Revision of failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty.

Little information has been published on the salvage of failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The current authors examined the failure mechanisms, complexity of surgery, and complications in such revisions. Of 39 consecutive unicompartmental knee revisions, two patients died within 2 years of surgery, four had inadequate followup, and one was excluded because of infection before revision. Therefore, 30 patients (32 knees) were followed up a mean 53 months. The patients were a mean age of 59 years at the time of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty and were predominantly male (60%). Revisions were done 9 to 204 months after the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty. The predominant failure mechanism was polyethylene wear; however, nine failed because of loosening. The mean polyethylene thickness of the failed arthroplasties was 7.3 mm. Revision procedures were straightforward. Ten patients required local autograft but no allografts were used. Primary femoral components were used in all patients; 25 were cruciate-retaining. Fourteen patients had stemmed tibial components; eight had wedge augments. The mean range of motion after revision was 111 degrees. Six patients had complications not requiring intervention. Three patients had rerevision surgery for polyethylene wear at 76, 77, and 102 months, respectively, two of whom required polyethylene insert and patellar component revision. The third patient also required tibial component revision for osteolysis. Although this is a small series, the simplicity of the procedure and the complications encountered compare favorably with those of total knee revision.     

Revision of failed unicondylar unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

In a retrospective review of the cases of twenty-nine patients who had a revision of a failed unicondylar unicompartmental knee replacement, the cause of failure of the original unicondylar arthroplasty was found to be loosening of one or both components in sixteen patients, progression of disease in the opposite compartment in nine, patellofemoral symptoms in two, ligamentous instability in one, and malposition of the tibial component in one. A technical error had been made in sixteen of the patients, and ten of the errors were associated with the ultimate failure of the original unicondylar procedure. Ninety-three per cent of the failed unicompartmental arthroplasties were revised using a posterior cruciate-sparing total knee replacement. Bone grafts, augmentation with screws and cement, a long-stem component, or a combination of these were used in half of the patients. The average follow-up after the revision arthroplasty was 4.6 years.     

Revision surgery after failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: a study of 35 cases

This retrospective study evaluates the results of 35 revision procedures after failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) in 34 patients, which were done during the period 1986 to 1996. There were 28 women and 6 men with a mean age of 71 years (range, 54-85 years). In all cases, St. Georg and Endo (W. Link, Hamburg, Germany) unicompartmental prostheses were used except 1 PCA unicondylar implant (How medica, Rutherford, NJ) and 1 B?hler unicondylar implant (Allo Pro, Baar, Switzerland). Failures most frequently were due to aseptic loosening followed by polyethylene wear. Two deep infections occurred. Revisions were performed 1 week to 11 years after UKA; 23 were required within the first 5 years. In most cases, revision was to a total knee arthroplasty. Partial component exchange was done in 9 cases. All 34 patients were evaluated clinically after exchange arthroplasty. After a mean follow-up time of 4 years (range, 1-12.2 years), we found 11 excellent, 13 good, 4 fair, and 7 poor results according to the Hospital for Special Surgery score. The fair and poor results were due to aseptic loosening of the knee prosthesis in 6 knees. One of 2 patients with deep infection needed femoral amputation. With correct indication and considerable surgical experience, UKA is still a good alternative, especially in the elderly patient.     

Revision total knee arthroplasty for failed unicompartmental replacement

The results in nineteen patients (twenty-one knees) who had a failed unicompartmental knee replacement followed by a revision total knee arthroplasty were evaluated. There were twelve excellent, four good, one fair, and two poor results. The interval between the unicompartmental replacement and the revision total knee arthroplasty ranged from eight months to eight years. At the time of the revision, a major osseous defect was found in sixteen knees (76 per cent). The duration of follow-up after the revision ranged from two to ten years. At the most recent follow-up examination, radiographs revealed at least one radiolucent line in thirteen knees (62 per cent). The technical difficulties associated with the revision operation are evidence that unicondylar arthroplasty is not a conservative procedure that allows a total knee arthroplasty to be done easily later. The results also do not support the argument that a revision performed after failure of a unicondylar arthroplasty is less technically demanding than one performed after a failed primary total knee arthroplasty.     

Dissecting a popliteal cyst after failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

This report documents the first case of a popliteal cyst in a knee with failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA). The cyst was treated successfully with the creation of a small communication hole between the posteromedial compartment and the popliteal cyst under direct arthroscopic visualization. This was followed by the replacement of a worn polyethylene insert via a small arthrotomy. Three months later, the popliteal mass had disappeared. This case suggests that a dissecting popliteal cyst may occur after UKA as one of the signs of a malfunction. It also suggests that treatment should be directed toward the joint and not the cyst itself.     

Revision after total knee arthroplasty and unicompartmental knee arthroplasty in the medicare population

This study compares the relative risk of revision and associated risk factors after total or unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (TKA or UKA) in the Medicare population. A total of 61 767 TKA and 2848 UKA patients were identified. Reviewed data included type of treatment, gender, age, race, Charlson Index for comorbidity, length of stay, Medicare buy-in for socioeconomic status, region, and year. Unicompartmental knee arthroplasty patients were at increased risk for revision at 2 and 5 years. Those patients undergoing UKA were significantly more likely to require revision in the first 5 years as compared with those undergoing TKA. Risk factors contributing to TKA revision included younger male patients with higher comorbidities and lower socioeconomic status. About UKA, lower revision rates tend to favor those surgeons with higher volume.     

Revision possibilities after failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty--an analysis of 116 revisions

AIM: A major advantage of the unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) is the quick rehabilitation, small traumatisation of tissue and the mostly uncomplicated revision to a total knee arthroplasty. The aim of the study is to examine whether the conversion to the total endoprosthesis, as is frequently is recommended at present in cases of defect of the sleigh system, is always necessary or whether a revision can have good chances of success with use of the unicondylar system under certain conditions. METHOD: 116 revisions were studied after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty at the first appearance of problems and during the follow-up of 45 months (range: 10-86 months) using the Knee Society Score and analyses of the various additional procedures as well as the anterior cruciate ligament substitute, the correction of slope etc. Revisions, with exchange of components or a conversion to a total arthroplasty, were included. RESULTS: In 60.3 % of all cases a revision could be performed within the unicompartmental knee system, with a mean score of 167.4 (range: 144-173). The outcome score corresponded to the outcome of primary UKA implantations and to conversion operations to total endoprosthesis in the literature (p < 0.05 Wilcoxon test). CONCLUSION: Under critical contemplation of the low case number and this short- to medium-term examination, individual revision solutions seem to have their entitlement within the unicondylar system as also do conversion operations to the TKA. Long-term results and larger case numbers are absolutely necessary prior to further judgment.     

Conversion of failed modern unicompartmental arthroplasty to total knee arthroplasty

Between January 1983 and January 1991, 29 patients (31 knees) with a failed Robert Brigham metal-backed knee arthroplasty (Johnson & Johnson, Raynham, MA) underwent revision to a total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Twenty-five patients had osteoarthritis, three avascular necrosis, and one rheumatoid arthritis. The average patient age was 72.3 years (range, 49–88 years), and the average weight was 179 lb. (range, 112–242 lb.). The interval between the primary and secondary index procedures averaged 62 months (range, 7–106 months), and mean postrevision follow-up period was 45 months (range, 24–104 months). The primary mechanism of failure of the UKA was tibial polyethylene wear in 21 knees and opposite compartment progression of arthritis in 10 knees. Sixteen knees had particulate synovitis with dense metallic staining of the synovium. At revision, the posterior cruciate ligament was spared in 30 knees and substituted in 1 knee. Restoration of bony deficiency at revision required cancellous bone—graft for contained defects in seven knees, tibial wedges in four knees, and femoral wedges in two knees. No defects received structural allografts. The data suggest that failed, modern unicompartmental knee arthroplasty can successfully be converted to TKA. In most cases, the posterior cruciate ligament can be spared and bone defects corrected with simple wedges or cancellous grafts. Moreover, the results of revision of failed unicompartmental knee arthroplasty are superior to those of failed TKA and failed high tibial osteotomy and comparable to the authors' results of primary TKA with similar-length follow-up periods. Although these results are encouraging, longer-term follow-up evaluation is required to determine survivorship of these revision arthroplasties.     

Recurrent hemarthrosis after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty

Recurrent hemarthrosis after knee arthroplasty can be disabling, requiring adequate and immediate diagnosis and treatment for recovery of symptoms and joint function. The most commonly reported cause is impingement of proliferative synovium between prosthetic components. Although various procedures for hemarthrosis have been reported after knee arthroplasty for patients who do not respond to conservative treatment, the recommended first-line therapy is open surgery or embolization. Although hyperplastic synovium was observed during the first and second arthrotomy, in our case, tissue impingement was not detected. We describe a rare case of recurrent hemarthrosis after unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) and successful treatment by open synovectomy. A 66-year-old woman presented with spontaneous osteonecrosis of the medial femoral condyle in the right leg. She underwent UKA of the right knee of the medial condyle. Eighteen months after UKA, the patient developed recurrent hemarthrosis. Open arthrotomy was performed 22 months after UKA, revealing only hematoma with no obvious hemorrhage or loosening of the prosthesis. No history of trauma or use of anticoagulant medications was present. After a symptom-free period of 8 months, another 2 episodes of hemarthrosis occurred over the course of 8 months. A second open arthrotomy was performed. Hyperplastic synovium with fibrin and hemosiderin pigmentation was observed, again without hemorrhage or loosening. There were no pathological features of pigmented villonodular synovitis. Synovectomy was performed, and no hemarthrosis has recurred for 2 years.     

Medial unicompartmental arthroplasty after failed high tibial osteotomy

Satisfactory selection criteria are essential for the successful outcome of unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UCA). We report the frequency of revision of the Oxford medial unicompartmental arthroplasty in knees previously treated for anteromedial osteoarthritis by high tibial osteotomy (HTO). The combined results from three sources were used to allow statistical analysis of this uncommon subgroup. In the combined series of 631 knees (507 patients) which had medial unicompartmental replacement, 613 were primary procedures and 18 were for a failed HTO. The mean follow-up times of the two groups were similar (5.8 years and 5.4 years, respectively). At review, 19 (3.1%) of the primary procedures and five (27.8%) of those undertaken for a failed HTO had been revised to total knee replacement. Survival analysis revealed the ten-year cumulative survivals to be 96% and 66%, respectively. The log-rank comparison of these survivals revealed a highly significant difference (p < 0.0001). We recommend that the Oxford UCA should not be used in knees which have previously undergone an HTO.     

Revision of a failed patellofemoral arthroplasty to a total knee arthroplasty

BACKGROUND: Patellofemoral arthroplasty is an effective treatment for isolated arthritis of the anterior compartment of the knee, but it is unclear whether it compromises the results of total knee arthroplasty if revision is necessary. The purpose of this study was to review the results of total knee arthroplasty after a prior patellofemoral arthroplasty. METHODS: Twelve failed patellofemoral replacements in ten patients were revised to total knee arthroplasties for isolated progressive tibiofemoral arthritis (six knees), isolated patellofemoral catching and maltracking (three), or a combination of both (three). Revisions were performed at a mean of four years after the patellofemoral arthroplasty. A posterior stabilized implant was used in each knee, without a need for stems, augments, or structural bone graft. Patients were assessed by clinical and radiographic follow-up, including Knee Society clinical and functional scores. Baseline preoperative Knee Society scores were obtained at the time of evaluation of the failed patellofemoral arthroplasty. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of 3.1 years, the mean Knee Society clinical and functional scores had increased from 57 points preoperatively to 96 points and from 51 points preoperatively to 91 points, respectively. At the most recent follow-up, there was no clinical or radiographic evidence of patellofemoral maltracking, loosening, or wear. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of our experience in this relatively small series with short-term follow-up, the results of total knee arthroplasty do not seem to be compromised after revision of the failed patellofemoral replacement.     

Revision surgery for patellar dislocation after primary total knee arthroplasty

This study evaluated risk factors for patellar dislocation after primary total knee arthroplasty and determined functional outcomes in patients following revision. Thirty-nine knees in 39 patients averaging 68 years (range, 27-91 years) at the time of revision were evaluated at a mean of 3.2 years (range, 2-7 years). Mean Knee Society and Function scores significantly improved from 34 and 35 to 77 and 54, respectively. Patellar dislocation most commonly resulted from errors in technique such as soft-tissue imbalance and malaligned components that led to poor tracking of the patella. Patellar tracking only improved after soft-tissue realignment in combination with revision of malaligned or loose components. Although revision significantly improved active knee extension and Knee Scores, two thirds of the patients had residual disabilities and pain.     

Revision of 33 unicompartmental knee prostheses using total knee arthroplasty: strategy and results

The purpose of this study was twofold: to evaluate the radiological and clinical results of 33 total knee arthroplasties (TKA) implanted between January 1993 and March 2005, to replace failed medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA), and to develop a strategy to deal with bone defects in the tibial plateau. Failure was due to: tibial loosening (15 cases), femoral loosening (five cases), femoral and tibial loosening (two cases), polyethylene wear (five cases), lateral compartment osteoarthritis (two cases), patellofemoral osteoarthritis (two cases), laxity and PE dislocation (one case), and sepsis in one case. In 12 cases the tibial bone defect was filled with a metallic wedge, in seven we used an allograft (femoral head), and in one we used both. We report the results of 27 cases (five patients died and one was lost to follow-up). The mean follow-up was 73+/-41.7 months (range, 8-153) and the global IKS score was 166.72+/-21.3 points (range, 128-200). X-rays of the eight allografts showed osteointegration in all cases and no radiolucency was noted.     

Revision surgery after failed subacromial decompression

The purpose of this study was to assess the results of revision subacromial decompression and identify clinical and psychological factors that influence its outcome. Thirty-five patients with intact rotator cuffs who underwent surgery for recurrent stage II impingement were studied at a mean follow-up time of 43 months post-surgery. Twenty-seven patients were satisfied with their surgery. The UCLA Scoring System rated 18 of 35 with good/excellent results and 17 of 35 poor/fair results, 22 patients had worker’s compensation injuries, which correlated with poor outcome (P=0.0067). Patients with concomitant brachial plexopathy and/or compressive neuropathies were associated with unsatisfactory results (P=0.02).

---

Résumé  Le but de cette étude est d’étudier les résultats de revision d’acromioplastie chez les patients qui n’ont pas de déchirure de la coiffe des rotateurs, de plus nous avons essayé d’identifier les facteurs cliniques et psychologiques qui influencent ces résultats. 35 patients ont participéà l’étude. La moyenne de suivi était de 43 mois. Il y avait 18/35 de bons ou excellent résultats et 17/35 de résultats médiocres d’après la classification UCLA. Vingt-et-deux patients ont subi leur blessure au travail ce qui était associéà un mauvais resultat (P=0.0067). La présence de lésions de la coiffe associéà des blessures neurologiques ou syndromes de compression neurologique ont demontré de mauvais resultats (P=0.02).

---

---

Accepted: 26 February 2000     

Revision of unicompartmental arthroplasty of the knee: Clinical and technical considerations

In 73 unicompartmental arthroplasties of the knee that were revised, the major causes of failure were progression of arthritis and implant failure. The interval between the primary and revision averaged 56 months. Eighty-eight percent were revised to a variety of total condylar prostheses. Bone loss was classified by defect at the end of preparation. In 31 patients, there were none; in 17, the defect was in either the femur or the tibia; and in 25, there were defects in both the femur and the tibia. Forty-seven of these defects were small and contained, presenting little problem. Twenty defects were either large, contained, or peripheral, requiring reconstruction. Fifteen knees were lost as a result of death (but there had been satisfactory knee function); 2 were lost to follow-up evaluation, and 3 have required further revision. Seventy-nine percent of the surviving knees had excellent or good knee function at an average follow-up period of 56 months.     

Revision surgery after trapeziometacarpal arthroplasty

Background  

The majority of patients with trapeziometacarpal joint (TMJ) arthritis can be successfully treated with some form of arthroplasty. Residual pain therefore is rather uncommon, but particularly difficult to treat. The aims of this study were to determine the number of patients in need of additional surgery; to identify the most common causes for persistent pain and to establish a treatment algorithm.