Revision knee arthroplasty with rotating hinge systems in patients with gross ligament instability
- 233 Downloads
The clinical and radiographic outcomes after revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for instability with two rotating hinge knee prostheses were compared.
Fifty-one patients revised for TKA instability were prospectively randomized to either the Link Endo-Model (N = 26) or the EnduRo (N = 25). Clinical and radiographic outcome scores were compared pre-operatively and at 12 months’ follow-up. Failure mechanisms were recorded.
Age, BMI, operation, and tourniquet-time did not differ significantly between groups. Radiographic evaluation demonstrated correct implant alignment. The Endo-Model was implanted with a higher slope (p = 0.0001) and the mechanical lower extremity axis was straighter (p = 0.0323). Except for the patient function Knee Society Score and the Physical Health Component Summary Score in the EnduRo group, all clinical scores (range of motion/knee function Knee Society Score/Oxford Knee Score/Visual Analog Scale/Mental Health Component Summary Score) improved significantly for both prosthesis designs during the follow-up period. The Visual Analog Scale and Mental Health Component Summary score were significantly better (p = 0.045 and p = 0.0148) in the Endo-Model group at the 12 months’ follow-up. In the EnduRo group 2 patients (8%) and in the Endo-Model group 1 patient (3.8%) had to be revised for infection.
Both prosthetic designs provide significant improvement in pain and function scores after TKA revision for gross instability. We found slight advantages in favor of the Endo-Model; however, no design yielded superior results throughout the study.
KeywordsTotal knee arthroplasty Link Endo-Model EnduRo Revision Instability Rotating hinge
Compliance with ethical standards
For this study protocol, we received institutional review board approval (approval no. 195/10) from the University. It was conducted according to the principles of the World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 8.Ochs BG, Schreiner AJ, de Zwart PM, Stockle U, Gonser CE (2016) Computer-assisted navigation is beneficial both in primary and revision surgery with modular rotating-hinge knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24(1):64–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-014-3316-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Saragaglia D, Cognault J, Refaie R, Rubens-Duval B, Mader R, Rouchy RC, Plaweski S, Pailhe R (2015) Computer navigation for revision of unicompartmental knee replacements to total knee replacements: the results of a case-control study of forty six knees comparing computer navigated and conventional surgery. Int Orthop 39(9):1779–1784. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2838-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Osmon DR, Berbari E, Berendt AR, Lew D, Zimmerli W, Steckelberg JM, Rao N, Hanssen A, Wilson WR, Infectious Diseases Society of America (2013) Executive summary: diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection: clinical practice guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 56(1):1–10CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 25.Jiang Y, Sanchez-Santos MT, Judge AD, Murray DW, Arden NK (2017) Predictors of patient-reported pain and functional outcomes over 10 years after primary total knee arthroplasty: a prospective cohort study. J Arthroplast 32(1):92–100 e102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arth.2016.06.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar