COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE

Midterm assessment of causes and results of revision total knee arthroplasty

Fahad Hossain, Shelain Patel, Fares Sami Haddad
Clinical Orthopaedics and related Research 2010, 468 (5): 1221-8
20058112

BACKGROUND: There is limited information regarding revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with respect to etiology, outcome, and long-term survival comparing different implant types.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We compared patient outcomes, survivorship and modes of failure and the most common etiologic factors for rerevision between different revision implant types.

METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 349 cases of revision TKA in 343 patients whose mean age was 67.8 years. Three implant types were used: posterior stabilized, condylar constrained knee, and rotating hinge. The etiologies included infection (32.7%), aseptic loosening (14.9%), and polyethylene wear (12.3%). The minimum followup was 12 months (mean, 57.7 months; range, 12-120 months).

RESULTS: The mean Knee Society scores were 89 (range, 48-94), 88.9 (range, 45-95), and 84 (range, 56-94) and the mean ranges of motion were 110.0 degrees (range, 70 degrees -125 degrees ), 106.1 degrees (range, 70 degrees -120 degrees ), and 111.7 degrees (range, 85 degrees -125 degrees ) for the posterior stabilized, condylar constrained knee, and rotating hinge types, respectively. The rotating hinge group had the highest satisfaction rates (88%). Overall 10-year survivorship was 90.6% with highest survivorship seen in the rotating hinge group. The most common causes for rerevision were infection (2.9% of our cohort), instability (1.7%), and aseptic loosening (1.4%). The mean overall time to rerevision was 69.9 months (range, 11-119 months).

CONCLUSIONS: In our experience periprosthetic infection is the most common cause of failure of both primary and revision TKA. Functional outcome and range of motion improve irrespective of revision implant type. The rotating hinge prosthesis provides patient satisfaction and survivorship similar to that of other implant types.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article

Discussion

You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read
20058112
×

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.

×

Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"