依据Paprosky分型股骨侧假体无菌性松动的处理策略

目的研究全髋关节置换术后假体无菌性松动的治疗方法及疗效,探讨股骨侧假体无菌性松动的治疗原则。方法回顾性分析自2000-01—2014-12诊治的24例股骨侧假体无菌性松动,记录手术前后VAS评分、Harris评分。影像学指标包括假体松动表现、Paprosky分型、假体内翻角、Barrack分级、植骨方式、内固定位置、并发症情况等。结果所有患者均获平均15.3(13~68)个月随访。术前VAS评分平均为8.9(7.2~10)分,末次随访VAS评分4.3(2~10)分,与术前有较大改善,差异有统计学意义(t=2.361,P=0.027)。术前Harris评分平均为32.5(12~54)分,末次随访时为60.8(36~82)分,差异有统计学意义(t=2.213,P=0.032)。所有患者初次置换为骨水泥型股骨柄假体,22例透亮线位于骨水泥-骨界面间。翻修手术采用生物型翻修假体,骨水泥残留1例。术前Paprosky分型,Ⅰ型4例(16.7%),Ⅱ型6例(25%),ⅢA型8例(33.3%),ⅢB型4例(16.7%),无Ⅳ型。术中根据不同分型应用结构性植骨及打压植骨,术后骨长入良好。结论股骨侧假体无菌性松动的处理原则需要对患者骨质缺损、初次置换方式及质量等方面因素进行综合考虑。其处理以翻修手术为主,需根据不同骨缺损类型选择植骨方式及翻修方法。     

MCP-1-CCR2抑制剂治疗人工关节无菌性松动的研究进展

人工关节磨损颗粒诱导全身的巨噬细胞迁移到关节假体周围,并刺激巨噬细胞释放多种趋化因子,其中巨噬细胞趋化性蛋白-1(MCP-1)在调节全身的单核/巨噬细胞趋化迁移和慢性炎症过程中起关键作用。单核/巨噬细胞是破骨细胞的前体细胞,减少单核/巨噬细胞的迁移和活化,有可能减轻与磨损颗粒相关的假体周围骨溶解。该文介绍磨损颗粒分类及其生物学特征,以及MCP-1-CCR2信号通路与磨损颗粒诱导的全身性巨噬细胞迁移、最终导致假体周围骨溶解的研究进展情况。     

No Difference in Revision Rate Between Low Viscosity and High Viscosity Cement Used in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundLoosening remains one of the most common reasons for revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Cement viscosity has a potential role in reducing revision rates for loosening. The aim of this study was to assess the outcome for loosening of the 5 most used cemented knee prostheses by constraint type, based on the cement viscosity type used.MethodsThere were 214,708 TKA procedures performed between 1999 and 2020 for a diagnosis of osteoarthritis using the 5 most commonly used minimally stabilized, posterior stabilized, and medial pivot design cemented tibial components. Only procedures with a cemented tibial component were included. Outcomes for two different cement viscosities, 140,060 high viscosity and 74,648 low viscosity cement, were compared for each fixation type within each of the three stability groups.ResultsThere was no difference in a risk of all-cause revision when high viscosity cement was used compared to low viscosity cement for minimally stabilized prostheses (hazards ratio [HR] 1.07 [95% CI 0.99-1.15], P = .09), posterior stabilized prostheses (HR 1.03 [95% CI 0.95-1.11], P = .53), and medial pivot design prostheses (HR 1.06 [95% CI 0.80-1.41], P = .67). No difference was observed between cement viscosity types for any of the prosthesis constraint types when aseptic loosening was assessed.ConclusionsWe found no difference in the risk of revision for any reason, or for loosening, with cement viscosity for the most commonly used minimally stabilized, posterior stabilized, and medial pivot TKA. The role of cement viscosity in the risk of TKA revision remains unclear and further research is required.Level of EvidenceLevel III Retrospective comparative study.     

Satisfactory Outcomes of All-Poly Fixed Bearing Unicompartmental Knee Arthroplasty for Avascular Osteonecrosis Versus Osteoarthritis: A Comparative Study With 10 to 22 Years of Follow-up

BackgroundWhile good mid-term results for treating spontaneous knee osteonecrosis (SPONK) with unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) have been reported, concerns remain about implant survival at long-term. This study aimed to compare outcomes and survivorship of UKA for SPONK vs osteoarthritis at a minimum of 10 years.MethodsThis case-control study included medial UKA for femoral SPONK operated between 1996 and 2010 with a minimum 10-year follow-up (n = 47). Each case was matched with a medial UKA for osteoarthritis based on body mass index (BMI), gender, and age. Knee Society Score (KSS), complications and radiological (loosening) data were collected at the last follow-up. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed using revision implant removal as endpoint.ResultsThe mean follow-up was 13.2 years (range 10 to 21 years). Mean age and BMI were 72.9 ± 8.4 years and 25.5 ± 3.6 Kg/m² in SPONK group. At last follow-up, knee and function KSS were 89.5 ± 12 and 79 ± 18 in SPONK group vs 90 ± 15 (P = .85) and 81.7 ± 17 (P = .47) in control group. Complications and radiological results showed no significant differences. The survival rate free from any revision was 85.1% at last follow-up in SPONK group and 93.6% in control group (P = .23). The leading cause for revision was aseptic tibial loosening (57.1%) in SPONK group. The 15-year survival estimate was 83% in SPONK group.ConclusionSatisfactory clinical outcomes at long-term after UKA for femoral SPONK were observed, similar to those after UKA for osteoarthritis, despite a higher risk of tibial loosening in the SPONK group. No symptomatic femoral loosening leading to a revision was observed.Level of EvidenceIV.     

Biofilm Producing Staphylococcus epidermidis (RP62A Strain) Inhibits Osseous Integration Without Osteolysis and Histopathology in a Murine Septic Implant Model

Despite its presence in orthopaedic infections, Staphylococcus epidermidis's ability to directly induce inflammation and bone destruction is unknown. Thus, we compared a clinical strain of methicillin-resistant biofilm-producing S. epidermidis (RP62A) to a highly virulent and osteolytic strain of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (USA300) in an established murine implant-associated osteomyelitis model. Bacterial burden was assessed by colony forming units (CFUs), tissue damage was assessed by histology and micro-computed tomography, biofilm was assessed by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), host gene expression was assessed by quantitative polymerase chain reaction, and osseous integration was assessed via biomechanical push-out test. While CFUs were recovered from RP62A-contaminated implants and surrounding tissues after 14 days, the bacterial burden was significantly less than USA300-infected tibiae (p < 0.001). In addition, RP62A failed to produce any of the gross pathologies induced by USA300 (osteolysis, reactive bone formation, Staphylococcus abscess communities, marrow necrosis, and biofilm). However, fibrous tissue was present at the implant-host interface, and rigorous SEM confirmed the rare presence of cocci on RP62A-contaminated implants. Gene expression studies revealed that IL-1β, IL-6, RANKL, and TLR-2 mRNA levels in RP62A-infected bone were increased versus Sterile controls. Ex vivo push-out testing showed that RP62A-infected implants required significantly less force compared with the Sterile group (7.5 ± 3.4 vs. 17.3 ± 4.1 N; p < 0.001), but required 10-fold greater force than USA300-infected implants (0.7 ± 0.3 N; p < 0.001). Taken together, these findings demonstrate that S. epidermidis is a commensal pathogen whose mechanisms to inhibit osseous integration are limited to minimal biofilm formation on the implant, and low-grade inflammation. © 2019 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 38:852-860, 2020     

Short-Term Follow-Up of Patellar Component Revision in Patients With Isolated Patellar Component Loosening

BackgroundThe etiology of patellar component loosening can be multifactorial, including component malposition, trauma, infection, and poor implant design. These cases may be managed with isolated patellar component revision or simultaneous patellar component with femoral and/or tibial component revision. Isolated patellar revision in the setting of aseptic loosening historically has had limited success with high rates of repeat revision.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of 75 cases diagnosed with patellar component loosening that underwent revision. Patients were followed for a minimum of 2 years. Cases were categorized as either isolated patellar (IP) revision or patellar with femoral and/or tibial component (P + O) revisions. Survivorship and re-revision causes were compared between groups. Secondary outcomes included surgical time, estimated blood loss, range of motion, and length of stay.ResultsFifty patients underwent IP revision, and 25 patients had P + O revision. Overall survivorship at the 2-year follow-up interval was 94.6%. Survivorship of IP revision undertaken for aseptic loosening was 94%. Survivorship of P + O revision was 96%. Eight percent of patients required reoperation from the P + O revision group, while 12% of patients in the IP revision group underwent a reoperation. Patients undergoing IP revision had better postoperative range of motion, lower surgical times, lower estimated blood loss, and decreased length of stay.ConclusionIP revision demonstrates excellent survivorship and clinical outcomes comparable to P + O revision. When appropriate, IP revision should be considered as a potential treatment option.Level of EvidenceLevel III, retrospective cohort study.     

Cemented vs Uncemented Femoral Components: A Randomized,Controlled Trial at 10 Years Minimum Follow-Up

BackgroundThe type of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) fixation (cemented or uncemented) is still subject to debate. The aim of this study is to assess the survival rate, clinical outcomes, and radiological results of TKA according to the fixation type.MethodsA total of 130 patients were randomly assigned to either the cement group (cemented femoral and tibial implants) or the hybrid group (cemented tibial implant, uncemented femoral implant). The inclusion criteria were patients between 50 and 90 years old who underwent primary TKA for osteoarthritis between 2004 and 2005 without a history of open knee surgery. Revisions and complications were reported, as well as clinical scores and radiological signs of loosening.ResultsOne hundred eighteen patients had complete data at 10 years of minimum follow-up (59 in each group). The mean age was 72 years old. The mean follow-up was 13 years. The survival rate was 98% at 13 years in both groups (1 aseptic loosening at 2 years in the cement group, 1 septic loosening in the hybrid group). The complication rate in the cement group was 8.5% (n = 5) vs 12.1% (n = 7) in the hybrid group (P = .8). The clinical results were not significantly different. In the cement group, 25% of patients (n = 15) had radiolucent lines at 10 years. In the hybrid group, 33% of patients had bone transparencies, not evolving or symptomatic.ConclusionAt a minimum follow-up of 10 years, there were no significant differences between cemented TKA and hybrid TKA for the survivorship, the complication rate, the clinical scores, or the radiological signs of loosening.Level of EvidenceI.     

Results of Cemented Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasty in Obese Patients With an Average 10-Year Follow-Up

BackgroundObese and morbidly obese patients undergoing primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) place significant stress at the bone-cement-implant interface over the life of the patient. The purpose of this study is to evaluate results of cemented, posterior-stabilized TKA in obese and morbidly obese patients at an average follow-up of 10 years.MethodsRetrospective study of 181 patients who had a cemented, posterior-stabilized TKA between 2000 and 2013 with body mass index >35 at the time of surgery was conducted. Clinical data and radiographs were evaluated along with survivorship, complications, and revisions. Minimum follow-up was 5 years with an average follow-up of 10 years.ResultsThere were 135 women and 46 men in the study, with mean age of 60.2 years (range 43-80), mean body mass index of 42.0 (range 35.1-66.1), and an average follow-up of 10 years (range 5-18). There were a total of 39 failures (22%) that underwent revision TKA surgery with mean time to revision of 8 years. Failures included 25 (14%) cases of aseptic loosening; 9 (5%) polyethylene wear; 2 (1%) prosthetic joint infection; and 3 additional revisions for instability, pain, and stiffness. There were a total of 11 cases of isolated tibial component loosening and 13 for both tibial and femoral loosening. Survivorship at 15 years with aseptic loosening as the endpoint was 86.7%, and for all causes 79.6% at 15 years.ConclusionAseptic loosening is the leading cause of failure following TKA in obese and morbidly obese patients with decreasing survivorship from 96.1% to 91.2% and 86.7% at 5, 10, and 15 years, respectively.     

Why Do Revision Total Knee Arthroplasties Fail? A Single-Center Review of 1632 Revision Total Knees Comparing Historic and Modern Cohorts

BackgroundUtilization of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) has been increasing, and reasons for failure are less understood than those of primary TKA. The purpose of this study is to identify the rates and mechanisms of failure of revision TKA, and compare those between a historic (1986-2005) and modern (2006-2015) cohort.MethodsAll revision TKAs performed at a single institution between 1986 and 2015 were reviewed, with minimum 2-year follow-up. Failure was defined as a second revision surgery in which any component was exchanged. Diagnosis at the time of index and any re-revision procedure was determined.ResultsIn total, 1632 revision TKAs in 1560 patients were reviewed. The average age was 65.1 and the average follow-up was 61.4 months. Overall failure rate was 22.8%, with no significant differences between the historic and modern cohort (25.1% vs 22.0%, P = .19). The leading cause for failure was infection in 38.5% of failures. The next most common causes for failure were aseptic loosening (20.9%) and instability (14.2%). Failure rate among revision TKAs for infection was 33%, with 67.2% failing due to repeat infection. Multivariate analysis found that septic index revision (odds ratio [OR] 1.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.47-2.48), male gender (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.11-1.78), and age less than 65 (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.23-1.97) were independent risk factors for failure.ConclusionThere remains a high rate of failure in revision TKA, with infection being the most common reason for failure. Rates and primary reasons for failure have not changed significantly in the past decade.     

High Failure Rates of the Spectron EF Stem at a Minimum of 10 Year's Follow-up

We prospectively followed 112 hips, undergoing THA with a Spectron EF stem. At mean follow-up of 11.2 years, 21 patients had died. We obtained radiological follow-up in 99% and clinical follow-up in 100% of the surviving 91 hips. Fifty-four percent demonstrated osteolysis in at least one Gruen zone. Twenty-two hips required revision for all causes, with a further five stems radiologically loose. With endpoint being stem revision for aseptic loosening or radiological failure, survivorship at 11 years was 0.783. We believe the addition of a rougher surface finish has contributed to the high levels of osteolysis and stem failure seen with the Spectron EF.