Unusual Failure of Modular TKA Prosthesis and Screw Migration following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

Mulpur, Praharsha; Jayakumar, Tarun; Masilamani, A. B. Suhas; Hippalgaonkar, Kushal; Reddy, A V Gurava

doi:10.13107/jocr.2022.v12.i12.3450

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many studies on revision TAA report similar constraints, particularly within TAA, 13 but also within other forms of TJA. 4,7,11,16,22,30,33 We used only INBONE II for revision TAA, and although the INBONE II system was not designed specifically for revision TAA, it has been widely used for revision cases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revision Total Ankle Arthroplasty Using the INBONE II System

Wu,

Anastasio,

Lee

et al. 2024

Foot Ankle Int.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The utilization of total ankle arthroplasty (TAA) for managing severe ankle osteoarthritis has become increasingly common, leading to a higher occurrence of revision TAA procedures because of failure of primary TAA. This study aims to examine the clinical results associated with revision TAA using the INBONE II system. Given the growing number of TAA revision procedures and a focus on motion-preserving salvage options, we evaluated our early experience with revision TAA. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on a group of 60 presumed noninfected patients who underwent revision TAA with the INBONE II system. Detailed information was collected on patient demographics, implant characteristics, concurrent procedures, and complications. The implant survival was estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: The study revealed high complication rates but generally fair clinical outcomes for revision TAA using the INBONE II system. Complications were observed in 22 patients (36.7%), including persistent pain (n = 6), nerve injury/impingement (n = 5), infection (n = 3), fracture (n = 3), implant failure (n = 3), impaired wound healing (n = 2), and osteolysis (n = 3). The 3-year survivorship rate from reoperation was 92.0% (82.7%-100.0%) whereas the 3-year survivorship rate from major complications was 90.4% (80.8%-100.0%). Conclusion: We report high complication rates but generally fair clinical results for revision TAA utilizing the INBONE II system. Level of Evidence: Level IV, retrospective case series study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revision Total Ankle Arthroplasty Using the INBONE II System

Wu,

Anastasio,

Lee

et al. 2024

Foot Ankle Int.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The design of the implant used and especially the material used is of great significance. Besides junctional failure of modular implants [76], another possible complication of cementless implants is hardware failure, notably the tibial component. Scully et al [77] and Fokter et al [78] investigated one catastrophic complication involving complete failure of uncemented porous tantalum tibia components in primary knee arthroplasty.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cemented versus Cementless Stem Fixation in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Darwich,

Jovanovic,

Dally

et al. 2023

Antibiotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of revision knee arthroplasties (rTKA) is growing significantly as is the use of intramedullary stems for optimized stability. The choice of the most appropriate stem fixation method is still controversial. The purpose of this meta-analysis is to compare cemented versus cementless stem fixation in rTKA. Publications with patients undergoing rTKA with a follow-up > 24 months were systemically reviewed. Extracted parameters included total revision and failure rates for any reason, incidence of aseptic loosening, periprosthetic infection, and radiolucent lines, as well as the clinical outcome. A statistical regression analysis was then performed on all extracted clinical and radiological outcome data. A total of 35 publications met the inclusion criteria and were included and analyzed. Overall, 14/35 publications compared cementless versus cemented stem fixation, whereas 21/35 publications investigated only one stem fixation method. There were no significant differences in revision (p = 0.2613) or failure rates (p = 0.3559) and no differences in the incidence of aseptic loosening (p = 0.3999) or periprosthetic infection (p = 0.1010). The incidence of radiolucent lines was significantly higher in patients with cemented stems (26.2% versus 18.6%, p < 0.0001). However, no differences in clinical outcomes were observed. No superiority of a specific stem fixation method in rTKA was found. Rates of revision or failure for any reason as well as incidence of aseptic loosening and periprosthetic infection in cemented versus cementless stem fixation showed no significant difference. A higher incidence of radiolucent lines was observed in cemented stem fixation; however, no effect was observed on the clinical outcome.

show abstract

Unusual Failure of Modular TKA Prosthesis and Screw Migration following Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty

Cited by 2 publications

References 15 publications

Revision Total Ankle Arthroplasty Using the INBONE II System

Revision Total Ankle Arthroplasty Using the INBONE II System

Cemented versus Cementless Stem Fixation in Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About