Debbi Eytan M, Alpaugh Kyle, Driscoll Daniel A, Tarity T David, Gkiatas Ioannis, Sculco Peter K
Stavros Niarchos Foundation Complex Joint Reconstruction Center, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY.
JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2021 Dec 22;11(4). doi: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.21.00009. eCollection 2021 Oct-Dec.
Stiffness following total knee arthroplasty is a challenging complication for both the patient and surgeon, with an incidence that ranges from 1% to 13%. There are several correctable mechanical causes for stiffness including malposition, malalignment, overstuffing, aseptic loosening, patella baja, and heterotopic ossification. Idiopathic stiffness is often termed arthrofibrosis and is more difficult to treat. Once patients have exhausted nonoperative options, including physical therapy and manipulation under anesthesia, revision surgery may be considered. Rotating hinge revision total knee arthroplasty has been shown to be an effective surgical treatment for severe arthrofibrosis.
First, remove all soft-tissue and osseous sources of stiffness and adequately expose the knee, then remove all previous components. Create a stable and balanced extension gap, and, conversely, a relatively loose flexion gap, which allows for a substantial increase in range of motion. Then, in order to prevent instability in flexion, a rotating hinge prosthesis is utilized, which allows for appropriate kinematic motion despite gap imbalance. Additional steps to regain flexion include medial and lateral distal femoral partial condylectomies, as well as patellar component revision.
The first line of treatment for stiffness following total knee arthroplasty is nonoperative and is mainly focused on physical therapy. Manipulation under anesthesia can also be performed within the first 12 weeks postoperatively. Surgical treatments can include arthroscopic debridement as well as open debridement with possible polyethylene liner exchange. If there is a mechanical cause for stiffness, then this should also be addressed surgically. For cases of arthrofibrosis without a clear mechanical etiology or for cases in which the above treatment has failed, complete revision of the femoral and tibial components should be considered. An alternative option to the technique proposed here is to utilize a varus-valgus constrained implant.
Revision with a hinged implant allows for a more aggressive approach to regaining motion, as compared with all other surgical alternatives. By revising all components, the surgeon is able to remove all sources of stiffness and reconstruct the knee until as much range of motion as possible is achieved. Unfortunately, even with balanced extension and flexion gaps, refractory stiffness is common. A solution for this residual stiffness is to unbalance the gaps and create a loose flexion gap. By doing so, the surgeon is advised to switch to a hinged implant to create a kinematically balanced knee. Any other revision implant, such as a varus-valgus constrained implant, would risk flexion instability.
Several studies have examined the use of revision total knee arthroplasty with a hinged implant for arthrofibrosis and have showed substantial improvements in knee range of motion. Bingham et al. showed that the rotating hinge group had a 20° improvement in range of motion (p = 0.048). Hermans et al. found a 35.8° flexion gain in the hinge group compared with a 14.2° flexion gain in the varus-valgus constrained group (p = 0.0002). van Rensch et al. found a median gain of 45° of range of motion. Patients should be aware that this procedure involving the use of a hinged implant has similar risks to other revision total knee arthroplasty procedures; specifically, there is a risk of recurrent arthrofibrosis as well as mechanical complications.
Achieve adequate exposure with a quadriceps snip.Perform a thorough synovectomy and debridement.Create a balanced extension gap with a relatively loose flexion gap.Distalize the joint line by resecting additional proximal tibia in cases of patella baja.Beware of refractory stiffness as a result of a scarred extensor mechanism.Consider revising the patellar component.Consider performing a partial condylectomy at the medial and lateral distal aspects of the femur.
TKA = total knee arthroplastyAP = anteroposteriorCT = computed tomographyMRI = magnetic resonance imagingRHK = rotating hinge kneeNSAIDs = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs.
全膝关节置换术后僵硬对患者和外科医生来说都是一个具有挑战性的并发症,发生率在1%至13%之间。僵硬有几种可纠正的机械性原因,包括位置不当、对线不良、填充过多、无菌性松动、低位髌骨和异位骨化。特发性僵硬通常称为关节纤维化,更难治疗。一旦患者用尽了非手术选择,包括物理治疗和麻醉下手法松解,可考虑进行翻修手术。旋转铰链式翻修全膝关节置换术已被证明是治疗严重关节纤维化的有效手术方法。
首先,去除所有导致僵硬的软组织和骨组织来源,充分暴露膝关节,然后移除所有先前的假体组件。创建一个稳定且平衡的伸直间隙,相反,创建一个相对宽松的屈曲间隙,这能大幅增加活动范围。然后,为防止屈曲时不稳定,使用旋转铰链式假体,尽管间隙不平衡,但仍能实现适当的运动学运动。恢复屈曲的其他步骤包括股骨远端内外侧部分髁切除术以及髌骨假体翻修。
全膝关节置换术后僵硬的一线治疗方法是非手术治疗,主要集中在物理治疗。术后12周内也可进行麻醉下手法松解。手术治疗可包括关节镜清创以及可能更换聚乙烯衬垫的开放清创。如果僵硬有机械性原因,也应进行手术处理。对于无明确机械病因的关节纤维化病例或上述治疗失败的病例,应考虑对股骨和胫骨组件进行彻底翻修。此处提出的技术的替代方案是使用内翻 - 外翻受限型植入物。
与所有其他手术替代方案相比,使用铰链式植入物进行翻修允许采取更积极的方法来恢复活动度。通过翻修所有组件,外科医生能够去除所有导致僵硬的来源并重建膝关节,直至达到尽可能大的活动范围。不幸的是,即使伸直和屈曲间隙平衡,难治性僵硬也很常见。解决这种残余僵硬的方法是使间隙不平衡并创建一个宽松的屈曲间隙。通过这样做,建议外科医生改用铰链式植入物以创建运动学上平衡的膝关节。任何其他翻修植入物,如内翻 - 外翻受限型植入物,都有屈曲不稳定的风险。
多项研究探讨了使用铰链式植入物进行全膝关节置换翻修治疗关节纤维化的情况,结果显示膝关节活动范围有显著改善。宾厄姆等人表明,旋转铰链组的活动范围改善了20°(p = 0.048)。赫尔曼斯等人发现铰链组的屈曲增加了35.8°,而内翻 - 外翻受限组的屈曲增加了14.2°(p = 0.0002)。范·伦施等人发现活动范围的中位数增加了45°。患者应意识到,这种使用铰链式植入物的手术与其他全膝关节置换翻修手术有类似风险;具体而言,有复发性关节纤维化以及机械并发症的风险。
通过股四头肌切断术获得充分暴露。进行彻底的滑膜切除术和清创术。创建一个平衡的伸直间隙和一个相对宽松的屈曲间隙。在低位髌骨病例中,通过切除更多近端胫骨使关节线向远端移位。注意因伸肌机制瘢痕化导致的难治性僵硬。考虑翻修髌骨组件。考虑在股骨远端内外侧进行部分髁切除术。
TKA = 全膝关节置换术;AP = 前后位;CT = 计算机断层扫描;MRI = 磁共振成像;RHK = 旋转铰链膝关节;NSAIDs = 非甾体抗炎药