Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Partial revision knee arthroplasty with retention of well-fixed components

  • General Review
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Retention of well-fixed and well-aligned component is a technically easier option compared to complete revision in a noninfected revision knee arthroplasty. However, it is very often difficult to decide the right treatment in a particular clinical scenario. In this study, we reviewed the available literature with regard to the role and indications of partial revision, advantages and disadvantages of partial revision over full revision and formulate some treatment algorithm based on the available literature. Our review shows that isolate polyethylene insert exchange is more reliable in a well-aligned and well-fixed knees with early evidence of polyethylene synovitis in a knee that was well functioning for at least 10 years. Polyethylene insert exchange is not reliable in the setting of instability or stiffness. Isolated revision of metal-backed patella is possible in elderly low demand patient with well-fixed femoral component and accessible osteolytic lesion. Outcome can be improved by careful patient selection and performing a synovectomy and polyethylene liner exchange at the time of revision. Isolated tibial component revision is a technically difficult procedure and often associated with poor results and hence should be reserved for well-fixed stemmed femoral component with loose tibia in a poor surgical candidate. Isolated femoral component revision is mainly indicated for femoral component malrotation and is technically easy to perform than isolated tibial component revision.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Engh GA, Koralewicz LM, Pereles TR (2000) Clinical results of modular polyethylene insert exchange with retention of total knee arthroplasty components. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82(4):516–523

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Babis GC, Trousdale RT, Morrey BF (2002) The effectiveness of isolated tibial insert exchange in revision total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A(1):64–68

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bert JM et al (1998) The incidence of modular tibial polyethylene insert exchange in total knee arthroplasty when polyethylene failure occurs. J Arthroplasty 13(6):609–614

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Jensen CL et al (2006) Outcome of isolated tibial polyethylene insert exchange after uncemented total knee arthroplasty: 27 patients followed for 8–71 months. Acta Orthop 77(6):917–920

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Griffin WL et al (2007) Modular insert exchange in knee arthroplasty for treatment of wear and osteolysis. Clin Orthop Relat Res 464:132–137

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Whiteside LA, Katerberg B (2006) Revision of the polyethylene component for wear in TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 452:193–199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Pagnano MW et al. (1998) Flexion instability after primary posterior cruciate retaining total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res (356):39–46

  8. Babis GC et al (2001) Poor outcomes of isolated tibial insert exchange and arthrolysis for the management of stiffness following total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83-A(10):1534–1536

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Arredondo J et al (1997) Midterm results in metal-backed patella revisions for metallosis. Am J Orthop 26(9):598–600

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Berry DJ, Rand JA (1993) Isolated patellar component revision of total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res (286):110–115

  11. Leopold SS et al (2003) Isolated revision of the patellar component in total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A(1):41–47

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Peters JD, Engh GA, Corpe RS (1991) The metal-backed patella. An invitation for failure? J Arthroplasty 6(3):221–228

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Chan WH et al (1998) Isolated metal-backed patellar component revision following total knee arthroplasty. Singapore Med J 39(7):303–305

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kobori M et al (2000) Revision of failed metal-backed patellar component of Miller/Galante-I total knee prosthesis. J Orthop Sci 5(5):436–438

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Koh JS et al (2004) Isolated patellar revisions for failed metal-backed components: 2- to 9-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 19(7):880–886

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lewallen DG, Rand JA (1995) Failure of metal backed patellar components after total knee arthroplasty. Knee 2(1):37–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Burke WV, Ammeen DJ, Engh GA (2005) Isolated revision of failed metal-backed patellar components: outcome with minimum 4-year follow-up. J Arthroplasty 20(8):998–1001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fehring TK et al (2005) Outcome comparison of partial and full component revision TKA. Clin Orthop Relat Res 440:131–134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Siddique MS et al (2003) Role of abrasion of the femoral component in revision knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85(3):393–398

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Mackay DC, Siddique MS (2003) The results of revision knee arthroplasty with and without retention of secure cemented femoral components. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85(4):517–520

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Berend ME et al (2008) Clinical results of isolated tibial component revisions with femoral component retention. J Arthroplasty 23(1):61–64

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedics, West Hospital 9th Floor, North Wing, Virginia Commonwealth University Health System, Richmond, VA, 23298, USA

    Senthil Nathan Sambandam, Issada Thongtrangan & Vartharaj Mounaswamy

  2. Wales Deanery, Health Park, Cardiff, UK

    Arif Gul

Authors
  1. Senthil Nathan Sambandam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arif Gul
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Issada Thongtrangan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Vartharaj Mounaswamy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Senthil Nathan Sambandam.

Additional information

None of the authors received support in any form from any source.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sambandam, S.N., Gul, A., Thongtrangan, I. et al. Partial revision knee arthroplasty with retention of well-fixed components. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 19, 151–154 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-008-0398-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-008-0398-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation