In this paper we make the case for the use of
single-stage revision for infected knee arthroplasty.
Conflicting clinical results are reported for the ATTUNE Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA). This randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated five-year follow-up results comparing cemented ATTUNE and PFC-Sigma cruciate retaining TKAs, analyzing component migration as measured by radiostereometric analysis (RSA), clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and radiological outcomes. A total of 74 primary TKAs were included in this single-blind RCT. RSA examinations were performed, and PROMs and clinical outcomes were collected immediate postoperatively, and at three, six, 12, 24, and 60 months’ follow-up. Radiolucent lines (RLLs) were measured in standard anteroposterior radiographs at six weeks, and 12 and 60 months postoperatively.Aims
Methods
The aim of this study was to compare any differences in the primary outcome (biphasic flexion knee moment during gait) of robotic arm-assisted bi-unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (bi-UKA) with conventional mechanically aligned total knee arthroplasty (TKA) at one year post-surgery. A total of 76 patients (34 bi-UKA and 42 TKA patients) were analyzed in a prospective, single-centre, randomized controlled trial. Flat ground shod gait analysis was performed preoperatively and one year postoperatively. Knee flexion moment was calculated from motion capture markers and force plates. The same setup determined proprioception outcomes during a joint position sense test and one-leg standing. Surgery allocation, surgeon, and secondary outcomes were analyzed for prediction of the primary outcome from a binary regression model.Aims
Methods
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. We included 47 patients (48 knees) with positive criteria for infection, with a minimum two-year follow-up, in which a two-stage approach with an articulating spacer with new implants was used. Patients with infection control, and a stable and functional knee were allowed to retain the initial first-stage components. Outcomes recorded included: infection control rate, reoperations, final range of motion (ROM), and quality of life assessment (QoL) including Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, Oxford Knee Score, 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey questionnaire, and University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) activity score and satisfaction score. These outcomes were evaluated and compared to additional cohorts of patients with retained first-stage interventions and those with a complete two-stage revision. Mean follow-up was 3.7 years (2.0 to 6.5).Aims
Methods
Peri-prosthetic infection is amongst the most
common causes of failure following total knee replacement (TKR).
In the presence of established infection, thorough joint debridement
and removal of all components is necessary following which new components
may be implanted. This can be performed in one or two stages; two-stage revision
with placement of an interim antibiotic-loaded spacer is regarded
by many to be the standard procedure for eradication of peri-prosthetic
joint infection. We present our experience of a consecutive series of 50 single-stage
revision TKRs for established deep infection performed between 1979
and 2010. There were 33 women and 17 men with a mean age at revision
of 66.8 years (42 to 84) and a mean follow-up of 10.5 years (2 to
24). The mean time between the primary TKR and the revision procedure
was 2.05 years (1 to 8). Only one patient required a further revision for recurrent infection,
representing a success rate of 98%. Nine patients required further
revision for aseptic loosening, according to microbiological testing
of biopsies taken at the subsequent surgery. Three other patients
developed a further septic episode but none required another revision. These results suggest that a single-stage revision can produce
comparable results to a two-stage revision. Single-stage revision
offers a reduction in costs as well as less morbidity and inconvenience
for patients. Cite this article:
Bone loss in the proximal tibia and distal femur
is frequently encountered in revision knee replacement surgery.
The various options for dealing with this depend on the extent of
any bone loss. We present our results with the use of cementless
metaphyseal metal sleeves in 103 patients (104 knees) with a mean
follow-up of 43 months (30 to 65). At final follow-up, sleeves in
102 knees had good osseointegration. Two tibial sleeves were revised
for loosening, possibly due to infection. The average pre-operative Oxford Knee Score was 23 (11 to 36)
and this improved to 32 (15 to 46) post-operatively. These early
results encourage us to continue with the technique and monitor
the outcomes in the long term. Cite this article:
