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
Revision of a total knee arthroplasty may require an extensile approach to permit a satisfactory exposure without compromising the attachment of the patellar tendon. It has been assumed that a rectus snip is a relatively benign form of release, but the effect of using this approach on function, pain and patient satisfaction is not known. From January 1997 to December 1999, 107 patients who underwent revision of total knee arthroplasty were followed up at a minimum of two years (mean 40.5 months) and assessed by the Oxford Hip Score, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), the Short-Form (SF)-12 and patient satisfaction. Co-morbidity, surgical exposure, the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee scores and the range of movement were also used. A standard medial parapatellar approach was used in 57 patients and the rectus snip in 50. The two groups were equivalent for age, sex and co-morbidity scores. The WOMAC function, pain, stiffness and satisfaction scores demonstrated no statistical difference. The use of a rectus snip as an extensile procedure has no effect on outcome.
