Stems improve the mechanical stability of tibial
components in total knee replacement (TKR), but come at a cost of stress
shielding along their length. Their advantages include resistance
to shear, reduced tibial lift-off and increased stability by reducing
micromotion. Longer stems may have disadvantages including stress
shielding along the length of the stem with associated reduction
in bone density and a theoretical risk of subsidence and loosening, peri-prosthetic
fracture and
Both the femoral and tibial component are usually cemented at revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA), while stems can be added with either cemented or press-fit (hybrid) fixation. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term stability of rTKA with cemented and press-fitted stems, using radiostereometric analysis (RSA). This is a follow-up of a randomized controlled trial, initially involving 32 patients, of whom 19 (nine cemented, ten hybrid) were available for follow-up ten years postoperatively, when further RSA measurements were made. Micromotion of the femoral and tibial components was assessed using model-based RSA software (RSAcore). The clinical outcome was evaluated using the Knee Society Score (KSS), the Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), and visual analogue scale (pain and satisfaction).Aims
Methods
Stems may improve fixation and stability of components
during revision total knee replacement. However, the choice between
cemented and cementless stems is not a clear one. Cemented stems
offer several advantages in terms of versatility, mechanical stability, surgical
technique and clinical outcome over their cementless counterpart. Cite this article:
