Lachiewicz Paul F, Soileau Elizabeth S
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA,
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015 Jan;473(1):185-9. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-3529-6.
The optimal stem length and method of fixation for the tibial component in revision knee arthroplasty remains controversial. The use of a cemented 30-mm stem extension provides certain advantages compared with other methods of fixation, but there are few published results.
QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore asked (1) what is the survivorship (with respect to loosening and repeat revision) of tibial component revisions when a 30-mm stem extension is used; and (2) what factors are associated with the appearance tibial radiolucent lines?
We retrospectively reviewed 54 patients (58 knees) with fixation of the revision tibial component with a 30-mm cemented stem extension; another seven patients died and 11 patients had these components but were lost to followup. These implants represented 74% of our tibial revisions during the period in question (76 of 103); general indications for using them were need for a varus-valgus constrained liner or proximal bone loss requiring a metaphyseal cone or metal augment with an intact diaphysis. The Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute tibial defect was Grade 1 in 37, 2A in 10, 2B in four, and Grade 3 in seven knees; constrained liners were used in 34% (20 of 58 knees). Patients were evaluated and followed for a mean of 5 years (range, 2-12 years).
There were no revisions for tibial component loosening. One patient had débridement and liner exchange for late infection. Radiolucent lines were seen in 25 tibial components but only eight knees had radiolucencies in four or more zones. There were significantly fewer radiolucencies in revisions that used metaphyseal cones (20 in eight knees with cones compared with 53 in 17 without, p=0.013).
The cemented 30-mm tibial stem extension provided excellent fixation in knee revision arthroplasty, even with metaphyseal defects and constrained polyethylene liners, although this series included relatively few patients with severe tibial defects. Longer followup is required for patients with radiolucent lines to confirm that the fixation will remain durable.
Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
在膝关节翻修术中,胫骨假体的最佳柄长及固定方法仍存在争议。与其他固定方法相比,使用30mm骨水泥柄延长有一定优势,但相关发表结果较少。
问题/目的:因此,我们探讨(1)使用30mm柄延长进行胫骨假体翻修时,其生存率(与松动及再次翻修相关)如何;(2)哪些因素与胫骨假体透光线的出现有关?
我们回顾性分析了54例患者(58个膝关节),这些患者的翻修胫骨假体采用了30mm骨水泥柄延长;另有7例患者死亡,11例患者有这些假体但失访。这些假体占我们在此期间胫骨翻修的74%(103例中的76例);使用它们的一般指征是需要使用内外翻限制衬垫或近端骨量丢失需要使用干骺端骨锥或金属加强件且骨干完整。安德森骨科研究所的胫骨缺损在37个膝关节中为1级,10个为2A级,4个为2B级,7个为3级;34%(58个膝关节中的20个)使用了限制衬垫。对患者进行评估并随访,平均随访时间为5年(范围2 - 12年)。
没有因胫骨假体松动而进行翻修的情况。1例患者因晚期感染进行了清创和衬垫更换。25个胫骨假体出现了透光线,但只有8个膝关节在四个或更多区域出现透光线。使用干骺端骨锥的翻修中透光线明显较少(8个有骨锥的膝关节中有20条透光线,17个没有骨锥的膝关节中有53条透光线,p = 0.013)。
30mm骨水泥胫骨柄延长在膝关节翻修术中提供了良好的固定,即使存在干骺端缺损和限制聚乙烯衬垫,尽管该系列中严重胫骨缺损的患者相对较少。对于有透光线的患者需要更长时间的随访以确认固定是否持久。
IV级,治疗性研究。有关证据水平的完整描述,请参阅作者指南。