The Journal of arthroplasty · 2018
Septic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: Treatment of Metaphyseal Bone Defects Using Metaphyseal Sleeves.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Klim Sebastian M, Amerstorfer Florian, Bernhardt Gerwin A, Sadoghi Patrick, Gruber Gerald, Radl Roman, Leithner Andreas, Glehr Mathias
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Bone loss is a severe problem in septic revision total knee arthroplasty (RTKA). The use of porous coated metaphyseal sleeves is a promising treatment option for metaphyseal bone defects. The currently published midterm results remain limited and no study has been focused exclusively on septic cases. Our aim was to determine the implant survivorship (with special focus on osseointegration) and the clinical and radiological midterm outcome of metaphyseal sleeve fixation in septic RTKA surgery (minimum follow-up of 2 years).
METHODS: We performed a clinical and radiographic examination of 56 patients with a history of prosthetic joint infection who underwent 2-stage RTKA with the use of porous coated metaphyseal sleeves. These examinations included evaluation of the American Knee Society Score, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, the Short Form (SF-36) Health survey as well as radiographic measurement to determine whether successful osseointegration had been achieved.
RESULTS: Nine patients (16%) had to be re-revised at the time of follow-up (mean, 5.3 years; range, 2-11.2), all due to reinfection. We did not encounter any cases of aseptic loosening. The mean range of motion (92°, SD ± 21°), subjective satisfaction score (7, SD ± 2), American Knee Society Score (76, SD ± 19), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (70, SD ± 20), SF-36 mental component summary (55, SD ± 14), and SF-36 physical component summary (35, SD ± 9) have shown satisfying results.
CONCLUSION: Metaphyseal sleeves have shown very promising midterm results regarding clinical scores, osseointegration, and aseptic loosening. Our results are the first analyzing exclusively septic indications and indicate that they are a reliable fixation option in all bone defect types in septic RTKA patients.
METHODS: We performed a clinical and radiographic examination of 56 patients with a history of prosthetic joint infection who underwent 2-stage RTKA with the use of porous coated metaphyseal sleeves. These examinations included evaluation of the American Knee Society Score, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, the Short Form (SF-36) Health survey as well as radiographic measurement to determine whether successful osseointegration had been achieved.
RESULTS: Nine patients (16%) had to be re-revised at the time of follow-up (mean, 5.3 years; range, 2-11.2), all due to reinfection. We did not encounter any cases of aseptic loosening. The mean range of motion (92°, SD ± 21°), subjective satisfaction score (7, SD ± 2), American Knee Society Score (76, SD ± 19), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (70, SD ± 20), SF-36 mental component summary (55, SD ± 14), and SF-36 physical component summary (35, SD ± 9) have shown satisfying results.
CONCLUSION: Metaphyseal sleeves have shown very promising midterm results regarding clinical scores, osseointegration, and aseptic loosening. Our results are the first analyzing exclusively septic indications and indicate that they are a reliable fixation option in all bone defect types in septic RTKA patients.