Stemmed tibial components are frequently used in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient satisfaction, overall pain, and diaphyseal tibial pain in patients who underwent revision TKA with cemented or uncemented stemmed tibial components. This is a retrospective cohort study involving 110 patients with revision TKA with cemented versus uncemented stemmed tibial components. Patients who underwent revision TKA with stemmed tibial components over a 15-year period at a single institution with at least two-year follow-up were assessed. Pain was evaluated through postal surveys. There were 63 patients with cemented tibial stems and 47 with uncemented stems. Radiographs and Knee Society Scores were used to evaluate for objective findings associated with pain or patient dissatisfaction. Postal surveys were analyzed using Fisher’s exact test and the independent-samples Aims
Methods
Revision knee arthroplasty presents a number
of challenges, not least of which is obtaining solid primary fixation
of implants into host bone. Three anatomical zones exist within
both femur and tibia which can be used to support revision implants.
These consist of the joint surface or epiphysis, the metaphysis
and the diaphysis. The methods by which fixation in each zone can
be obtained are discussed. The authors suggest that solid fixation
should be obtained in at least two of the three zones and emphasise
the importance of pre-operative planning and implant selection. Cite this article:
This review considers the surgical treatment
of displaced fractures involving the knee in elderly, osteoporotic patients.
The goals of treatment include pain control, early mobilisation,
avoidance of complications and minimising the need for further surgery.
Open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) frequently results in
loss of reduction, which can result in post-traumatic arthritis
and the occasional conversion to total knee replacement (TKR). TKR
after failed internal fixation is challenging, with modest functional
outcomes and high complication rates. TKR undertaken as treatment
of the initial fracture has better results to late TKR, but does
not match the outcome of primary TKR without complications. Given
the relatively infrequent need for late TKR following failed fixation,
ORIF is the preferred management for most cases. Early TKR can be
considered for those patients with pre-existing arthritis, bicondylar
femoral fractures, those who would be unable to comply with weight-bearing restrictions,
or where a single definitive procedure is required.
We examined the placement of the stem in relation to the medial tibial cortex when using total knee replacements (TKRs) with medially-offset tibial stems in Korean patients. Measurements were performed on the pre- and post-operative radiographs of 246 osteoarthritic knees replaced between January 2005 and May 2006 using the Genesis II or E-motion TKR with a medially-offset stem. Pre-operatively, we measured the distance between the mechanical axis and that of the tibial shaft and post-operatively, that between the midline of the tibial stem and the axis of the shaft. Knees were identified in which there was radiological contact between the tip of the stem and the medial tibial cortex. The mechanical axis was located medial to the axis of the shaft in 203 knees (82.5%). Post-operatively, the midline of the tibial stem was located medial to the tibial shaft axis in 196 knees (79.7%). In 16 knees (6.5%) there was radiological contact between the tibial stem or cement mantle and the medial tibial cortex. Our study has shown that the medially-offset stem in the tibial component may not be a good option for knees undergoing replacement for advanced osteoarthritis in some Korean patients.
