Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

OUTCOMES OF REVISION TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY FOR STIFFNESS



Abstract

Introduction: Chronic stiffness is an uncommon complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with reports in the literature citing an incidence of 1–5%. Surgical options to manage this debilitating condition include manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) and arthrolysis; there is concern regarding revision surgery given the potential for stiffness recurrence.

Methods: Patients undergoing revision TKA for stiffness were prospectively identified. Inclusion criteria required a flexion contracture greater than 10 degrees and/or less than 70 degrees arc of motion. WOMAC and SF-36 self-report questionnaires were completed by all patients’ pre and post revision surgery.

Results: Between July 2005 and Dec 2006, 7 consecutive, aseptic, primary TKA’s were revised to address limited range of motion. Five female and 2 male patients (mean age: 57.6 years) underwent revision TKA 17.1 months (range, 7–25 months) after index TKA. All patients had attempted MUA, with additional open arthrolysis unsuccessful in 1 case. A medial parapatellar approach was performed although 3 required additional quadriceps snip for exposure. Five cases were revised with the Scorpio TS system and 2 with posterior stabilised components. Femoral augmentation was required in 2 cases and tibial in 1. Gap imbalance with increased soft tissue tension was noted intra-operatively in 5 cases with arthrofibrosis found in the remainder. At 6 months follow-up, arc of motion increased from a mean of 41.3° preoperatively to 81.4° (p=0.001) while mean flexion contracture decreased from 17.4° to 2.1° (p=0.004). Subjective improvement was also demonstrated: mean WOMAC decreased from 46.5 to 22.5 (p=0.023) and SF-36 scores increased by a mean of 35.8 points (p=0.001).

Conclusion: When conservative, implant preserving measures fail, revision surgery can be considered a viable option in addressing restricted movement following primary TKA. Aggressive physiotherapy and good patient compliance is required to minimise the recurrence of stiffness.

Correspondence should be addressed to Mr T Wilton, c/o BOA, BASK at the Royal College of Surgeons, 35–43 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PE, England.