Osseointegrated total knee replacement connected to a lower limb prosthesis: 4 cases

Background and purpose — Osseointegrated implants are an alternative for prosthetic attachment in individuals with amputation who are unable to wear a socket. However, the load transmitted through the osseointegrated fixation to the residual tibia and knee joint can be unbearable for those with transtibial amputation and knee arthritis. We report on the feasibility of combining total knee replacement (TKR) with an osseointegrated implant for prosthetic attachment.Patients and methods — We retrospectively reviewed all 4 cases (aged 38–77 years) of transtibial amputations managed with osseointegration and TKR in 2012–2014. The below-the-knee prosthesis was connected to the tibial base plate of a TKR, enabling the tibial residuum and knee joint to act as weight-sharing structures. A 2-stage procedure involved connecting a standard hinged TKR to custom-made implants and creation of a skin-implant interface. Clinical outcomes were assessed at baseline and after 1–3 years of follow-up using standard measures of health-related quality of life, ambulation, and activity level including the questionnaire for transfemoral amputees (Q-TFA) and the 6-minute walk test.Results — There were no major complications, and there was 1 case of superficial infection. All patients showed improved clinical outcomes, with a Q-TFA improvement range of 29–52 and a 6-minute walk test improvement range of 37–84 meters.Interpretation — It is possible to combine TKR with osseointegrated implants.Socket-related discomfort leads to a significant reduction in the quality of life of individuals with lower limb amputation (Dillingham et al. 2001, Gholizadeh et al. 2014). Socket-skin interface problems lead to poor fit, diminished proprioception in the amputated limb, lack of rotational control, and reduction of ipsilateral proximal joint movement (Legro et al. 1999, Lyon et al. 2000, Meulenbelt et al. 2006).A direct connection of the prosthetic limb to the bone using osseointegrated implants can address these socket-related problems (Van de Meent et al. 2013, Tsikandylakis et al. 2014). Brånemark introduced this surgical procedure in 1995. He adapted osseointegration principles established in dental surgery to the rehabilitation of individuals with transfemoral amputation using a percutaneous bone anchoring implant screwed into the femur (Brånemark et al. 2001). Hip replacement spongiosa surface coating technology has been used to make a chrome cobalt intramedullary press-fit implant (Endo-Exo Prosthesis) allowing larger surface area for osseointegration and faster rehabilitation (Staubach and Grundei 2001). Al Muderis et al. (2015) adapted highly porous plasma-sprayed titanium implants to provide optimum initial press-fit and solid bone ingrowth.Studies of transfemoral implants have found improved quality of life, prosthetic use, body image, hip range of motion, sitting comfort, and walking ability (Van de Meent et al. 2013, Hagberg et al. 2014). For example, substantial improvements in health-related quality of life using the Global component of the questionnaire for transfemoral amputees (Q-TFA)—of 38 points (Hagberg et al. 2014) and 24 points (Van de Meent et al. 2013)—have been reported in 2 case series of 51 and 22 patients, respectively.Similar benefits could be expected for transtibial amputees using osseointegrated implants, as the knee joint could possibly enhance their gait. A study of 39 cases involving upper and lower limb prostheses (Tillander et al. 2010) found infections in 7 patients at an average follow-up period of 54 (3–132) months, with no infections reported for 1 tibial implant. At our own center, preliminary evidence of the safety and effectiveness of the tibial impants in 22 transtibial amputees with a minimum of 6 months of follow-up gave results consistent with the published results for transfemoral amputations (Khemka et al. 2015).Few authors have reported on the safety of this procedure (Brånemark et al. 2014, Tsikandylakis et al. 2014). One of the largest studies included 51 patients and reported superficial infections in approximately half of these patients at 2-year follow-up. In that study, the implant was removed in 1 patient due to deep infection and in 3 patients due to aseptic loosening (Brånemark et al. 2014).Osseointegrated implants are not currently recommended for transtibial amputees with ultra-short residuum. In addition to the practical technical challenges, biomechanical studies have suggested that small bone-implant contact is more likely to increase the risk of loosening (Lohr et al. 2000, Henriksen et al. 2003, Carvalho et al. 2012). Osseointegration is also not currently recommended for those suffering from ipsilateral knee osteoarthritis because it is hypothesized that an osseointegrated tibial implant will aggravate arthritic symptoms due to mechanical forces (Frossard et al. 2008).We describe the surgical procedure and early results of combining a total knee replacement (TKR) with an osseointegrated implant for prosthetic attachment for the first time.