Severe metallosis-related osteolysis as a cause of failure after total knee replacement.
Arthroplasty
Metal on metal
Metallosis
Polyethylene wear
Revision total knee replacement
Journal
Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma
ISSN: 0976-5662
Titre abrégé: J Clin Orthop Trauma
Pays: India
ID NLM: 101559469
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
12
01
2019
revised:
15
04
2019
accepted:
17
04
2019
entrez:
1
2
2020
pubmed:
1
2
2020
medline:
1
2
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Metallosis is a syndrome of metal-induced synovitis caused by friction between two metal surfaces. In contrast to the hip joint after resurfacing arthroplasty or metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip replacement, metallosis of the knee is extremely rare. We describe 4 patients who underwent revision total knee replacement because of disabling pain and implant loosening after a mean time of 21 (range: 13-30) years of knee replacement surgery. They were all females with a mean age of 79 (range: 75-82) years. Septic loosening was excluded through microbiological examination and synovial fluid analysis. Direct metal-on-metal contact at the tibiofemoral interface was confirmed intraoperatively in all cases. All knees showed severe metallosis with advanced osteolysis and pseudotumor formation. In one knee there was a complete fracture of the tibial tray. All patients had a one-stage revision surgery with implant removal, profound synovectomy and implantation of a constrained modular revision knee system. Long modular stems with offset adapters, wedges and/or blocks were used in all cases. Metallosis-associated osteolysis should be suspected in cases with radiologically evident polyethylene wear after knee replacement. Recognizing that revision arthroplasty is very technically demanding in such cases, surgeons should have a back-up with modular revision components and a ready access to reconstructive options at this revision setting.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Metallosis is a syndrome of metal-induced synovitis caused by friction between two metal surfaces. In contrast to the hip joint after resurfacing arthroplasty or metal-on-metal (MoM) total hip replacement, metallosis of the knee is extremely rare.
MATERIALS
METHODS
We describe 4 patients who underwent revision total knee replacement because of disabling pain and implant loosening after a mean time of 21 (range: 13-30) years of knee replacement surgery. They were all females with a mean age of 79 (range: 75-82) years. Septic loosening was excluded through microbiological examination and synovial fluid analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Direct metal-on-metal contact at the tibiofemoral interface was confirmed intraoperatively in all cases. All knees showed severe metallosis with advanced osteolysis and pseudotumor formation. In one knee there was a complete fracture of the tibial tray. All patients had a one-stage revision surgery with implant removal, profound synovectomy and implantation of a constrained modular revision knee system. Long modular stems with offset adapters, wedges and/or blocks were used in all cases.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Metallosis-associated osteolysis should be suspected in cases with radiologically evident polyethylene wear after knee replacement. Recognizing that revision arthroplasty is very technically demanding in such cases, surgeons should have a back-up with modular revision components and a ready access to reconstructive options at this revision setting.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32002007
doi: 10.1016/j.jcot.2019.04.010
pii: S0976-5662(19)30050-5
pmc: PMC6985032
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
165-170Informations de copyright
© 2019 Delhi Orthopedic Association. All rights reserved.
Références
Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 1997 Sep;26(9):598-600
pubmed: 9316720
J Arthroplasty. 2005 Aug;20(5):568-73
pubmed: 16309990
Mod Rheumatol. 2007;17(6):507-10
pubmed: 18084705
BMJ Case Rep. 2014 Mar 18;2014:null
pubmed: 24642179
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Jun;88(6):1183-91
pubmed: 16757749
Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol. 2011 Jul-Sep;24(3):711-9
pubmed: 21978703
J Arthroplasty. 2007 Sep;22(6):909-15
pubmed: 17826284
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1991 Aug;73(7):1002-7
pubmed: 1874762
Skeletal Radiol. 2008 Jan;37(1):59-62
pubmed: 17876581
Acta Chir Orthop Traumatol Cech. 2003;70(1):47-50
pubmed: 12764951
J Med Case Rep. 2009 Nov 29;3:9304
pubmed: 20062793
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009 Aug;91(8):1025-30
pubmed: 19651828
J Hand Surg Am. 2006 Dec;31(10):1615-8
pubmed: 17145381
J Arthroplasty. 1998 Jan;13(1):116-9
pubmed: 9493550
Int Orthop. 2019 Jan;43(1):85-96
pubmed: 30269183
Int J Surg Case Rep. 2017;30:9-12
pubmed: 27898357
Acta Orthop. 2009 Dec;80(6):653-9
pubmed: 19995315
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011 Feb;93(2):205-9
pubmed: 21282760
J Biomed Mater Res A. 2007 Jun 15;81(4):1005-10
pubmed: 17265437
J Radiol Case Rep. 2010;4(9):7-17
pubmed: 22470753
Acta Orthop Belg. 2008 Dec;74(6):753-60
pubmed: 19205321
Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2007 Apr;15(4):361-4
pubmed: 17028866
Orthopedics. 1997 May;20(5):466-70
pubmed: 9172254
Pathol Eur. 1970;5(3):307-14
pubmed: 5477026
J Orthop Case Rep. 2015 Apr-Jun;5(2):62-5
pubmed: 27299048
J Orthop Case Rep. 2014 Jan-Mar;4(1):21-3
pubmed: 27298939
J Arthroplasty. 1996 Dec;11(8):923-30
pubmed: 8986570
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998 Jun;170(6):1556
pubmed: 9609173
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008 Apr;90(4):502-5
pubmed: 18378928