A Prophylactic Tibial Stem Reduces Rates of Early Aseptic Loosening in Patients with Severe Preoperative Varus Deformity in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundPatients with a preoperative varus deformity >8 degrees are at increased risk of aseptic loosening after total knee arthroplasty. This study analyzes the effect of a tibial stem on the rate of aseptic loosening in patients with a severe preoperative varus deformity.MethodsPatients with a preoperative varus deformity of >8 degrees and 2-year minimum follow-up with a stemmed tibial component (n = 67) were matched 1:2 to patients with a similar preoperative varus deformity with a standard tibial component (n = 134). Radiolucent lines were measured on the tibia at 6 weeks, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively using the Knee Society Radiographic Evaluation System. Failure was defined as revision due to aseptic loosening of the tibial component. Outcomes were evaluated using Student’s t-tests and log-rank tests.ResultsPatients with tibial stems had greater preoperative deformity (12.9 vs 11.3 degrees, P = .004). There was no difference in postoperative alignment (1.7 vs 2.1 degrees varus, P = .25) or tibial component angle (1.8 vs 2.1 degrees varus, P = .33). Patients with stems were more likely to have more constraint (44.8% vs 1.5%, P < .001). Progression of radiolucent lines >2 mm was observed in 17.6% (23/134) vs 5.97% (4/67) of patients in the stem group (P = .03). Rates of aseptic loosening were lower in the stem group (0% vs 5.15%, P = .05).ConclusionDespite worse preoperative deformity and higher utilization of constraint, tibial stem use in patients with severe preoperative varus deformity resulted in lower rates of aseptic loosening. Prophylactic use of stems in these patients may help increase implant survival.     

In Kinematically Aligned Total Knee Arthroplasty,Failure to Recreate Native Tibial Alignment Is Associated With Early Revision

BackgroundThe goal of kinematically aligned (KA) total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is to restore native knee anatomy. However, there are concerns about patellofemoral tracking problems with this technique that lead to early revision. We measured the differences between preoperative anatomic alignment and postoperative component alignment in a consecutive series of KA TKA and evaluated the association between alignment changes and the likelihood of early revision.MethodsThe charts of 219 patients who underwent 275 KA TKA procedures were reviewed. Preoperative anatomic alignment and postoperative tibial and femoral component alignment were measured radiographically. The difference in component alignment compared with preoperative anatomic alignment was compared between patients who underwent aseptic revision and those who did not at a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. Receiver operating characteristic curves were created for statistically significant variables, and the Youden index was used to determine optimal alignment thresholds with regard to likelihood of revision surgery.ResultsChange in tibial component alignment compared with native alignment was greater (P = .005) in the revision group (5.0° ± 3.7° of increased varus compared with preoperative anatomic tibial angle) than in the nonrevision group (1.3° ± 4.2° of increased varus). The Youden index indicated that increasing tibial varus by >2.2° or more is associated with increased likelihood of revision. Preoperative anatomic alignment and change in femoral alignment and overall joint alignment (ie, Q angle) were not associated with increased likelihood of revision.ConclusionSmall increases in tibial component varus compared with native alignment are associated with early aseptic revision in patients undergoing KA TKA.     

Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients Less Than 50 Years of Age: Results at a Mean of 13 Years

BackgroundPatients between 45 and 54 years old will be the fastest-growing cohort seeking total knee arthroplasty (TKA) over the next 15 years. The purpose of this investigation is to determine the clinical outcomes of TKA in patients less than 50 years old at a minimum of 10 years. We hypothesized that this patient population would have a high rate of survivorship that is similar to that of older patients.MethodsWe reviewed 298 consecutive TKAs on 242 patients at a minimum of 10 years postoperatively. Twenty patients died and 30 TKAs were lost to follow-up leaving 248 TKAs in 202 patients (91 male, 111 female) with a mean age of 45.7 years (range, 26-49) at the time of surgery. Patient-reported outcomes, survivorship, causes of reoperation, and initial postoperative radiographic parameters were collected.ResultsAt a mean of 13.0 years, there were 9 revisions for tibial loosening (3.6%), 8 for deep infection (3.2%), 7 for polyethylene wear (2.8%), and 3 for failed ingrowth of a cementless femoral component (1.2%). Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated 92.0% survivorship with failures defined as aseptic component revision and 83.9% survivorship for all-cause reoperation at 13 years. Patients with tibial alignment of 4° or more of varus or 10° or more of posterior slope were found to have increased rate of failure.ConclusionWhile overall durability was good in this young patient population, tibial fixation and deep infection were relatively common causes of failure. In addition, increased tibial varus and slope were found to increase the rate of failure. Furthermore, the nearly 3% risk of revision for wear suggests that the use of more wear-resistant bearing surfaces may reduce the risk of failure in this patient population.     

Survivorship of 500 Cementless Total Knee Arthroplasties in Patients Under 55 Years of Age

BackgroundWith respect to survivorship following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), joint registries consistently demonstrate higher revision rates for both genders in those aged less than 55 years. The present study analyzed the survivorship of 500 cementless TKAs performed in this age group in a high-volume primary joint unit where cementless TKA has traditionally been used for the majority of patients.MethodsThis was a retrospective review of 500 consecutive TKAs performed in patients aged less than 55 years between March 1994 and April 2017. The primary outcome measures for the study were survivorship and all-cause revisions. Secondary outcome measures included nonrevision procedures, clinical, functional, and radiological outcomes.ResultsAn all-cause survival rate of 98.4% and an aseptic survival rate of 99.2% at a median time of 10.7 years (interquartile range 7.3-14.9, range 0.2-27.7) were found. Four patents were revised for infection, 2 for stiffness, 1 for aseptic loosening of the tibial component, and 1 for a patella that was resurfaced for anterior knee pain. Thirty four patients (6.8%) had a nonrevision procedure with manipulation under anesthetic accounting for 27. On a multivariate analysis, preoperative range of motion and female gender were negatively associated with postoperative range of motion (P < .001 and P = .003, respectively). Sixty seven patients (17.3%) had radioluscent lines and on a multivariate analysis, there were no significant predictors of radiolucent lines.ConclusionCementless TKA in the young patient can achieve excellent clinical and functional outcomes. At a median of 10.7 years, aseptic revision rates are exceptionally low at 0.8% for the entire cohort.     

Comparison of the clinical and radiological outcomes between an isolated tibial component revision and total revision knee arthroplasty in aseptic loosening of an isolated tibial component

BackgroundAn isolated tibial component revision could be a treatment option for isolated tibial side loosening; however, few studies have proved its efficacy. This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes between isolated (tibial component) and total (femoral and tibial component) revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA).MethodsBetween January 2008 and February 2017, 31 patients underwent revision TKA for isolated tibial side loosening; 14 underwent an isolated tibial component revision (isolated group) and 17 underwent total (both femoral and tibial components) revision surgery (total group). The postoperative range of motion (ROM), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis (WOMAC) index, Knee Society knee score (KSKS), Knee Society function score (KSFS), and mechanical axis (MA) were compared between the two groups. The intraoperative tourniquet time and amount of blood drainage were also compared.ResultsThe mean follow-up durations in the isolated and total groups were 40.7 and 56.1 months, respectively. Both groups had similar postoperative ROM, WOMAC index, KSKS, KSFS, and MA; however, significantly shorter tourniquet time (105.2 vs. 154.6 min, P < 0.001) and less blood drainage (417.2 vs. 968.1 ml, P < 0.001) were noted in the isolated group than in the total group.ConclusionIsolated tibial component revision TKA for tibial component loosening showed comparable clinical and radiological outcomes to those of total revision TKA. The advantages of the isolated tibial component revision surgery were short operation time and small blood loss.Study designLevel III, Retrospective comparative study.     

Progressive Tibial Bearing Sagittal Plane Conformity in Cruciate-Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundWe hypothesized that when the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) is found deficient at total knee arthroplasty (TKA), using an anterior-stabilized (AS) tibial insert would provide similar function and survivorship when compared to using a more traditional cruciate-retaining (CR) bearing when the (PCL) is balanced.MethodsA total of 1731 TKAs were performed using the same TKA design. Of them, 868 TKAs had a standard CR insert implanted (CR-S), 480 TKAs used a lipped CR insert (CR-L), and 383 TKAs used an AS insert. If the PCL was considered nonfunctional or absent, an AS bearing was placed. When the PCL was balanced, a CR-S or CR-L bearing was used. Follow-up was performed using the Knee Society scoring system. Kaplan-Meier survivorship was used with failure defined as aseptic loosening.ResultsAt final follow-up, there were no significant differences in knee flexion, pain, function, or stair scores. Walking scores were significantly lower in the AS group. Posterior instability was higher in the CR-S group, whereas the manipulation rate was highest in the CR-L group (1.7%, 1.3%, and 0% for CR-L, CR-S, and AS groups, respectively). Kaplan-Meier survivorship at 5 years demonstrated no significant difference between the 3 groups (99% 100%, and 99% for CR-S, CR-L, and AS groups, respectively).ConclusionUsing an AS insert provided similar function and 5-year survivorship as compared to using a CR-S and CR-L tibial insert when the PCL was balanced. Using an ultracongruent AS dished tibial component appears to be a reasonable option when the PCL is completely released or found deficient at operation.     

Modular Tibial Stem Use and Risk of Revision for Aseptic Loosening in Cemented Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundModular tibial stem extensions in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are designed to reduce the risk of aseptic loosening of the tibial base plate. However, these implants add significant cost and an evaluation of their effectiveness in reducing this risk of loosening has not been studied in a large cohort. We sought to evaluate modular tibial stem utilization in primary TKA.MethodsWe conducted a cohort study using our integrated healthcare system’s Total Joint Replacement Registry. Patients who underwent cemented primary TKA were identified (2009-2019). Propensity scores were used to 1:1 match patients without to those with a stem extension. Cox proportional-hazards regression was used to evaluate the risk for revision due to aseptic loosening.ResultsTen thousand four hundred seventy six TKA with a modular tibial stem were matched to 10,476 TKA without a tibial stem. Stem utilization associated with a lower risk of revision for loosening across all postoperative follow-up (hazard ratio = 0.38, 95% confidence interval = 0.17-0.85).ConclusionIn a matched cohort study, we observed presence of a stem extension was associated with a lower risk of revision for aseptic loosening. Further study to identify specific risk factors for aseptic loosening and confirm the findings presented here are warranted.Level of EvidenceLevel III.     

Comparison of Modular Conventional and High-Flexion Posterior-Stabilized Total Knee Arthroplasties in the Same Patients at a Mean Follow-Up of 15 Years

BackgroundAs previous studies are limited to short-term clinical data on conventional and high-flexion total knee arthroplasties (TKAs), long-term clinical data on these TKAs remain unclear. Therefore, we evaluated long-term functional outcome, range of knee motion, revision rate, implant survival, and the prevalence of osteolysis after conventional and high-flexion TKAs in the same patients.MethodsThe authors evaluated a cohort of 1206 patients with a mean age of 65.3 ± 7 years (range: 22-70) who underwent bilateral simultaneous sequential TKAs. One knee received a conventional TKA and the other received a high-flexion TKA. The mean duration of follow-up was 15.6 years (range: 14-17).ResultsNo significant differences were found between the 2 groups at the latest follow-up with respect to Knee Society score (93 vs 92 points, P = .765), pain score (45 vs 44 points, P = .641), range of knee motion (125° vs 126°, P = .712), and radiographic and computed tomography scan results. Furthermore, no significant revision rate differences were found between the 2 groups (1.3% for conventional TKA vs 1.6% for high-flexion TKA; P = .137). There was no osteolysis recorded in either group. The rate of survivorship free of implant revision or aseptic loosening was 98.7% (95% CI = 91-100) for conventional TKA and 98.4% (95% CI = 91-100) for high-flexion TKA at 17 years.ConclusionAt the latest follow-up, we were not able to demonstrate any significant difference between conventional and high-flexion TKAs with respect to functional outcome scores, range of knee motion, revision rate, implant survival, and prevalence of osteolysis.     

Impact of Polyethylene Thickness on Clinical Outcomes and Survivorship in Medial Mobile-Bearing Unicondylar Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundThe thickness of the polyethylene bearing in medial unicondylar knee arthroplasty (UKA) is determined by the depth of the tibial resection, degree of correctable deformity, and balance of the knee. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether polyethylene thickness in medial mobile-bearing UKA impacts clinical outcomes and survivorship.MethodsA retrospective review from 2004 to 2017 identified patients who underwent a primary mobile-bearing medial UKA with 2-year minimum follow-up or revision. A total of 2305 patients (3030 knees) met inclusion criteria. Patients were divided in 2 groups: thin bearing (group 1): 3-mm or 4-mm bearing and thick bearing (group 2): ≥ 5 mm. The thin group consisted of 2640 knees (87%), whereas the thick group had 390 knees (13%). Preoperative and postoperative demographics, range of motion, Knee Society scores, complications, and reoperations were evaluated.ResultsMean follow-up was 5.2 years (range, 0.5 to 12.6). There was no significant difference between groups in postoperative range of motion or Knee Society scores (P > .05). Manipulations were performed in 1.3% of patients and not significantly different between groups. The all-cause revision rate for group 1 was 4.02% and group 2 was 4.58% (P = .6). Revision rates for tibial aseptic loosening were significantly higher in group 2 (1.8%) than those in group 1 (0.7%) (P = .04). There was no significant difference in failure rates between groups for tibial collapse or fracture, femoral aseptic loosening, arthritic progression, bearing dislocation, or other cause of revision.ConclusionThis study demonstrated that thicker bearings in medial UKA increased the risk of tibial aseptic loosening, but not all-cause failures or clinical outcomes.     

Outcome and Risk Factors Associated with Failures of Isolated Bearing Exchange for Osteolysis in Well-Fixed Cementless Total Hip Arthroplasty

BackgroundIt is often challenging to decide whether to revise only the bearing or femoral acetabular component in the setting of progressive osteolysis without component loosening in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). In this study, we aimed to (1) compare the survivorship of isolated bearing exchange and single/both component revision for patients with periprosthetic osteolysis without component loosening, and (2) identify potential risk factors associated with failures of isolated bearing exchange.MethodsA total of 228 consecutive cases of revision THA for progressive osteolysis without component loosening was evaluated in 2 groups: (1) 124 component revision and (2) 104 isolated bearing exchange. The primary outcome was survival, with failure defined as repeat revision or reoperation for any reason. Patient risk factors, such as demographics and medical comorbidities, were also analyzed.ResultsThere was no significant difference in survivorship between the component revision group and the bearing exchange group at 10 years (85% vs 82%; P = .89). There was no progression of osteolysis on radiographs at last follow-up for patients with isolated bearing change. Univariate regression modeling demonstrated that renal disease was associated with failure of isolated bearing exchange after revision THA.ConclusionThis study demonstrated that isolated bearing exchange is associated with similar outcomes compared with component revision for aseptic osteolysis without loosening, demonstrating that isolated bearing exchange is a viable option for selected patients with osteolysis in the setting of well-fixed THA components. This provides clinically useful information for surgeons in the surgical treatment of THA patients with wear and osteolysis without component loosening.     

Weight Gain After Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty Is Associated With Accelerated Time to Revision for Aseptic Loosening

BackgroundObesity is a major health problem worldwide and is associated with complications after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). It remains unknown whether a change in body mass index (BMI) after primary TKA affects the reasons for revision TKA or the time to revision TKA.MethodsA total of 160 primary TKAs referred to an academic tertiary center for revision TKA were retrospectively stratified according to change in BMI from the time of their primary TKA to revision TKA. The association between change in BMI and time to revision was also analyzed according to indication for revision of TKA using Pearson's chi-square test.ResultsThe mean change in BMI from primary to revision TKA was 0.82 ± 3.5 kg/m². Maintaining a stable weight after primary TKA was protective against late revision TKA for any reason (P = .004). Patients who failed to reduce their BMI were revised for aseptic loosening earlier, at less than 5 years (P = .020), whereas those who reduced their BMI were revised later, at over 10 years (P = .004).ConclusionMaintaining weight after primary TKA is protective against later revision TKA for any reason but failure to reduce weight after primary TKA is a risk factor for early revision TKA for aseptic loosening and osteolysis. Orthopedic surgeons should recommend against weight gain after primary TKA to reduce the risk of an earlier revision TKA in the event that a revision TKA is indicated.     

Polyethylene Damage Increases With Varus Implant Alignment in Posterior-stabilized and Constrained Condylar Knee Arthroplasty

Background

Implant malalignment in primary TKA has been reported to increase stresses placed on the bearing surfaces of implant components. We used a longitudinally maintained registry coupled with an implant retrieval program to consider whether preoperative, postoperative, or prerevision malalignment was associated with increased risk of revision surgery after TKA.

Questions/purposes

(1) What is the relative polyethylene damage on medial and lateral compartments of the tibial plateaus from revised TKAs? (2) Does coronal TKA alignment affect implant performance, such that TKAs aligned in varus are predisposed to experience increased polyethylene damage? (3) Does TKA alignment differ between postoperative and prerevision radiographs, and if so, what does this difference suggest about the mechanical contact load placed on a knee with a TKA?

Methods

Between 2007 and 2012, we performed 18,065 primary TKAs at our institution. By March 2016, 178 of those TKAs (1%) were revised at our center at least 2 years after primary surgery at our institution. Eighteen of those TKAs were excluded from this analysis because the tibial insert was not explanted during revision surgery, and four more were excluded because the inserts were lost or returned to the patient before the study was initiated, leaving 156 retrieved polyethylene tibial inserts (in 153 patients) revised at greater than 2 years after the primary TKA for this retrospective study. Patients who underwent revision surgery elsewhere were not considered here, since this study depended on having retrieved components. Polyethylene damage modes of burnishing, pitting, scratching, delamination, surface deformation, abrasion, and third-body debris were subjectively graded on a scale of 0 to 3 to reflect the extent and severity of each damage mode. On preoperative, postoperative, and prerevision radiographs, overall alignment, femoral alignment, and tibial alignment in the coronal plane were measured according to the protocol recommended by the Knee Society.

Results

Knees with more overall varus alignment after TKA had increased total damage on the retrieved tibial inserts (Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients of −0.3 [95% CI, −0.4 to −0.1; p = 0.001]). We also found revised TKAs tended to drift back into greater varus before revision surgery, with a mean (SD) of 3.6° ± 4.0° valgus for postoperative alignment compared with 1.7° ± 6.4° prerevision (p = 0.04).

Conclusions

Despite surgical efforts to achieve neutral mechanical alignment, remaining varus alignment places an increased contact load on the polyethylene articular surfaces. The drift toward further varus alignment postoperatively is consistent with the knee adduction moment remaining high after surgery.

Clinical Relevance

While we found a predisposition toward recurrence of the preoperative varus deformity, we did not find increased medial as opposed to lateral polyethylene damage, which may be explained by the curve-on-curve toroidal design of the articulating surfaces of the TKA implants in this study.

     

High Rate of Re-Revision in Patients Less Than 55 Years of Age Undergoing Aseptic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundThere are limited data on the outcomes of revision total knee arthroplasty in young patients. We sought to characterize the re-revision-free survival and risk factors for re-revision in patients less than 55 years who underwent aseptic revision TKA.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 197 revision TKAs at a mean follow-up of 5 years. Mean age was 49 years; mean body mass index was 31 kg/m². Twenty-seven (14%) patients had at least 1 prior revision TKA. The most common indications for revision included instability (29%), arthrofibrosis (26%), and aseptic loosening (24%). Constraint included the following: 59 posterior-stabilized (30%), 123 varus-valgus constrained (62%), and 15 hinged (8%). Components revised included the following: 93 femur/tibia (47%), 68 polyethylene-only (35%), 19 femur-only (10%), and 17 other (9%). Survivorship free from re-revision was calculated via the Kaplan-Meier method and a multivariate Cox proportional regression was utilized to identify risk factors for re-revision.ResultsSurvivorship free from any re-revision at 5 years was 80%. In the multivariate analysis, patients with a prior revision (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.78, P = .02), an isolated polyethylene exchange (HR = 3.0, P = .004), and a hinged prosthesis (HR = 3.47, P = .05) were significant risk factors for lower revision-free survival. Forty-two patients (21%) underwent re-revision, most commonly for periprosthetic joint infection (7%), instability (6%), and aseptic loosening (5%). Re-revision occurred in 18/68 (26%) patients undergoing an isolated polyethylene exchange.ConclusionPatients less than 55 years undergoing revision TKA have a modest 5-year revision-free survival of 80%. Patients with prior revision TKAs (HR = 2.78), hinge type prostheses (HR = 3.47), and polyethylene-only revisions (HR = 3.0) had higher revision rates.     

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Satisfaction 1 to 3 Years After Revisions of Total Knee Arthroplasties for Unexplained Pain Versus Aseptic Loosening

BackgroundIt is unknown if patients are relieved of pain after knee arthroplasty revision for unexplained pain. The aim of this cross-sectional case-control study was to compare patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and satisfaction 1 to 3 years after revision of total knee arthroplasties (TKAs) for the indications of unexplained pain versus aseptic loosening.MethodsWe included 384 patients undergoing TKA revision for the indications of unexplained pain and aseptic loosening from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2020 from the Danish Knee Arthroplasty Register. A total of 81 patients were revised for unexplained pain and 303 for aseptic loosening. Questionnaires including PROMs (Oxford Knee Score, EQ-5D-5L, and Forgotten Joint Score) and satisfaction with the surgery on a 0-100 scale (100 = not satisfied; 0 = very satisfied) were sent to digitally secured mailboxes. Time from revision to data collection was a median 3.1 years (range, 1.4-4.4 years).ResultsMedian Oxford Knee Score was 25 (interquartile range [IQR] 15) versus 31 (IQR 18) 1-3 years after revisions for unexplained pain versus aseptic loosening, P = .009. Median EQ-5D-5L was 0.6 (IQR 0.4) versus 0.8 (IQR 0.3) for unexplained pain versus aseptic loosening, P = .009. Median Forgotten Joint Score was 50 (IQR 7) versus 50 (IQR 16) for unexplained pain versus aseptic loosening, P = .905. Satisfaction was 75 (IQR 38) for unexplained pain and 50 (IQR 73) for aseptic loosening, P < .001.ConclusionPatients undergoing TKA revision for the indication of unexplained pain had worse results on PROMs than those revised for aseptic loosening. Likewise, patients revised for unexplained pain were less satisfied compared to patients revised for aseptic loosening. This information is valuable to both surgeons and patients when candidates for revision surgery are selected, to obtain the best possible outcomes.     

Isolated Versus Full Component Revision in Total Knee Arthroplasty for Aseptic Loosening

BackgroundRevision of both femoral and tibial components of a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for aseptic loosening has favorable outcomes. Revision of only one loose component with retention of others has shorter operative time and lower cost; however, implant survivorship and clinical outcomes of these different operations are unclear.MethodsBetween January 2009 and December 2019, a consecutive cohort of revision TKA was reviewed. Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to study correlations among factors and surgical related complications, time to prosthesis failure, and functional outcomes (University of California Los Angeles, Knee Society functional, knee osteoarthritis and outcome score for joint replacement, Veterans RAND 12 (VR-12) physical, and VR-12 mental).ResultsA total of 238 patients underwent revision TKA for aseptic loosening. The mean follow-up time was 61 months (range 25 to 152). Ten of the 105 patients (9.5%) who underwent full revision (both femoral and tibial components) and 18 of the 133 (13.5%) who underwent isolated revision had subsequent prosthesis failure [Hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, P = .343]. The factor analysis of type of revision (full or isolated revision) did not demonstrate a significant difference between groups in terms of complications, implant failures, and times to failure. Metallosis was related to early time to failure [Hazard ratio 10.11, P < .001] and iliotibial band release was associated with more complications (Odds ratio 9.87, P = .027). Preoperative symptoms of instability were associated with the worst improvement in University of California Los Angeles score. Higher American Society of Anesthesiologists status and higher Charlson Comorbidity Index were related with worse VR-12 physical (?30.5, P = .008) and knee osteoarthritis and outcome score for joint replacement (?4.2, P = .050) scores, respectively.ConclusionIsolated and full component revision TKA for aseptic loosening does not differ with respect to prosthesis failures, complications, and clinical results at 5 years. Poor American Society of Anesthesiologists status, increased comorbidities, instability, and a severe bone defect are related to worse functional improvement.Level of evidenceIII, cohort with control.     

Clinical Outcomes in Isolated Tibial Revision With Cruciate Retaining Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundTibial component loosening is one of the most common modes of failure in contemporary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Limited literature is available on the outcomes of isolated tibial revision with retention of the cruciate retaining (CR) femoral component. The purpose of this study was to determine the results of isolated tibial revisions in CR TKA.MethodsWe identified 135 patients who underwent an isolated tibial revision after a primary CR TKA from our institutional registry between January 2007 and January 2017. The mean time between the primary and revision was 2.9 years (range 0.1-15.4). Revision with a press-fit stem was performed in 79 patients and 56 patients were revised with a fully cemented stem. Patients were evaluated at a minimum of two years using Knee Society Score, Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score for Joint Replacement, and radiography. Implant survivorship was determined using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.ResultsAt a mean follow-up of 5.1 years, there were six (4.4%) repeat revisions: three for periprosthetic infection (2.2%), two for instability (1.5%), and one for a fractured tibial stem (0.7%). The mean Knee Society Score and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Score for Joint Replacement increased from 51.6 and 56.1 preoperatively to 90.1 and 89.7 after surgery (P < .001). Survivorship free of repeat revision for any cause was 93.3% at 5 years, and aseptic revision survivorship was 95.8% at 5 years. No implants were radiographically loose.ConclusionIn patients with isolated tibial loosening and a well-fixed and well-positioned CR femoral component, isolated tibial revision provides excellent early to midterm implant survivorship and clinical outcomes with a low risk of instability and recurrent tibial loosening.     

Hybrid fixation versus full-cemented or full-cementless fixation in total knee arthroplasty: Systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

ObjectiveHybrid fixation is one alternative to full-cemented fixation in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with theoretical advantages. Hybrid fixation may offer the advantages of cementless femoral fixation, while also avoiding the problem of tibial loosening in full-cementless TKA. The purpose of the study is to determine whether hybrid TKA may perform comparably to or better than full-cemented and full-cementless TKA.MethodsWe searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases through September 2018 for randomized controlled trials and observational studies comparing outcomes of hybrid versus full-cemented or full-cementless fixation techniques. Outcomes of interest included aseptic loosening, overall reoperation rate, infection, radiolucent lines and operating time. Data were pooled with the Mantel–Haenszel random effects model.ResultsWe included 14 studies with follow-up ranging from 2.7 to 9.6 years in our quantitative analysis, of which 7 studies compared hybrid fixation with full-cemented TKA and another 7 compared hybrid fixation with full-cementless TKA. Combined data revealed that the hybrid fixation group had a similar rate of aseptic loosening compared with cemented (P = 0.19) and cementless (P = 0.49) groups. There was no difference with respect to other outcomes, including overall reoperation rate, infection, radiolucent lines and operating time between groups.ConclusionHybrid, cementless and cemented TKAs have comparable mid-term results as it pertains to aseptic loosening, overall reoperation, infection, radiolucent lines and operating time. Further comparative studies are needed to investigate these potential effects over the long-term.     

Increased Survivorship of Cementless versus Cemented TKA in the Morbidly Obese. A Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

Background

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the morbidly obese patients can be challenging with an increased risk of complications. Studies have shown increased aseptic failures with well-aligned cemented TKAs in the obese patient. The purpose of this study is to determine if TKA in the morbidly obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 40) using cementless implants would demonstrate improved results and survivorship compared to cemented TKA at a minimum 5-year follow-up.

Metaphyseal Fixation Using Highly Porous Cones in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: Minimum Two Year Follow Up Study

BackgroundHighly porous metaphyseal cones have been introduced to restore metaphyseal integrity for improved cement interdigitation to achieve durable fixation in revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The purpose of this study is to review the survivorship, clinical results, and complications of revision TKA using highly porous 3-dimensionally printed titanium metaphyseal cones.MethodsThis is a review of 62 revision TKAs using metaphyseal tibial cones, with 15 cases utilizing both tibial and femoral cones. The mean age of the patients was 66 years (range 32-84) who had a mean follow-up of 27 months (range 24-34). There were 38 women and 24 men, who had a mean body mass index of 33 (range 18.3-62).ResultsRevision-free survival of the cones was 90.2%. If infection was excluded, survivorship was 100%. There were no cases of aseptic loosening. The mean Knee Society Score improved from 51 points preoperatively to 80 points at the time of latest follow-up. The mean Knee Society Functional Score improved from 48 points preoperatively to 68 points. A total of 15 of the 62 patients (24%) required additional surgery: 10 (16%) for infection, 3 (5%) for contracture, 1 for patellar subluxation, and 1 for quadriceps tendon rupture.ConclusionMetaphyseal fixation is important for survivorship in revision TKA which can be challenging due to cancellous and structural bone loss encountered at the time of revision. Prosthetic joint infection continues to be the leading cause of failure in revision TKA. The use of highly porous titanium metaphyseal cones produced from 3-dimensionally printed technology used in this study demonstrated excellent short-term results with no cases of aseptic loosening. Further follow-up is required to determine if these results can be durable over a longer period.     

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.