Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 6 of 6
Results per page:
The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 5 | Pages 468 - 474
1 May 2024
d'Amato M Flevas DA Salari P Bornes TD Brenneis M Boettner F Sculco PK Baldini A

Aims

Obtaining solid implant fixation is crucial in revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA) to avoid aseptic loosening, a major reason for re-revision. This study aims to validate a novel grading system that quantifies implant fixation across three anatomical zones (epiphysis, metaphysis, diaphysis).

Methods

Based on pre-, intra-, and postoperative assessments, the novel grading system allocates a quantitative score (0, 0.5, or 1 point) for the quality of fixation achieved in each anatomical zone. The criteria used by the algorithm to assign the score include the bone quality, the size of the bone defect, and the type of fixation used. A consecutive cohort of 245 patients undergoing rTKA from 2012 to 2018 were evaluated using the current novel scoring system and followed prospectively. In addition, 100 first-time revision cases were assessed radiologically from the original cohort and graded by three observers to evaluate the intra- and inter-rater reliability of the novel radiological grading system.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 106-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1240 - 1248
1 Nov 2024
Smolle MA Keintzel M Staats K Böhler C Windhager R Koutp A Leithner A Donner S Reiner T Renkawitz T Sava M Hirschmann MT Sadoghi P

Aims

This multicentre retrospective observational study’s aims were to investigate whether there are differences in the occurrence of radiolucent lines (RLLs) following total knee arthroplasty (TKA) between the conventional Attune baseplate and its successor, the novel Attune S+, independent from other potentially influencing factors; and whether tibial baseplate design and presence of RLLs are associated with differing risk of revision.

Methods

A total of 780 patients (39% male; median age 70.7 years (IQR 62.0 to 77.2)) underwent cemented TKA using the Attune Knee System) at five centres, and with the latest radiograph available for the evaluation of RLL at between six and 36 months from surgery. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models were performed to assess associations between patient and implant-associated factors on the presence of tibial and femoral RLLs. Differences in revision risk depending on RLLs and tibial baseplate design were investigated with the log-rank test.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 105-B, Issue 11 | Pages 1168 - 1176
1 Nov 2023
Yüksel Y Koster LA Kaptein BL Nelissen RGHH den Hollander P

Aims

Conflicting clinical results are reported for the ATTUNE Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA). This randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated five-year follow-up results comparing cemented ATTUNE and PFC-Sigma cruciate retaining TKAs, analyzing component migration as measured by radiostereometric analysis (RSA), clinical outcomes, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and radiological outcomes.

Methods

A total of 74 primary TKAs were included in this single-blind RCT. RSA examinations were performed, and PROMs and clinical outcomes were collected immediate postoperatively, and at three, six, 12, 24, and 60 months’ follow-up. Radiolucent lines (RLLs) were measured in standard anteroposterior radiographs at six weeks, and 12 and 60 months postoperatively.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 103-B, Issue 5 | Pages 855 - 863
1 May 2021
Koster LA Meinardi JE Kaptein BL Van der Linden - Van der Zwaag E Nelissen RGHH

Aims

The objective of this study was to compare the two-year migration pattern and clinical outcomes of a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) with an asymmetrical tibial design (Persona PS) and a well-proven TKA with a symmetrical tibial design (NexGen LPS).

Methods

A randomized controlled radiostereometric analysis (RSA) trial was conducted including 75 cemented posterior-stabilized TKAs. Implant migration was measured with RSA. Maximum total point motion (MTPM), translations, rotations, clinical outcomes, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were assessed at one week postoperatively and at three, six, 12, and 24 months postoperatively.


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 95-B, Issue 3 | Pages 295 - 300
1 Mar 2013
Cawley DT Kelly N McGarry JP Shannon FJ

The optimum cementing technique for the tibial component in cemented primary total knee replacement (TKR) remains controversial. The technique of cementing, the volume of cement and the penetration are largely dependent on the operator, and hence large variations can occur. Clinical, experimental and computational studies have been performed, with conflicting results. Early implant migration is an indication of loosening. Aseptic loosening is the most common cause of failure in primary TKR and is the product of several factors. Sufficient penetration of cement has been shown to increase implant stability. This review discusses the relevant literature regarding all aspects of the cementing of the tibial component at primary TKR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:295–300


The Bone & Joint Journal
Vol. 96-B, Issue 11_Supple_A | Pages 93 - 95
1 Nov 2014
Gehrke T Kendoff D Haasper C

The use of hinged implants in primary total knee replacement (TKR) should be restricted to selected indications and mainly for elderly patients. Potential indications for a rotating hinge or pure hinge implant in primary TKR include: collateral ligament insufficiency, severe varus or valgus deformity (> 20°) with necessary relevant soft-tissue release, relevant bone loss including insertions of collateral ligaments, gross flexion-extension gap imbalance, ankylosis, or hyperlaxity. Although data reported in the literature are inconsistent, clinical results depend on implant design, proper technical use, and adequate indications. We present our experience with a specific implant type that we have used for over 30 years and which has given our elderly patients good mid-term results. Because revision of implants with long cemented stems can be very challenging, an effort should be made in the future to use shorter stems in modular versions of hinged implants.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B(11 Suppl A):93–5.