Background: Tibial bone defects are commonly encountered in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) and can be managed with metaphyseal cones or sleeves. Few studies have directly compared tibial cones and sleeves in rTKA, and none have limited this comparison to the most severe tibial defects. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the outcomes of metaphyseal cones and sleeves for tibial reconstruction in rTKA regarding implant fixation and clinical outcomes.
Methods: A retrospective review was conducted on patients undergoing rTKA in which metaphyseal cones or sleeves were utilized for addressing metaphyseal bone loss (34 cones and 18 sleeves). Tibial bone loss was classified according to the Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute bone defect classification, with types 2B and 3 being included. Patient-reported outcomes and postoperative complications were collected, and a radiographic evaluation of osseointegration or loosening was performed.
Results: There were 52 knees included (34 cones, 18 sleeves), with a median follow-up of 41.0 months. All-cause implant survival was 100% at 2 years and 96% (95% confidence interval: 76 to 99%) at 4 years, with 98% of tibial components demonstrating osseointegration at the final follow-up. During follow-up, there were a total 11 revisions, of which 1 sleeve was revised secondary to implant loosening. Tibial sleeves had a higher risk of revision compared to tibial cones (P < .01), and sleeves fixed with a hybrid technique were more likely to need revision than cones fixed by the same method (P = .01).
Conclusions: Porous metaphyseal tibial cones and tibial metaphyseal sleeves both performed well at a 41-month median follow-up with no difference in aseptic survivorship between the 2 constructs. Both demonstrate high rates of osseointegration, low rates of aseptic failure, and significant improvement in Knee Society Scores in patients with severe tibial defects in rTKA.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2024.03.062 | DOI Listing |
J Arthroplasty
October 2024
Department of Orthopaedics, Fortis Bone and Joint Institute, New Delhi, India.
Materials (Basel)
September 2024
Department Hybride Manufacturing, BTU Cottbus Senftenberg, Konrad-Wachsmann-Allee 17, 03046 Cottbus, Germany.
Within the scope of these investigations, the feasibility of a material bond between Ti-6Al-4V and the magnesium alloy AZ91 is analyzed. Ti-6Al-4V is frequently used for implants due to its biocompatibility, corrosion resistance, and specific strength. However, depending on the surface quality, the attachment behavior of the bone to the implant varies.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Orthop
November 2024
School of Mechanical Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
Background: The primary objective of revision total knee surgery is to achieve solid bone fixation. Generally, this could be accomplished using sleeves and long stems, which require substantial remaining bone stock and may increase the risk of stem tip pain. An alternative approach involves the use of customized diaphyseal cones, which can preserve the integrity of the bone canal.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Arthroplasty
September 2024
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
The number of revision total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) performed annually continues to rise. This article is a summary of a symposium on revision TKAs presented at the 2023 American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons annual meeting. It will provide an overview of the surgical tips and tricks for exposure and component removal, use of metaphyseal fixation and stems to manage bone loss and optimize fixation, constraint in TKA, as well as how to manage extensor mechanism disruptions with a synthetic mesh reconstruction.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFOrthop Surg
July 2024
Department of Orthopedics, The First Medical Center of PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Objective: Both porous metal cones and metaphyseal sleeves are excellent implants for reconstructing severe bone defects in the knee joint, but they both exhibit design limitations. The porous metal cone, especially, has significant room for improvement in its shape design. The existing porous metal cones often feature a conical external surface with a relatively small taper, potentially compromising both rotational and axial stability.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!