the short-term implant survivorship, complications, and risk factors for patients who underwent DFA for non-neoplastic indications.

Abstract. Introduction. Distal Femoral Fractures around a Total Knee Replacement have a reported incidence of 0.25–2.3% of primary TKRs. Literature suggests that these fractures have high complication rates such as non union and revision. Methodology. A retrospective case note review was undertaken of all patients who sustained a distal femoral fracture around a TKR from April 2014-April 2021. Data parameters collected included patient demographics, classification of fracture, management, post op mobility, fracture union and mortality. Results. 52 distal femoral fractures were recorded, out of which 5 patients had bilateral fractures. The average age was 83.6 years (61–101). 41 fractures were managed operatively with 61% undergoing ORIF, 37% undergoing Distal Femoral Replacement & 2% undergoing a retrograde IM Nail. The median LOS was 22 days (11–85) for patients treated with DFR versus 10 (3–75) for those undergoing an ORIF. 60% of DFR patients were discharged home compared to 56% of those who underwent an ORIF. All the DFR patients were FWB post op compared to ORIF 24%. Conclusion. Over a 7 year study period, 52 distal femoral fractures were reviewed. Despite FWB status post op, patients undergoing a DFR had a longer length of stay and less were discharged home compared to the ORIF group. Given the cost of a distal femoral replacement (£4485-6500) compared to £212-297 for a locking plate, in order to get patients FWB post operatively potentially dual plating (medial and lateral) may need to be considered if the fracture is amenable to improve stability & allow FWB

Abstract. Introduction. Patients presenting with loosening or a fracture between ipsilateral hip and knee replacements provide a unique reconstructive challenge. We present mid-term results of the cement-over megaprosthesis (COM) when managing these complex cases. A COM is cement-linked to the stem of a well-fixed existing implant. We report the largest series to date and show that this may be preferable to total femoral replacement in a cohort of patients who often have significant co-morbidities. Methodology. A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing COM between 2002–2022 was performed. Primary outcomes were defined as implant survival, displayed with survival analysis. Secondary outcomes included mortality and surgical complications. Functional outcomes included Visual Analogue Score (VAS), EuroQol-5D-3L and Musculoskeletal Tumour Society (MSTS) score at one year post operatively. Results. 34 patients underwent reconstructive cement-over technique. There were 20 custom distal femur replacements and 10 custom proximal femoral replacements. Two patients were revised, with a ten year implant survival of 94%. Fifteen patients died during the study period with an mean time to death of 66 months (25–109). The mean follow up was 75 months. 11 patients (32%) developed surgical complications. Mean VAS score was 4.9 (1–10), EuroQol-5D-3L index 0.45 (−0.59 – 0.88) and MSTS score was 16.8 (2–27) in 29 patients. Conclusion. The COM technique provides good implant survivorship in complex cases with compromised bone stock and this series confirms this as an established alternative to total femoral replacement in these cases

Abstract. Background. The incidence of periprosthetic fractures of the femur around a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is rising and this is owed to the increased longevity that today's TKA implants allow for, as well as an aging population. These injuries are significant as they are related to increased morbidity and mortality. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed all periprosthetic fractures around a TKA that presented to our NHS Trust between 2011 to 2020. Medical records were reviewed. Treatment, complications and mortality were noted. Results. 37 patients (34 females) with an average age of 84 (range 65–99) met the inclusion criteria for this study. 17 patients (45.9%) underwent open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), eight patients (21.6%) underwent revision arthroplasty to a distal femoral replacement (DFR) and 12 patients (32.4%) were treated non-operatively. 10 (58.8%) of the 17 patients that were treated with ORIF were discharged from hospital to a rehabilitation facility rather than their usual residence. In comparison, 3 (37.5%) of the patients that were treated with a DFR were discharged to a rehabilitation facility. one-year mortality rate in the ORIF group was 29.4 compared to 12.5% in those that had a DFR. Conclusion. Revision arthroplasty using a DFR should be considered in patients with periprosthetic fractures around a TKR, as it is associated with lower mortality rates and higher immediate post-operative function

PURPOSE OF STUDY. Periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty is a potentially serious and challenging complication and the incidence is continuously rising. The purpose of this study was to analyse the prevalence and analyse effectiveness of the various treatment methods for management of periprosthetic fracture of the distal femur after total knee arthroplasty, and to determine the clinical and radiographic results of patients following surgical treatment of these injuries. METHODS. We reviewed all patients with periprosthetic fractures after total knee arthroplasty treated surgically between 2003 and 2008 from the prospective hospital database. Medical and radiographic records were reviewed for patient characteristics, fracture characteristics, implant details, healing, and complications. Antero-posterior and lateral radiographs were reviewed at the time of admission, post-operatively and at follow up visits. Fractures were classified according to the Lewis and Rorabeck, Orthopaedic Trauma Association and the methods of Su and DeWal. RESULTS. 26 patients (average age= 77.6) had operative management for displaced fractures. Mechanical fall was the commonest mode of injury at a mean of 4.66 years post primary replacement. Locking plates was the commonest method of fixation for stable implant and displaced fractures [Lewis & Rorabeck type 2] and 2 patients had distal femoral replacements for unstable implants. Successful fracture healing within 6 months occurred in all but one patient. Full weight bearing mobilisation was achieved at 3 months in 94% and patients with distal femoral replacements achieved quickest recovery. CONCLUSIONS. Compared to the current literature, we had a satisfactory outcome in following individualised treatment of periprosthetic fractures after knee joint replacement. Periprosthetic femoral fractures around the knee commonly constitute a challenging problem and require an adequate analysis of fracture etiology and distal femoral replacement achieves satisfactory results in fractures with unstable implants

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate medium- to long-term outcomes and complications of the Stanmore Modular Individualised Lower Extremity System (SMILES) rotating hinge implant in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) at a tertiary unit. It is hypothesized that this fully cemented construct leads to satisfactory clinical outcomes.

Introduction. Extraction of implants due to periprosthetic infection (PJI) following complex revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) with extensive hardware can be a daunting undertaking for surgeon and patient alike. We question whether irrigation and debridement (I&D) has a role in this difficult situation with respect to infection control, reoperation, and function. Methods. rTKAs for PJI from 2005–2016 were reviewed. Extensive hardware was defined as: metaphyseal cone/sleeve fixation, distal femoral replacement, periprosthetic fracture hardware, or stems >75mm. Cases were categorized by treatment (I&D or 2-stage exchange). Results. 87 patients were identified with extensive hardware and PJI − 63 I&Ds and 42 2-stages. Follow-up was 3.7 years. Success defined as no re-operation for infection was similar − 38/63 (60.3%) I&D vs 28/42 (66.7%) 2-stage (p=0.54). 26/42 (61.9%) 2-stages required static spacers for post-extraction bone loss or wound problems. Only 14/42 (33%) 2-stages were successfully replanted without re-infection. 11/42 (26.1%) 2-stages had retained spacers while 7/42 (16.7%) 2-stages were eventually fused. In contrast, 38/63 (60.3%) I&Ds maintained original implants without further surgery. 8/63 (12.7%) required repeat I&D; 9/63 (14.3%) underwent eventual 2-stage. Chronic antibiotic suppression was utilized in 53/63 (84.1%) I&Ds and 17/42 (40.5%) 2-stages (p<0.001). Amputation rates were similar − 9/63 (14.3%) I&D vs 7/42 (16.7%) 2-stage (p=0.79). Ambulatory rates were similar − 46/63 (73.0%) I&D vs 24/42 (57.1%) 2-stage (p=0.09). More patients who underwent I&D had a functional TKA at final follow-up (53/63 (84.1%) I&D vs 20/42 (47.6%) 2-stage; p<0.001). Mortality was high − 22/59 (37.3%) I&D vs 13/37 (35.1%) 2-stage (p=1.00). Conclusion. In the setting of PJI following rTKA with extensive hardware, morbidity and mortality is high. I&D with chronic suppression appears as effective as 2-stage procedures in preventing reoperation for infection and maintaining ambulatory status while avoiding the morbidity of 2-stage exchange

Aim. A case series with functional and radiographic outcomes, of modular endoprosthetic distal femoral replacement in complex cases of periprosthetic fracture. Method. Sixteen cases were identified of endoprosthetic replacement (EPR) from the bone and soft tissue cancer implant registry. A retrospective review was undertaken. Results. There were 11 periprosthetic fractures of total knee arthroplasty, 3 revision arthroplasty cases, and 3 cases of distal femoral fracture. Of which four were complicated by infection. AKSS scores ranged from 62-100, average 82, with 6 month minimum follow up. There were two post operative infections, both successfully treated. One femoral component required exchange for aseptic loosening at two years. Conclusion. EPR is an effective surgical procedure for complex cases with a demonstrable good functional outcome

Aims

Porous metaphyseal cones can be used for fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and complex TKAs. This metaphyseal fixation has led to some surgeons using shorter cemented stems instead of diaphyseal engaging cementless stems with a potential benefit of ease of obtaining proper alignment without being beholden to the diaphysis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate short term clinical and radiographic outcomes of a series of TKA cases performed using 3D-printed metaphyseal cones.

Aims

Our objective is to describe our early and mid-term results with the use of a new simple primary knee prosthesis as an articulating spacer in planned two-stage management for infected knee arthroplasty. As a second objective, we compared outcomes between the group with a retained first stage and those with a complete two-stage revision.

Aims

The aim of this study was to assess the effects of transferring patients to a specialized arthroplasty centre between the first and second stages (interstage) of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) of the knee.

Fractures around total knee arthroplasties pose a significant surgical challenge. Most can be managed with osteosynthesis and salvage of the replacement. The techniques of fixation of these fractures and revision surgery have evolved and so has the assessment of outcome. This specialty update summarises the current evidence for the classification, methods of fixation, revision surgery and outcomes of the management of periprosthetic fractures associated with total knee arthroplasty.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1489–96.