No abstract

Revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) is a challenging procedure with often unreproducible results. A step-by-step approach is fundamental to achieving good outcomes. Successful surgery requires a correct diagnosis of the original cause of failure. Only with an accurate and detailed plan can surgeons overcome difficulties presented in this scenario. Any bone loss should be prevented during prosthetic component removal. Efficient tools must be chosen to avoid time-consuming manoeuvres. Joint reconstruction based on a ‘dual-zone’ fixation is essential to provide a long-term survivorship of the implant. The use of relatively short fully cemented stems combined with a biological metaphyseal fixation is highly recommended by authors. Flexion and extension gaps are accurately balanced after the establishment of the tibial platform. Varus-valgus laxity is commonly managed with a condylar constrained prosthesis. If hinged implants are required, a stronger implant fixation is needed to counteract constraints forces. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:495-500. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210018

Purpose Core decompression is a surgical option since the 1960s for hip osteonecrosis treatment. This technique promotes bone repair by reducing intramedullary pressure, but this is not often enough to stop the progression of necrosis. The aim of this study was to associate core decompression with the regenerative stimulus provided by platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and compare our results with other regenerative techniques. Methods Femoral head osteonecrosis was prospectively evaluated in 30 hips (22 patients, 15-60 years) treated by core decompression and PRP graft. Patients presented monolateral or bilateral osteonecrosis in stage I-IIA-IIB according to Arlet and Ficat classification. The outcome was assessed by changes in Harris Hip Score (HHS) and the need for total hip replacement (THA). Results The mean preoperative HHS was 64 points, at two years from surgery was roughly 84 points. Sixteen of 30 hips showed osteonecrosis progression of the femoral head and were converted to THA. At the five year follow-up, the survival rate was 100% for patients at stage I, 67% for stage IIA, and 0% for stage IIB and was 68% and 32% for idiopathic and secondary osteonecrosis, respectively. Conclusion Core decompression combined with PRP could be indicated as a treatment for the I and IIA stages of osteonecrosis, as it significantly reduces joint pain and delays THA. This procedure should be avoided in AVNFH related to cortisone therapy because only a few benefits have been proven. It also has the advantage of being technically simple, minimally invasive, and free from complications.

No abstract

Background Nitride-based ceramic coatings, such as titanium nitride (TiN) and titanium niobium nitride (TiNbN), have been introduced in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to enhance the mechanical properties and biocompatibility of knee components, harden the metal surface and reduce CoCrMo exposure and metal ion release. However, the theoretical advantages of these ceramic coatings in TKA have yet to be fully elucidated. This systematic review aimed to provide clinical evidence on mid-term outcomes of ceramic-coated knee prostheses in comparison with uncoated standard CoCrMo knee prostheses in primary TKA. The hypothesis was that ceramic-coated implants can be used in primary TKA with no inferior outcomes compared to uncoated CoCrMo implants. Methods A systematic review of the literature was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to ind all clinical studies regarding primary TKA with ceramiccoated knee prostheses. MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase and Cochrane Library were searched from 1990 to October 2020 to identify relevant studies for the irst qualitative analysis. Using PICOS eligibility criteria, a subgroup of the selected studies was used to perform a meta-analysis. Results Fifteen studies were included in this systematic review, of which six were included in the meta-analysis: 3 randomized controlled trials, 2 retrospective comparative studies and 1 prospective cross-sectional study. Pooled data overall included 321 coated TKAs vs. 359 uncoated TKAs and a mean follow-up of 4.6 years (range, 2-10 years). No signiicant diference in the implant survival risk ratio with revision or reoperation due to any reason was found between coated and uncoated TKAs, even considering the RCT study subgroup with a risk ratio of 1.02 (P = 0.34). No signiicant diferences were found for postoperative complications, clinical scores, or metal blood concentrations at 1 year. Conclusion The indings of this systematic review and meta-analysis support the statement that ceramic-coated TKAs are not inferior to uncoated TKAs, showing comparable survival rates, complication rates and clinical outcomes. There is strong evidence that ceramic-coated TKA does not improve the clinical results or survival rate in comparison with uncoated TKA. Level of evidence II, Therapeutic.

No abstract