One of the main considerations in the revision TKR setting is deciding on the level of constraint to be utilized once the bone defects have been reconstructed. There is a fear that employing a maximally constrained insert could compromise long term results. We report on a consecutive series of full tibial and femoral component revisions all treated with a maximally conforming insert and followed for a minimum of 5 years. The study group consisted of 76 consecutive revision TKR in 76 patients where both the femur and the tibia were revised. 4 patients died and 6 were lost to follow up. Final cohort had an average age of 70 years, average BMI of 31 and there were 39 males in the group. Average time to revision was 7 years (range 1–10 years) and the reasons for revision included infection in 28, aseptic loosening 26, osteolysis and poly wear in 9 and 13 other. All were treated with the same revision system and an identical maximally conforming tibial rotating platform insert and followed for an average of 7 years (range 5–14 years).Introduction
Materials and Methods
Enhanced perioperative protocols have significantly improved patient recovery following primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Little has been investigated the effectiveness of these protocols for revision TKA (RTKA). We report on a matched group of aseptic revision and primary TKA patients treated with an identical pain and rehabilitation programmes. Overall, 40 aseptic full-component RTKA patients were matched (surgical date, age, sex, and body mass index (BMI)) to a group of primary cemented TKA patients. All RTKAs had new uncemented stemmed femoral and tibial components with metaphyseal sleeves. Both groups were treated with an identical postoperative pain protocol. Patients were followed for at least two years. Knee Society Scores (KSS) at six weeks and at final follow-up were recorded for both groups.Aims
Methods
Enhanced pain and rehabilitation protocols have significantly improved patient recovery following primary TKR. Little has been written on how the protocols have affected the revision TKR patient. We report on a matched group of revision and primary TKR patients treated with the identical pain and rehab program. 40 aseptic RTKR patients who underwent a full femoral and tibial revision were matched by age, sex, and BMI to a group of patients who underwent a cemented tri-compartmental primary TKR. All revision knees had uncemented stemmed femurs and tibias. All 40 patients had either a metaphyseal sleeve on either the femur or tibia or both. Patients in both groups were treated with an identical post op pain protocol (Spinal anesthetic, local infiltrative analgesia and multimodal oral pain management along with rapid rehabilitation). All patients were mobilized on POD1 and allowed weight bearing as tolerated. Patients were followed for a minimum of 1 year. KSS at 6 weeks and 1 year were recorded for both groups.Introduction
Materials and Methods
The aim of this study was to establish the results of isolated exchange of the tibial polyethylene insert in revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA) in patients with well-fixed femoral or tibial components. We report on a series of RTKAs where only the polyethylene was replaced, and the patients were followed for a mean of 13.2 years (10.0 to 19.1). Our study group consisted of 64 non-infected, grossly stable TKA patients revised over an eight-year period (1998 to 2006). The mean age of the patients at time of revision was 72.2 years (48 to 88). There were 36 females (56%) and 28 males (44%) in the cohort. All patients had received the same cemented, cruciate-retaining patella resurfaced primary TKA. All subsequently underwent an isolated polyethylene insert exchange. The mean time from the primary TKA to RTKA was 9.1 years (2.2 to 16.1).Aims
Patients and Methods
The causes of revision total knee replacement are varied. There is a subset of these revision cases (poly wear and some cases of instability for example) where the ability to retain the metal femoral and tibial components and replacing just the polyethylene is an appealing option. We report on a series of RTKR where only the poly insert was replaced and the patients were followed for a minimum of ten years. Our study group consisted of 64 consecutive non infected RTKR patients who underwent a revision of the polyethylene alone between 1998 and 2006. All patients had been treated originally with the same cemented, CR, patella resurfaced primary TKR. Reasons for revision were 51 poly wear and/or osteolysis, 7 instability, and 6 other. The average time from the primary to the revision surgery was 9.1 years (range 2.2 to 16.1 years). All patients had an isolated poly liner change. No femurs or tibial trays were revised. Average age of the cohort at revision was 72.2 (range 48 to 88). Average BMI was 31.9 (range 23.6 to 43.9). There were 36 female patients. Of the group, 42 were ASA 1 or 2 and 22 were ASA 3. Pre-op alignment averaged 6.0 (range 2 varus to 8 valgus). Patients were followed for a minimum of 10 years (range 10 to 19 years).Introduction
Materials and Methods
