In 1983 we underscored the importance of understanding the cause or mechanism of failure following total knee arthroplasty. In this article we reported that revision total knee replacement was generally unsuccessful unless the surgeon new the mechanism of failure. In the ensuing years we have collectively made improvements in instrumentation, component design and material properties such that the mechanisms of failure are now different and less common than in the earlier years. Early failure following total knee arthroplasty is generally related to technical issues. There are a myriad of such issues but many of them relate to component positioning and soft tissue balance. Post-operative wound complications are concerning as they cause an increased incidence of deep infection. Hematoma from over anticoagulation is a particular problem that leads to stiffness and increased risk for infection. Most knee systems now have multiple sizing options and instrument systems that can improve reproducibility of component implantation. Midterm failure is often due to flexion instability which has been reported in cruciate substitution and cruciate retention knees. The instability can be global, mid flexion, flexion or a combination of all 3. Issues with extension and mid flexion instability but no flexion instability are generally those with tight extensor mechanisms. Pain and stiffness are frequently due to component malalignment. One common problem is abnormal internal rotation of the tibial component. Late failure in our institution is generally seen due to wear and loosening from earlier designs with inferior polyethylene. Late hematogenous infection occurs in people with immunocompromise, severe diabetes and diagnoses that alter the patient's ability to mount an immune response. The newest epidemic in total knee failure has been that of periprosthetic fracture. As these patients are becoming older and with worse proprioception, they are at greater risk. Generalised osteopenia and increased activity also increase the risk of fracture. Total knee arthroplasty represents a remarkable improvement in the care of the patient with knee arthritis. It is only by focusing upon and decreasing the causes of failure that we will advance use of this procedure in patient care

Most presentations about total knee arthroplasty begin with a statement that the procedure has been one of the great successes of modern surgery. However, not all patients consider their total knee a success. Success requires that patients experience relief of arthritic pain, return of function, and express satisfaction with the result. Patients need to be aware of the limitations of implants and accept reasonable expectations for the arthroplasty. If they don't, your next revision will likely be on a unsatisfied patient who had unrealistic expectations. The surgeon who operated on the patient for the primary intervention may feel obliged to try to make it better. Don't make that mistake. Avoid your next revision by only intervening when there is a clear indication.

In a recent patient survey, 15–20% of patients (and maybe more) were not completely satisfied with their arthroplasty in spite of having recent implant designs. It is a fact that some patients will not be satisfied with any intervention. Fibromyalgia, depression, high narcotic use for arthritic pain, secondary gain (e.g., Worker's Compensation claims pending) are some of the conditions that predict a difficult post-operative course and an unsatisfied patient who will push for revision. To avoid your next revision, choose patients wisely and make sure they understand that the total joint is a poor substitute for the normal knee.

Design surgeons and engineers have developed techniques for a specific implant system to minimise the problems of malrotation, malalignment, instability, anterior knee pain, stiffness, loosening and polyethylene wear. Surgeons should be careful to use the recommended implantation philosophy and technique to avoid these problems. Choose implant systems with a proven track record. Learn how and why to use the instruments correctly. Study a system well and know the nuances. If you don't know the system well enough, take a course from the designers and ask questions. Avoid your next revision by using a prosthesis system as it was intended.

Prosthetic joint infection remains a major reason for revision. Some patients have a greater chance of developing infection. Attention to detail from pre-operative preparation to rehabilitation will minimise, but cannot eliminate, the occurrence of infection. The recently published International Consensus on Prosthetic Joint Infection contains recommendations that should be followed to minimise the chance of infection. Avoid your next revision by following the recommendations to minimise the chance of infection.

The indication for revision is diagnosis of a problem that can be corrected with surgery. If a patient is satisfied with a result, revision surgery would only rarely be indicated regardless of the radiographic result. (Severe wear would be an exception to this.) Avoid you next revision by recognizing that “the enemy of good is better”.

Most presentations about total knee arthroplasty begin with a statement that the procedure has been one of the great successes of modern surgery. However, not all patients consider their total knee a success. Success requires that patients experience relief of arthritic pain, return of function, and satisfaction with the result. Patients need to be aware of the limitations of implants and accept reasonable expectations for the arthroplasty. If they don't, your next revision will likely be on a dissatisfied patient who had unrealistic expectations. The surgeon who operated on the patient for the primary intervention may feel obliged to try to make it better. Avoid your next revision by only intervening when there is a clear indication.

In a recent patient survey, 15–20% of patients were not completely satisfied with their arthroplasty in spite of having recent implant designs. It is a fact that some patients will not be satisfied with any intervention. Fibromyalgia, depression, high narcotic use for arthritic pain, secondary gain (e.g., Worker's Compensation claims pending) are some of the conditions that predict a difficult post-operative course and an unsatisfied patient who will push for revision. To avoid your next revision, choose patients wisely and make sure they understand that the total joint is a poor substitute for the normal knee.

Design surgeons and engineers have developed techniques for a specific implant system to minimise the problems of malrotation, malalignment, instability, anterior knee pain, stiffness, loosening and polyethylene wear. Surgeons should be careful to use the recommended implantation philosophy and technique to avoid these problems. Choose implant systems with a proven track record. Learn how and why to use the instruments correctly. Study a system well and know the nuances. If you don't know the system well enough, take a course from the designers and ask questions. Using a system as it was intended will help avoid your next revision.

Prosthetic joint infection remains a major reason for revision. Some patients have a greater chance of developing infection. Attention to detail from pre-operative preparation to rehabilitation will minimise, but cannot eliminate, the occurrence of infection. The recently published International Consensus on Prosthetic Joint Infection contains recommendations that should be followed to minimise the chance of infection and thus help avoid your next revision for infection.

The indication for revision is presentation of a problem that can be corrected with surgery. If a patient is satisfied with a result, revision surgery would only rarely be indicated regardless of the radiographic result. (Severe wear would be an exception to this.) Recognising that “the enemy of good is better” will help you avoid your next revision.

Aim

Knee arthrodesis (KA) and above knee amputation (AKA) have been used for salvage of failed total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the setting of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). The factors that lead to a failed fusion and progression to AKA are not well understood. The purpose of our study was to determine factors associated with failure of a staged fusion for PJI and predictive of progression to AKA.

Due to the success, quantified by both clinical improvement and durability, the number of TKA procedures performed annually has steadily increased since its introduction and it is predicted that approximately 3 million knee arthroplasties will be performed in 2030. Part of this exponential growth is due to indication expansion and TKA is now often performed for younger, more active and heavier patients that historically would have been denied the procedure. Combined with an aging population, often afflicted with comorbidities, it is not surprising that the number of TKA revisions performed annually is also increasing. TKA failure, with subsequent revision surgery, is a costly problem often associated with substantial morbidity. In order to reduce the incidence of TKA failure, it is critical that we expand our knowledge of the issue by asking the question, why are TKAs failing today? Due to a demographically evolving arthroplasty population, the introduction of the new surgical techniques and the routine addition to the market of next generation implants, it is likely that the mechanisms for TKA failure will change over time. It is also possible that there may be regional and even institutional variance when the reasons for TKA failure are investigated. Therefore, it is critical that this question concerning failure mechanisms be repeatedly studied and examined by various study designs in multiple clinical settings. This lecture will focus on several key aspects of TKA failure: Early (less than 2 to 5 years) vs. late failure; Historically, why did TKAs fail and what has been done to decrease certain failure modes; Why are TKAs failing today?. Only with a comprehensive understanding of TKA failure mechanisms will we be able to properly address this problem and focus our efforts and resources on meaningful solutions. Even incremental improvements that only modestly decrease TKA failure incidence should provide our healthcare system with enormous savings and more importantly, greatly decrease patient morbidity

Purpose. To identify the modes of failure after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients ≤ 55 years of age and to compare with those ≥ 56 years of age in patients who underwent revision TKA. Materials and Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 256 revision TKAs among patients who underwent TKA for knee osteoarthritis between January 1992 and December 2012. The causes of TKA failure were analyzed and compared between those ≤ 55 years of age and those ≥ 56 years of age. The age at the time of primary surgery was ≤ 55 years in 30 patients (31 knees) and ≥ 56 years in 210 patients (225 knees). Results. A total of 453 TKAs were performed in ≤ 55-year-old patients between 1992 and 2012. Of these, 31 cases (7%) were revised. Their mean age was 50.6 years (range, 40 to 55 years) at primary surgery and the interval from primary TKA to revision was 8.6 years (range, 1 to 17 years). In the ≤ 55 years of age group, the most common modes of TKA failure was polyethylene wear in 14 cases (45%) followed by infection in 8 cases (26%) and component loosening in 5 cases (17%). The other conditions led to TKA failure were stiffness, periprosthetic fracture, malalignment, and osteolysis in one case each (3%). Of the 11,363 TKAs that were performed in ≥ 56-year-old patients, 225 cases (2%) required a revision. The mean interval between the operations was 5.3 years (range, 0.1 to 18 years). The major modes of failure of primary TKA include polyethylene wear in 99 cases (44%), infection in 91 cases (40%), and component loosening in 26 cases (12%). In both groups, the most common cause of failure was polyethylene wear, which was followed by infection and component loosening. There were relatively lower infection rate and higher loosening rate in patients ≤ 55 years of age, but the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The mean interval between the operations was shorter in the ≥ 56 years of age group (5.3 years; range, 0.1 to 18 years) than in the younger patient group (8.6 years; range, 1 to 17 years), but there was no notable intergroup difference (p > 0.05). Conclusion. The main modes of failure after TKA in patients ≤ 55 years of age were polyethylene wear, infection and loosening, and there was no significant difference in the modes of failure after TKA between the two groups

Introduction. The Rotational alignment is an important factor for survival total knee Arthroplasty. Rotational malalignment causes knee pain, global instability, and wear of the polyethylene inlay. Also, the anterior cortex line was reported that more reliable and more easily identifiable landmark for correct tibial component alignment. The aims of the current study is to identify effect of inserting the tibial baseplate of using anterior cortex line landmark of TKA on stress/strain distributions within cortical bone and bone cement. Through the current study, final aim is to suggest an alternative position of tibia baseplate for reduction of TKA failures with surgical convenience. Materials and Method. A three-dimensional tibia FE model with TKA was generated based on a traditional TKA surgical guideline. Here, a commercialized TKA (LOSPA, Corentc, Korea) was considered corresponded to a patient specific tibia morphology. Tibia baseplate was positioned at anterior cortex line. Alternative two positions were also considered based on tibia tuberosity 1/3 line and tibia tuberosity end line known as a gold standard (Fig. 1-A). Loading and boundary conditions for the FE analysis were determined based on five activities of daily life of persons with TKA (Fig. 1-B). FE model was additionally validated comparing with an actual mechanical test. Results and Discussions. The, through comparing with strain distribution on the cortical bone measured from the actual mechanical test considering 0°, 30° 60°, 90°, 120° and 140° flexion with femoral rollback phenomenon (Fig. 2). Stress/strain on the cortical bone (medial region) of the proximal tibia for the baseplate positioned at anterior cortex line were a little better distributed than those at tibia tuberosity 1/3 line and tibia tuberosity end line although the stress/stain values were similar to each other (Fig. 3-A). Potential fracture risk of the bone cement for the baseplate positioned at anterior cortex line was lower than that at tibia tuberosity 1/3 line and tibia tuberosity end line, considering safety factor (N=3). Particularly, Potential fracture risk of the bone cement for the baseplate positioned at tibia tuberosity 1/3 line known as a gold standard was highest (over 20MPa for stair down activity) (Fig. 3-B). Conclusion. Our results suggested that anterior cortex line landmark was feasible to apply positioning method on the tibial baseplate in terms of mechanical characteristics which were compared to tibia tuberosity 1/3 line and tibia tuberosity end line known as a gold standard. This study may be valuable by suggesting for the first time an alternative baseplate position for reduction of TKA failures with surgical convenience

Introduction. Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) has been proposed as an implant material for femoral total knee arthroplasty (TKA) components. Potential clinical advantages of PEEK over standard cobalt chrome alloys include modulus of elasticity and subsequently reduced stress shielding potentially eliminating osteolysis, thermal conduction properties allowing for a more natural soft tissue environment, and reduced weight enabling quicker quadriceps recovery. Manufacturing advantages include reduced manufacturing and sterilization time, lower cost, and improved quality control. Currently, no PEEK TKA implants exist on the market. Therefore, evaluation of mechanical properties in a pre-clinical phase is required to minimize patient risk. The objectives of this study include evaluation of implant fixation and determination of the potential for reduced stress shielding using the PEEK femoral TKA component. Methods and Materials. Experimental and computational analysis was performed to evaluate the biomechanical response of the femoral component (Freedom Knee, Maxx Orthopedics Inc., Plymouth Meeting, PA; Figure 1). Fixation strength of CoCr and PEEK components was evaluated in pull-off tests of cemented femoral components on cellular polyurethane foam blocks (Sawbones, Vashon Island, WA). Subsequent testing investigated the cemented fixation using cadaveric distal femurs. The reconstructions were subjected to 500,000 cycles of the peak load occurring during a standardized gait cycle (ISO 14243-1). The change from CoCr to PEEK on implant fixation was studied through computational analysis of stress distributions in the cement, implant, and the cement-implant interface. Reconstructions were analyzed when subjected to standardized gait and demanding squat loads. To investigate potentially reduced stress shielding when using a PEEK component, paired cadaveric femurs were used to measure local bone strains using digital image correlation (DIC). First, standardized gait load was applied, then the left and right femurs were implanted with CoCr and PEEK components, respectively, and subjected to the same load. To verify the validity of the computational methodology, the intact and reconstructed femurs were replicated in FEA models, based on CT scans. Results. The cyclic load phase of the pull-off experiments revealed minimal migration for both CoCr and PEEK components, although after construct sectioning, debonding at the implant-cement interface was observed for the PEEK implants. During pull-off from Sawbones the ultimate failure load of the PEEK and CoCr components averaged 2552N and 3814N respectively. FEA simulations indicated that under more physiological loading, such as walking or squatting, the PEEK component had no increased risk of loss of fixation when compared to the CoCr component. Finally, the DIC experiments and FEA simulations confirmed closer resemblance of pre-operative strain distribution using the PEEK component. Discussion. The biomechanical consequences of changing implant material from CoCr to PEEK on implant fixation was studied using experimental and computational testing of cemented reconstructions. The results indicate that, although changes occur in implant fixation, the PEEK component had a fixation strength comparable to CoCr. The advantage of long term bone preservation, as the more compliant PEEK implant is able to better replicate the physiological loads occurring in the intact femur, may reduce stress shielding around the distal femur, a common clinical cause of TKA failure. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Bone loss creates a challenge to achieving fixation in revision TKR. Failure to achieve metaphyseal fixation is associated with failure in revision TKR. In the absence of cancellous bone for cement fixation, metaphyseal augments placed without cement have shown promise in achieving fixation. First generation augments were modular solid titanium sleeves attached to a taper at the base of the core implant. The introduction of tantalum with its favorable mechanical qualities markedly increased the utility and utilization of metaphyseal augments, with positive reports. These are either large augments where the bone is prepared with a burr, or later small cones placed with a cannulated broaching technique. Both have solved real problems, the first being limited by the reproducibility of bone preparation, and the second with excellent reproducibility of bone preparation but limited diameters. Other highly porous titanium surfaces have broadened the choices. Modern metaphyseal augments seek to add flexibility and options, specifically the use of offset stems. One tibial augment design features a reamed cone with a matching conical implant. Another option is based on an anatomic cone design with a single ream and a broached technique to optimise endosteal cortical bone contact. With each of these options, the augment can be placed wherever the remaining bone exists for fixation, even down to the metaphyseal-diaphyseal junction, and not limited to the area adjacent to the cut surface of bone. Once independent fixation is achieved, the intramedullary stem is cemented inside of it. Modern femoral augments are designed to sit either in the epiphyseal region, or the metaphysis. Cannulated reaming systems allow for preparation of complex asymmetrical double cone implants at the epiphysis. Metaphyseal implants are designed anatomically to sit deeper in the femoral bone, and can manage larger bony defects. Each system has benefits and compromises, and together they comprise increasingly powerful alternatives to manage extensive bone loss

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is reliable, durable, and reproducible in relieving pain and improving function in patients with arthritis of the knee joint. Cemented fixation is the gold standard with low rates of loosening and excellent survivorship in several large clinical series and joint registries. While cementless knee designs have been available for the past 3 decades, changing patient demographics (i.e. younger patients), improved implant designs and materials, and a shift towards TKA procedures being performed in ambulatory surgery centers has rekindled the debate of the role of cementless knee implants in TKA. The drive towards achieving biologic implant fixation in TKA is also driven by the successful transition from cemented hip implants to uncemented THA. However, new technologies and new techniques must be adopted as a result of an unmet need, significant improvement, and/or clinical advantage. Thus, the questions remain: 1) Why switch; and 2) Is cementless TKA more reliable, durable, or reproducible compared to cemented TKA?. There are several advantages to using cement during TKA. First, the technique can be universally applied to all cases without exception and without concerns for bone health or structure. Second, cement can mask imprecisions in bone cuts and is a remarkably durable grout. Third, cement allows for antibiotic delivery at the time surrounding surgery which has been shown in some instances to reduce the risk of subsequent infection. Finally, cement fixation has provided successful and durable fixation across various types knee designs, surface finishes, and articulations. On the other hand, cementless knee implants have had an inconsistent track record throughout history. While some have fared very well, others have exhibited early failures and high revision rates. Behery et al. reported on a series of 70 consecutive cases of cementless TKA matched with 70 cemented TKA cases based on implant design and demographics and found that cementless TKA was associated with a greater risk of aseptic loosening and revision surgery at 5 years follow up. Finally, to date, there has not been a randomised controlled clinical trial demonstrating superiority of cementless fixation compared to cemented fixation in TKA. Improvements in materials and designs have definitely made cementless TKA designs viable. However, concerns with added cost, reproducibility, and durability remain. Cement fixation has withstood the test of time and is not the main cause of TKA failure. Therefore, until there is significant data showing that cementless TKA is more durable, reliable, and reproducible compared to cemented TKA, the widespread use of these implants cannot be recommended

Background. Aseptic loosening is the leading cause of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) failure in the long term, of which osteolysis from polyethylene wear debris remains a problem that can limit the lifetime of TKA past the second decade. To help speed up design innovations, our goal was to develop a computational framework that could efficiently predict the effect of many sources of variability on TKA wear—including design, surgical, and patient variability. Methods. We developed a computational framework for predicting TKA contact mechanics and wear. The framework accepts multiple forms of input data: patient-specific, population-specific, or standardized motions and forces. CAD models are used to create the FEA mesh. An analytical wear model, calibrated from materials testing (wheel-on-flat) experiments, is fully integrated into the FEA process. Isight execution engine runs a design of experiments (DOE) analysis with an outcome variable, such as volumetric wear, to guide statistical model output. We report two DOE applications to test the utility of the computational framework for performing large variable studies in an efficient manner: one to test the sensitivity of TKA wear to the femoral center of rotation, and the second to test the sensitivity of TKA wear to gait input perturbations. Results. Using this method, we demonstrated that choice of femoral center of rotation matters, and that although volumetric wear was most sensitive to variation in flexion/extension peaks, no one kinematic factor dominates TKA volumetric wear variability. Conclusion. The two DOE applications represent initial first attempts to study variability in component alignment and input waveforms across large solution spaces. The computational framework will be most useful if it can be used in a TKA design setting, where new innovations can be tested as soon as they are developed to see if they are worthy of further mechanical testing

Introduction. Aseptic loosening has been reported to be the most common, contemporary mode of total knee arthroplasty failure. It has been suggested that the etiology of revision due to loosening can be attributed, in part, to joint imbalance and the variability inherent in standard surgical techniques. Due to the high prevalence of revision, the purpose of this study was to quantify the change in kinetic loading of the knee joint before versus after the application of the final cement-component complex. Methods. Ninety-two consecutive, cruciate-retaining TKAs were performed, between March 2014 and June 2014, by two collaborating surgeons. Two different knee systems were used, each with a different viscosity cement type (either medium viscosity or high viscosity). All knees were initially balanced using a microelectronic tibial insert, which provides real-time feedback of femoral contact points and joint kinetics. After the post-balance loads were captured, and the surgeon was satisfied with joint balance, the final components were cemented into place, and the sensor was re-inserted to capture any change in loading due to cementing technique. Results. Of the 92 TKAs performed, 42% of patients required post-cement correction due to changes in loading. Of the entire cohort, 41% of patients were also classified as “imbalanced”, post-cementing, as defined previously in literature. The average absolute value of the post-cementing change to intercompartmental loading was 28.2 lbs. (±24.8 lbs.). Of those patients with excessive changes to joint loading, 84.2% exhibited the majority of change to loading in the medial compartment, which is theorized to be due to the right-handedness of both surgeons and angle of impaction. There was a highly statistically significant relationship between post-cementation loading changes and proportion of imbalance (P <0.001). There was no significant difference in average loading values, or occurrence of imbalance, between either component systems or cement types. Discussion. Joint imbalance and loosening substantially contribute to the current 2.7 billion dollar TKA revision burden in the United States. The post-cementing imbalance, as detected by the sensor in this study, demonstrates how using quantified methods in TKA may mitigate imbalance-related complications. By using technology to guide the surgeon through appropriate kinetic correction, the subtleties in imbalance, despite a symmetrical flexion gap, can be corrected for more effectively than by subjective surgeon “feel.” Longer clinical follow-up of these patients will be necessary to track the outcomes associated with quantifiably balanced joint loading

Why are total knees being revised? Aseptic loosening, poly wear, and instability account for up to 59% of revision TKA procedures. Younger and more active patients are placing greater demands on total knee arthroplasty (TKA) implants and international registries have documented a much higher rate of TKA failure in this population. Implant designs utilised in the active patient population should focus on optimisation of long term wear properties and minimising interface stress. Instability after TKA, often related to technical concerns at the time of the index procedure, accounts for by far the greatest subset of failures, excluding infection, in the early revision TKA patients (<5 years). The inability to achieve a rectangular flexion gap with certain TKA techniques for certain deformities has been documented. The adverse clinical consequence of flexion gap asymmetry has also been published in peer reviewed manuscripts. Techniques should be considered that optimise flexion space balance and enhance mid-flexion stability in active, physically demanding patients. This surgical demonstration will highlight gap balancing techniques and a new rotating platform TKA system as an option for the active patient population

Introduction. Aseptic loosening is the main reason for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) failure, responsible for more than 25% of the revision procedures, with most of the problems occurring with the tibial component. While early loosening can be attributed to failure of primary fixation, late implant loosening is associated with loss of fixation secondary to bone resorption due to altered physiological load transfer to the tibial bone. Several attempts have been made to investigate these changes in bone load transfer in biomechanical simulations and bone remodeling analyses, which can be useful to provide information on the effect of patient, surgery, or design-related factors. On the other hand, these factors have also been investigated in clinical studies of radiographic changes of bone density following TKA. In this study we made an overview of the knowledge obtained from these clinical studies, which can be used to inform clinical decision making and implant design choices. Methods. A literature search was performed to identify clinical follow-up studies that monitored peri-prosthetic bone changes following TKA. Within these studies, effects of the following parameters on bone density changes were investigated: post-operative time, region of interest, alignment, body weight, systemic osteoporosis, implant design and cementation. Moreover, we investigated the effect of bone density loss on implant survival. Results. A total of 19 studies was included in this overview, with a number of included patients ranging from 12 to 7,760. Most studies used DEXA (n=16), while a few studies performed analyses on calibrated digital radiographs (n=2), or computed tomography (n=1). Postoperative follow-up varied from 9 months to 10 years. Studies consistently report the largest bone density reduction within the first postoperative year. Bone loss is mainly seen in the medial region. This has been attributed to the change in alignment following surgery, during which often the pre-operative varus knee is corrected to a more physiological alignment, resulting in a load shift towards the lateral compartment. Measurements in unoperated contralateral legs were performed in 3 cases, and two studies performed standardized DEXA measurements to provide information on systemic osteoporosis. While on the short term no changes were observed, significant negative correlations have been found between severity of osteoporosis and peri-prosthetic bone density. No clear effects of bodyweight and cementation on bone loss have been identified. Although some studies do find differences between implant types, the variation in the data makes it difficult to draw general conclusions from these findings. Several studies reported no effect of bone loss on implant migration. In another study, a medial collapse was associated with a medial increase in density, suggesting that altered loading and increased stresses are responsible for both bone formation and the overload leading to collapse. Discussion. There are important lessons to be learned from these clinical studies, although generally the large spread in the DEXA data restricts strong conclusions. There is a large variation in used ROI definitions, complicating direct comparisons. Finally, most studies report density changes of well-functioning reconstructions, since only very large studies are able to gather enough failed cases

Total knee arthroplasty is a reliable and durable solution to knee arthritis that fails conservative management. However, there are clinical pitfalls awaiting the surgeon, which can be avoided with forethought and analysis. The majority of early TKR failures are related to technical error on the part of the surgeon! The top 10 errors are: . 10. The knee attached to secondary gain: worker's comp, depression, etc. will make a successful outcome less likely. 9. Wound complications: raising large subcutaneous flaps, failure to respect pre-existing incisions about the knee, and delay in obtaining closure with flaps, etc. will almost guarantee infection!. 8. Prolonged observation of the draining wound: another invitation to infection!. 7. Internal rotation of the femoral component: patellar maltracking, and flexion instability await!. 6. Infection: discipline for the OR staff and surgeon alike are necessary to minimise this complication. 5. Varus position of the tibial component: early loosening and accelerated polyethylene wear are assured. 4. Failure to restore a neutral mechanical axis of the limb: early wear and loosening are the outcome of failure to pay attention to this very important basic principle of TKR. 3. Patellar tilt or dislocation: lateral retinacular release is less common with current designs, but is still required for proper patellar tracking. 2. Failure to balance soft tissue: collateral ligament, and the posterior cruciate ligament must be balanced throughout the range of motion for a successful result. And the #1 way to ruin a good result is…. Operating too early! Don't operate on the x-ray, and exhaust all reasonable conservative therapy and non-arthroplasty alternatives before resorting to prosthetic arthroplasty. The patient needs to understand the limitations of technology, and have reasonable expectations. Make sure the pre-op symptoms justify the procedure!

Introduction:. Proper rotational alignment of the tibial component is a critical factor in the outcome of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and misalignment has been implicated as a major contributing factor to several mechanisms of TKA failure. In this study we examine the relationship between bony and soft tissue tibial landmarks against the knee motion axis (plane that best approximates tibiofemoral motion through range of motion). Methods:. The kinematic motions of 16 fresh-frozen lower limb specimens were analyzed in simulated lunging and squatting. All the tendons of the quadriceps and hamstrings were independently loaded to simulate a lunging or squatting maneuver. All specimens underwent CT scan and the 3D position of the knee was virtually reconstructed. Ten anatomic axes were identified using both the intact tibia and the resected tibial surface. Two axes were normal vectors to either the medial-lateral plateau center or the posterior tibial surface. Seven axes were defined between the tibial tubercle (the most prominent point, center of the tubercle, or medial third of the tubercle) and soft tissue landmarks of the tibia (the medial insertion of the patellar tendon, the center of the PCL and ACL, and the tibial spines). The last axis was the Knee Motion Axis (KMA), which was defined as the longitudinal axis of the femur from 30 to 90 degrees of flexion. Results:. The closest approximation of the KMA was provided by the axis from the PCL to Medial Tibial Spine Axis, which was internally rotated 1.9 ± 7.6 degrees (Table – 1). The closest axis to the KMA in external rotation was the axis from the tibial plateau center to the medial third of the tibial tubercle, which was externally rotated 2.8 ± 4.3 degrees. The most precisely located constant axis was from the center of the tibia to the center of the tibial tubercle, which was externally rotated by 14.9 ± 3.7 degrees. Conclusions:. The line connecting the center of the PCL and the mid-point between the medial and lateral tibial spines was the closest to the functional tibial rotation. Though no individual landmark exactly correlated with the KMA in all knees, we found that the average anteroposterior motion of the femur with the tibia from 30 to 90 degrees of the femur could be consistently described by these landmarks, and that the addition of soft-tissue landmarks to prior bony topography can provide reliable indications to the location of the KMA

A Tracking Fluoroscope System (TFS), the first of its kind, has been developed and the design of this new technology has been previously presented. The TFS is a unique mobile robot that can acquire real-time x-ray records of hip, knee, or ankle joint motion while a subject walks/maneuvers naturally within a laboratory floor area. By virtue of its mechanizations, test protocols can involve many types maneuvers such as chair rises, stair climbing/descending, ramp crossing, walking, etc. Because the subjects are performing such actions naturally, the resulting fluoroscope images reflect the full functionality of their musculoskeletal anatomy. The goal of this follow-up study is to conduct a comparative analysis with traditional stationary fluoroscopy units to determine if this new technology does offer clinical and research advantages. Technical trials with human subjects and active fluoroscope operation were designed to evaluate and refine the TFS engineering and operational features. These trials have been completed and the key results were compared with the traditional stationary fluoroscopic units. The technical trials verified that the TFS is ready for actual clinical diagnostic use and provides the researcher an opportunity to evaluate in vivo kinematics of subjects while performing normal daily activities at various speeds. Using the mobile fluoroscopic unit, patients performed activities that were not possible to capture with a stationary unit. Also, with the upgrade to an image recording rate of 60 frames per second, the quality of the fluoroscopic images using the TFS were superior to stationary units. Further analyses are now being conducted to compare the kinematic results for a deep knee bend and gait, traditionally analyzed in the past using stationary fluoroscopic units to determine if there are unique advantages. It is hypothesized that the more normal-like gait patterns may produce kinematic patterns that differ from stationary fluoroscopic units. At present, the TFS has proven to be superior over other fluoroscopic units and will allow clinicians to evaluate patients under and unrestricted kinematic environment. Also, future research studies will be able to compare patients with or without a TKA under more challenging kinematic conditions, producing kinematic patterns that may lead to incites pertaining to TKA failure and/or concerns

A key determinant of long-term implant survival following primary TKA is post- operative alignment of the limb and components. The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of the Vector-Vision CT-free navigation system versus conventional hand-guided TKA by comparing post-operative alignment. In a retrospective study 51 sets of post-operative radiographs were analysed, 33 computer-guided and 18 hand-guided. A specific protocol for the measurement of post-operative TKA radiographs was outlined and a novel Trigonometric Method (TM) of angle measurement was compared with the traditional Goniometer Method (GM) of measurement. The standardised protocol was applied to all 51 sets of radiographs. In total, six angles were measured on each radiograph by two independent observers and compared between the computer-guided and hand-guided groups. A protocol for the measurement of post-operative TKA radiographs was delineated with step-by-step instructions. The TM of angle measurement had a precision of 1.06° compared with 1.5° using the GM. The standard deviation of the TM was significantly smaller than the GM (p=0.033) and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) of the TM was 0.94 versus 0.90 for the GM. For the Mechanical Axis (MA), 91% of patients in the computer-guided group attained a MA within 180±3o compared with only 78% in the hand-guided group. T he absolute median raw deviation from 180° was 0.8 in the navigated group and 1.9° in the hand-guided group (p=0.029). Thus, the navigated group was associated with significantly less variability about the neutral 180°. For the other five angle measurements, a higher percentage of patients attained a more neutral alignment with computer-guided TKA; however, these did not reach statistical significance. The computer-assisted group demonstrated significantly more neutral alignment following TKA, and this may in turn lead to reduced TKA failure rates and improved implant longevity. In addition, a new TM of angle measurement was found to be more superior in terms of precision in comparison to the traditional method

INTRODUCTION. Despite a large percentage of total knee arthroplasty failures occurs for disorders at the patello-femoral joint (PFJ), current navigation systems report tibio-femoral (TFJ) kinematics only, and do not track the patella. Despite this tracking is made difficult by the small bone and by its full eversion during surgery, a new such technique has been developed, which includes a new tracker, new corresponding surgical instrumentation also for patellar resurfacing, and all relevant software. The aim of this study is to report an early experience in patients of these measurements, i.e. TFJ and PFJ kinematics. METHODS. These measurements were taken in the first ten patients, affected by primary gonarthrosis and implanted with a resurfacing posterior-stabilised prosthesis in the period July 2010 – May 2011. A standard knee navigation system was enhanced by a specially-designed patellar tracker, mounted with a cluster of three light emitting diodes. Standard procedures for femoral and tibial bone preparation were performed according to the navigation system, and the patellar was resurfaced. Relevant resection planes were taken by an instrumented verification probe. Final position of the three components and lower limb alignment were also acquired. Joint kinematics was deduced from the anatomical survey, which included anatomical landmarks on the patellar posterior aspect, and according to established recommendations and original proposals. RESULTS. In addition to the standard assessment of TFJ kinematics, patellar tracking was performed successfully in all cases without complications, resulting in a maximum of 30 min longer operations. PFJ kinematics (see figure) after replacement and resurfacing showed a mean (± standard deviation, over the patients) range of flexion, tilt and medio-lateral shift respectively of 66.9° ± 8.5° (mean of minimum flexion ÷ of maximum flexion, 15.6° ÷ 82.5°), 8.0° ± 3.1° (−5.3° ÷ 2.8°), and 5.3 ± 2.0 mm (−5.5 ÷ 0.2 mm). Statistically significant correlations were found between the internal/external rotation of the femoral component and the range of PFJ tilt (p=0.05; R=0.64); in three patients, medio-lateral PFJ shift seemed to be affected by the medio-lateral position of the femoral component. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. Data obtained from our preliminary experience support the relevance, feasibility and efficacy of patellar tracking in navigated knee arthroplasty by means of a standard knee navigation system, suitably extended to track also the patellar motion. Patellar-based measurement provides for a more comprehensive assessment of the whole knee function, not only for the resurfacing but also for a best possible positioning of the femoral and tibial components

Pain control is critical in the management of TKA patients and is crucial to allow for early ambulation and accelerated physical therapy. Currently data suggests that 19% of patients are not satisfied with their results following TKA, and failure to control pain may result in prolonged hospitalization, worse outcomes, and increased patient dissatisfaction. Studies suggest that local analgesics coupled with both pre- and post-operative multimodal pain management may result in improved pain control and increased patient satisfaction. Minimization of opioid use is helpful in decreasing complications, accelerating physical therapy milestones, minimizing length of stay and increasing discharge to home. Femoral nerve blocks (FNB) can reduce pain scores for up to 48 hours post-operatively, but may delay ambulation and result in an increased rate of falls. Periarticular injection (PAI) with local analgesics can provide significant short term relief comparable to FNB and can also facilitate decreased opioid consumption. One commonly used local anesthetic is bupivacaine, but the average half-life of this drug is only 2.7 hours. An alternative to this for PAI during TKA is liposomal bupivacaine (LB). LB is a multivesicular drug designed for rapid absorption, prolonged release of bupivacaine, and analgesia that is maintained for up to 72 hours with a single injection. LB exhibits a bimodal peak of distribution, one immediate associated with extra-liposomal bupivacaine, and a second 10–36 hours later associated with the release of liposomal encapsulated bupivacaine. The safety profile of LB has been investigated and adverse events are similar to standard bupivacaine and demonstrate acceptable tolerability. Multiple studies have demonstrated efficacy of this drug compared to other pain control modalities. LB is highly technique dependent and only one piece of a multimodal pain management protocol. Our study consisted of 1808 consecutive primary TKA patients from Sept 2013 to Sept 2015. Three patient cohorts were compiled by date, from Sept 2013 to May 2014 was cohort 1, consisting of FNB and PCA. Department wide adoption of LB began in May 2014 and became routinely used in all patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty at our institution. Cohort 2 entailed a PCA along with LB injection from May 2014 through Feb 2015. Cohort 3 consisted of LB injection only and was from Feb 2015 through Sept 2015. All patients undergoing TKA were eligible and there were no exclusion criteria as long as the protocols were followed. The standard multi-modal analgesia protocol was provided to all patients in all three cohorts. Prior to entering the operating room, patients received preemptive oral analgesics, consisting of: 200 mg celecoxib, 1000 mg acetaminophen, and 50 mg pregabalin. Intra-operative analgesia was chosen at the discretion of the anesthesiologist and preferentially consisted of spinal anesthesia with general anesthesia as an alternate. For all three cohorts, a peri-incisional analgesic cocktail was injected prior to closure consisting of: 40 cc 0.25% Marcaine, 5 cc of (1 mg/cc) morphine, and 1 cc of (30 mg/cc) ketorolac. Cohorts 1 and 2 received PCA post-operatively for pain control post-operatively with prn oral narcotic administration as well. Cohort 3 did not receive a PCA. The cohort treated without FNB and without a PCA using a multimodal pain management protocol including a short acting periarticular injection and a longer acting periarticular injection with LB, had equivalent pain control, less narcotic use, faster achievement of physical therapy milestones, earlier and more frequent discharge home, less complications and a lower cost of the episode of care