Early Results of a Modular Revision System in Total Knee Arthroplasty
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15438/rr.v3i4.44Abstract
Background: The number of revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) procedures is projected to rise dramatically over the next fifteen years. These procedures are technically more demanding than routine primary TKA. Modular component options can assist the surgeon in addressing complex reconstructions in TKA, providing customization to remedy bony deficits, deformity, malalignment and instability. We review the early clinical results of a modular revision system that offers full interchangeability enhanced with a wide array of options for augmentation, offset, and constraint as well as modular stems.
Materials and Methods: A query of our practice’s arthroplasty registry revealed a consecutive series of 100 patients (101 knees) who signed an IRB-approved general research consent allowing retrospective review, and underwent total knee arthroplasty performed with the modular revision system between May 2011 and May 2012. Reconstruction constructs and components, demographic variables, pre and post-operative clinical variables, failure modes, and survivorship were analyzed.
Results: At an average follow-up of 1 year (range, 0.1 to 2.2 years) there has been one aseptic failure for instability. One patient required incision and debridement of a non-healing wound. Three patients, all status-post reimplantation, failed secondary to recurrent infection, with one treated single-staged and the others undergoing another 2-staged exchange. Average ROM improved from 96.4° preoperatively to 104.8° at most recent evaluation. Average Knee Society clinical scores (0 to 100 possible) improved from 45.5 to 78.0, and function scores (0 to 100 possible) improved from 41.3 to 48.3. There have been no patient deaths during the follow-up period. Postoperative radiographs were available for review for 97 knees. Satisfactory position, fixation and alignment were observed in 92 (95%). Heterotopic ossification was observed at the lateral tibial aspect in 1 knee with CR lipped bearing. A stable radiolucency was observed around the tibial component of one knee. Minor radiolucencies were observed in femoral zones I and II and tibial zone 1 on lateral view of one knee, in tibial zones III and IV on AP view in one knee, and in tibial zone IV on AP view in one knee.
Conclusion: The early results of this modular TKA revision system are promising for use in complex TKA, with only one aseptic failure observed. There has been substantial improvements in ROM and function in this cohort.
Key words: Arthroplasty, Knee, Revision
References
Ritter MA, Berend ME, Meding JB, Keating EM, Faris PM, Crites BM. Long-term followup of anatomic graduated components posterior cruciate-retaining total knee replacement. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001;388:51-57.
Ranawat CS, Flynn WF Jr, Saddler S, Hansraj KK, Maynard MJ. Long-term results of total condylar knee arthroplasty: A 15-year survivorship study. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1993;286:94-102.
Kurtz S, Ong K, Lau E, Mowat F, Halpern M. Projections of primary and revision hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 2005 to 2030. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2007;89(4):780-785.
Fehring TK, Odum S, Griffin WL, Mason JB, Nadaud M. Early failures in total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001;392:315-8.
Sharkey PF, Hozack WJ, Rothman RH, Shastri S, Jacoby SM. Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;404:7-13.
Saleh KJ, Santos ER, Ghomrawi HM, Parvizi J, Mulhall KJ. Socioeconomic issues and demographics of total knee arthroplasty revision. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;446:15-21.
Burns AWR, Bourne RB, Chesworth BM, MacDonald SJ, Rorabeck CH. Cost effectiveness of revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;446:29-33.
Ong K, Mowat F, Chan N, Lau E, Halpern M, Kurtz S. Economic burden of revision hip and knee arthroplasty in Medicare enrollees. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;446:22-8.
Greidanus NV, Peterson RC, Masri BA, Garbuz DS. Quality of life outcomes in revision versus primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26:615-20.
Donaldson WF 3rd, Sculco TP, Insall JN, Ranawat CS. Total condylar III knee prosthesis. Long-term follow-up study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;(226):21-8.
Chotivichit AL, Cracchiolo A 3rd, Chow GH, Dorey F. Total knee arthroplasty using the total condylar III knee prosthesis. J Arthroplasty. 1991;6(4):341-50.
Hohl WM, Crawfurd E, Zelicof SB, Ewald FC. The Total Condylar III prosthesis in complex knee reconstruction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;(273):91-7.
Kavolus CH, Faris PM, Ritter MA, Keating EM. The total condylar III knee prosthesis in elderly patients. J Arthroplasty. 1991;6(1):39-43.
Rand JA. Revision total knee arthroplasty using the total condylar III prosthesis. J Arthroplasty. 1991;6(3):279-84.
Rosenberg AG, Verner JJ, Galante JO. Clinical results of total knee revision using the Total Condylar III prosthesis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;(273):83-90.
Stern SH, Moeckel BH, Insall JN. Total knee arthroplasty in valgus knees. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1991;(273):5-8.
Haas SB, Insall JN, Montgomery W 3rd, Windsor RE. Revision total knee arthroplasty with use of modular components with stems inserted without cement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77(11):1700-7.
Vince KG, Long W. Revision knee arthroplasty. The limits of press fit medullary fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1995;(317):172-7.
Lachiewicz PF, Falatyn SP. Clinical and radiographic results of the Total Condylar III and Constrained Condylar total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1996;11(8):916-22.
Lombardi AV Jr, Mallory TH, Eberle RW, Adams JB. Results of revision knee arthroplasty using constrained prostheses. Seminars in Arthroplasty. 1996;7(4):349-355
Font-Rodriguez DE, Scuderi GR, Insall JN. Survivorship of cemented total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;(345):79-86.
Peters CL, Hennessey R, Barden RM, Galante JO, Rosenberg AG. Revision total knee arthroplasty with a cemented posterior-stabilized or constrained condylar prosthesis: a minimum 3-year and average 5-year follow-up study. J Arthroplasty. 1997;12(8):896-903.
Hartford JM, Goodman SB, Schurman DJ, Knoblick G. Complex primary and revision total knee arthroplasty using the condylar constrained prosthesis: an average 5-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty. 1998 Jun;13(4):380-7.
Easley ME, Insall JN, Scuderi GR, Bullek DD. Primary constrained condylar knee arthroplasty for the arthritic valgus knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000;(380):58-64.
Nazarian DG, Mehta S, Booth RE Jr. A comparison of stemmed and unstemmed components in revision knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;(404):256-62.
Sheng PY, Jämsen E, Lehto MU, Konttinen YT, Pajamäki J, Halonen P. Revision total knee arthroplasty with the Total Condylar III system in inflammatory arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2005;87(9):1222-4.
Anderson JA, Baldini A, MacDonald JH, Pellicci PM, Sculco TP. Primary constrained condylar knee arthroplasty without stem extensions for the valgus knee. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;442:199-203.
Berend KR, Lombardi AV Jr, Adams JB. Total knee arthroplasty in patients with greater than 20 degrees flexion contracture. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2006;(452):83-87.
Lachiewicz PF, Soileau ES. Ten-year survival and clinical results of constrained components in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2006;21(6):803-8.
Lombardi AV Jr, Berend KR. The role of implant constraint in revision TKA: striking the balance. Orthopedics. 2006;29(9):847-9.
Sheng PY, Jämsen E, Lehto M, Pajamäki J, Halonen P, Konttinen YT. Revision total knee arthroplasty with the total condylar III system: a comparative analysis of 71 consecutive cases of osteoarthritis or inflammatory arthritis. Acta Orthop. 2006 Jun;77(3):512-8.
Anderson JA, Baldini A, MacDonald JH, Tomek I, Pellicci PM, Sculco TP. Constrained condylar knee without stem extensions for difficult primary total knee arthroplasty. J Knee Surg. 2007 Jul;20(3):195-8.
Lombardi AV Jr, Berend KR, Leith JR, Mangino GP, Adams JB. Posterior-stabilized constrained total knee arthroplasty for complex primary cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89-A(Suppl 3):90-102.
Kim YH, Kim JS. Revision total knee arthroplasty with use of a constrained condylar knee prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(6):1440-7.
Peters CL, Erickson JA, Gililland JM. Clinical and radiographic results of 184 consecutive revision total knee arthroplasties placed with modular cementless stems. J Arthroplasty. 2009;24(6 Suppl):48-53.
Hwang SC, Kong JY, Nam DC, Kim DH, Park HB, Jeong ST, Cho SH. Revision total knee arthroplasty with a cemented posterior stabilized, condylar constrained or fully constrained prosthesis: a minimum 2-year follow-up analysis. Clin Orthop Surg. 2010;2(2):112-20.
Lachiewicz PF, Soileau ES. Results of a second-generation constrained condylar prosthesis in primary total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26(8):1228-31.
Lee JK, Lee S, Kim D, Lee SM, Jang J, Seong SC, Lee MC. Revision total knee arthroplasty with varus-valgus constrained prosthesis versus posterior stabilized prosthesis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(3):620-8.
Lee JK, Kim SJ, Choi CH, Chung HK. Revision total knee arthroplasty using a constrained condylar knee prosthesis in conjunction with a posterior stabilized articular polyethylene. J Arthroplasty. 2013;28(4):566-9.
Pang HN, Yeo SJ, Chong HC, Chin PL, Chia SL, Lo NN. Joint line changes and outcomes in constrained versus unconstrained total knee arthroplasty for the type II valgus knee. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2013;21(10):2363-9.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2014 Michael Morris, MD, Keith Berend, MD, Joanne Adams, BFA, Adolph Lombardi, Jr., MD, FACS
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright and License Agreement:
Authors who publish with the Reconstructive Review agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work. Reconstructive Review follows the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial CC BY-NC. This license allows anyone to download works, build upon the material, and share them with others for non-commercial purposes as long as they credit the senior author, Reconstructive Review, and the Joint Implant Surgery & Research Foundation (JISRF). An example credit would be: "Courtesy of (senior author's name), Reconstructive Review, JISRF, Chagrin Falls, Ohio". While works can be downloaded and shared they cannot be used commercially.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
