Implant survival and outcome after rotating-hinge total knee revision arthroplasty: a minimum 6-year follow-up

Gudnason, Asgeir; Milbrink, Jan; Hailer, Nils P

doi:10.1007/s00402-011-1330-5

Cited by 50 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The authors concluded that hinged prostheses could be used to salvage of limb threatening situations in elderly patients at risk of arthrodesis or amputation. Gudnason et al [10], more recently, reported similar results. Kim et al [11] reported a ten-year 96 % components survivorship on 114 revision TKAs using a CCK prosthesis.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

“…Apart from infections, the principal causes of revision TKA failure are wear, aseptic loosening [9] and instability due to the inappropriate choice of revision implant constraint [6,10]. In fact, one of the greatest challenges during revision TKA is the management of the ligamentous instability affecting both the function and final survival of the knee joint reconstruction [5,11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Constraint choice in revision knee arthroplasty

Vasso

Beaufils

Panni

2013

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Along with the increase in primary total knee arthroplasty, there has been an increase in the number of revisions. The aim of this study was to propose a selection algorithm for the knee revision constraint according to the state of ligaments and to the bone defects Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute Classification [AORI] classification. The hypothesis was that this algorithm would facilitate the appropriate choice of prosthesis constraint, thus providing stable components and a good long-term survivorship of the knee revisions. Methods Sixty consecutive revision knee arthroplasties in 57 patients were prospectively evaluated. Prostheses implanted at revision included postero-stabilised, condylar constrained and rotating hinged, relative to the state of the ligaments and of the bone loss around the knee. The median follow-up was nine years (range, 4-12). Results The median IKS knee and function scores and HSS score were 41 (15-62), 21.5 (12-43) and 34 (23-65) points, respectively, before the operation, and 81 (48-97), 79 (56-92) and 83.5 (62-98) points (p<0.001) at the latest followup evaluation. The median ROM increased from 74°(29-110°) preoperatively to 121°(98-132°) (p<0.01) at the final follow-up. Re-revision was necessary in five (8.3 %) patients. Conclusions A selection algorithm for the revision implant constraint based on the state of ligaments and the bone loss AORI classification could provide stable knee reconstructions and long-term success of knee revisions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 73%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Constraint choice in revision knee arthroplasty

Vasso

Beaufils

Panni

2013

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…16,[22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] Its use in the trauma setting has yet to be published. The prosthesis has antitorsional, antitilt and antimigration properties.…”

Section: Description Of Surgical Technique and Patient Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 3 year minimum follow up of Endoprosthetic replacement for distal femoral fractures — An alternative treatment option

Atrey

Hussain²,

Gosling³

et al. 2017

Journal of Orthopaedics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Although the use of an endoprosthesis for distal femoral fractures remains a valid treatment option the widespread use is in its infancy. Methodology: In this retrospective case series, we review cases of distal femoral fracture treated with endoprosthetic replacement (EPR). The outcomes we assessed were the time to start mobilising, the time to discharge, morbidity and mortality as well as an Oxford knee score to assess pain and function and also the early survivorship. 6 of the 11 from the cohort had existing Total Knee Replacements (TKRs) in situ. Results: There were 11 knees in our cohort with a mean age of 81.5 years (range 52-102 years). The median time to follow up was 3.5 years (range 1.6 to 5.5 years). The median times to theatre was 3 days and to discharge was 16 days. Oxford functional and pain scores were 32/48. Discussion: In the appropriate patient and fracture pattern, Endoprosthetic knee replacement is an excellent option in the treatment of distal femoral fractures whether associated with an existing TKR or not. The implant is more costly than traditional open reduction and internal fixation, but the earlier return to full mobility post-operatively may save on hospital/care home stay and free up hospital space and minimise complications.

show abstract

“…As many as one-third of patients experience a postoperative complication. [6][7][8] Pour et al reported 14% of patients experienced a medical complication after their surgical procedure and 16% of patients having a surgical complication requiring revision within the first 3 years after surgery. 6 Deep wound infection, patellar complications, extensor mechanism disruption, prosthetic dislocation, periprosthetic fracture, and component breakage are listed among the specific complications related to the implant.…”

Section: Complicationsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…More commonly, periprosthetic bone in the setting of fracture will not adequately support a conventional revision arthroplasty, and the use of implants that can replace large segments of the distal femur is necessary to ensure a reliable outcome (►Figs. 7,8). During preoperative planning for the use of distal femoral replacement components, it is important to determine the amount of femoral bone resection that will be necessary to restore the joint line for the distal femur and to approximate the patient's AP anatomy, ensuring that flexion and extension gaps are reasonably balanced and patellofemoral loading mechanics are accommodated.…”

Section: Implant Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Periprosthetic Total Knee Arthroplasty Fractures: Revision Arthroplasty Technique

Keeney

2013

J Knee Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With increased use of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) technique, the burden of revision surgery for all causes including periprosthetic fractures is anticipated to increase substantially in the coming decades. Although periprosthetic TKA fractures are most frequently managed with operative repair, there are circumstances where fracture characteristics or patient factors may make a revision total knee arthroplasty more preferable. This article outlines the principles of surgical treatment when a revision arthroplasty technique is selected.

show abstract

Implant survival and outcome after rotating-hinge total knee revision arthroplasty: a minimum 6-year follow-up

Abstract: Our results indicate that revision arthroplasty of the knee with this rotating hinge prosthesis can be performed with satisfactory or good results in an elderly population with severe comorbidities.

Cited by 50 publications

References 36 publications

Constraint choice in revision knee arthroplasty

Constraint choice in revision knee arthroplasty

A 3 year minimum follow up of Endoprosthetic replacement for distal femoral fractures — An alternative treatment option

Periprosthetic Total Knee Arthroplasty Fractures: Revision Arthroplasty Technique

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About