Comparative evaluation of bone defect substitution in revision knee arthroplasty

Abstract

Objective: to evaluate the immediate and long-term outcomes of revision knee replacement using porous metaphysical sleeves and cones. Material and methods. The research involved 134 patients who underwent revision arthroplasty of their knee joints. The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of metaphyseal fixator: sleeves (Group 1) — 97 patients, and cones (Group 2) — 37 patients. The evaluation of the surgical outcomes was carried out at discharge from the hospital (in 7-12 days) as well as 6, 12, and 24 months after their surgeries. The survival rate of the implants was analyzed by the Kaplan — Meyer method. A revision with total replacement of the implant or its components was considered to be a critical event. Results. The analysis of the survival rate of the implants using various metaphysical fixators showed that the groups with metaphyseal sleeves and cones do not differ statistically (Log Rank criterion (Mantel — Cox) p=0.108). Conclusion. The medium term follow-up revealed no difference in clinical, functional or radiological outcomes of revision knee arthroplasty using porous cones or metaphyseal sleeves in 2A, 2B, and 3 (by Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute classification) bone loss replacements.