Hybrid Cementation Technique Using the New Modular System for Aseptic Knee Arthroplasty Revision Surgery.
Hybrid cementation
Knee revision
Vanguard 360
Journal
The archives of bone and joint surgery
ISSN: 2345-4644
Titre abrégé: Arch Bone Jt Surg
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101636743
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2022
May 2022
Historique:
received:
03
10
2020
accepted:
26
08
2021
entrez:
27
6
2022
pubmed:
28
6
2022
medline:
28
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of aseptic revision of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using the Vanguard 360 Revision Knee System with the hybrid cementation technique. Between January 2014 and October 2016, nineteen aseptic revision TKAs were carried out with the Vanguard 360 Revision Knee System (Zimmer-Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA) performed by two different surgeons. The patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically at one, six, and twelve months after surgery and yearly thereafter. Functional outcomes were assessed according to the range of motion (ROM), knee society knee score (KSKS) and knee society function score (KSFS). Radiological evaluations were performed using the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), weight-bearing anteroposterior view, latero-lateral view, Rosenberg x-rays of the knee and skyline patellar x-rays. A triple-phase technetium bone scan was performed on all the patients complaining of knee pain after one year from surgery. Clinical and radiological results including KSKS, KSFS, ROM and HKA angle improved after revision of TKA with a statistically significant difference ( Patients who underwent revision of TKA using the Vanguard 360 with the hybrid cementation technique had a failure rate of 36.8% at a mean time of 29 months due to aseptic loosening. Further studies are required to analyse the role of cementation in detail to prevent this complication.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
To evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of aseptic revision of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) using the Vanguard 360 Revision Knee System with the hybrid cementation technique.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
Between January 2014 and October 2016, nineteen aseptic revision TKAs were carried out with the Vanguard 360 Revision Knee System (Zimmer-Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA) performed by two different surgeons. The patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically at one, six, and twelve months after surgery and yearly thereafter. Functional outcomes were assessed according to the range of motion (ROM), knee society knee score (KSKS) and knee society function score (KSFS). Radiological evaluations were performed using the hip-knee-ankle angle (HKA), weight-bearing anteroposterior view, latero-lateral view, Rosenberg x-rays of the knee and skyline patellar x-rays. A triple-phase technetium bone scan was performed on all the patients complaining of knee pain after one year from surgery.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Clinical and radiological results including KSKS, KSFS, ROM and HKA angle improved after revision of TKA with a statistically significant difference (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
Patients who underwent revision of TKA using the Vanguard 360 with the hybrid cementation technique had a failure rate of 36.8% at a mean time of 29 months due to aseptic loosening. Further studies are required to analyse the role of cementation in detail to prevent this complication.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35755795
doi: 10.22038/ABJS.2021.52467.2593
pmc: PMC9194714
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
432-438Références
J Exp Orthop. 2018 Oct 19;5(1):46
pubmed: 30341552
J Arthroplasty. 2017 Sep;32(9):2792-2798
pubmed: 28502536
Instr Course Lect. 1986;35:290-6
pubmed: 3819416
J Arthroplasty. 2013 Apr;28(4):570-4
pubmed: 23183277
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Mar;469(3):839-46
pubmed: 20878290
Chin Med J (Engl). 2016 Jun 5;129(11):1334-9
pubmed: 27231172
Orthopedics. 2019 Nov 1;42(6):323-329
pubmed: 31505013
Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2012 May;27(4):390-7
pubmed: 22079691
J Arthroplasty. 2015 Oct;30(10):1804-9
pubmed: 25953383
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989 Nov;(248):13-4
pubmed: 2805470
J Arthroplasty. 2003 Aug;18(5):592-9
pubmed: 12934211
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982 Oct;(170):123-30
pubmed: 7127937
J Knee Surg. 2018 Feb;31(2):197-201
pubmed: 28561156
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1993 Jan;(286):168-73
pubmed: 8425340
Knee Surg Relat Res. 2017 Dec 1;29(4):282-287
pubmed: 29172389
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1994 Dec;(309):156-62
pubmed: 7994955
Clin Orthop Surg. 2010 Jun;2(2):112-20
pubmed: 20514269
Orthopedics. 2016 Sep 1;39(5):e833-7
pubmed: 27172366
Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2021 Nov;9(6):633-640
pubmed: 35106327
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002 Nov;(404):158-68
pubmed: 12439256
J Arthroplasty. 2013 Apr;28(4):566-9
pubmed: 23146582
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988 Jan;(226):86-92
pubmed: 3335110
J Knee Surg. 2021 Nov;34(13):1396-1401
pubmed: 34507367
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016 Jul 26;17:313
pubmed: 27455842
Biomed Tech (Berl). 2006 Jul;51(2):95-102
pubmed: 16915772
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2015 Jun;101(4):449-54
pubmed: 25952710
J Arthroplasty. 2009 Sep;24(6 Suppl):48-53
pubmed: 19553076
Surg Technol Int. 2021 May 20;38:460-466
pubmed: 33878194
Acta Ortop Bras. 2016 Nov-Dec;24(6):304-308
pubmed: 28924355
SICOT J. 2021;7:45
pubmed: 34515632
Knee. 2019 Jan;26(1):222-227
pubmed: 30415974
J Arthroplasty. 2015 Dec;30(12):2311-4
pubmed: 26122112
Knee. 2017 Mar;24(2):179-190
pubmed: 27916580
Acta Orthop. 2019 Oct;90(5):467-472
pubmed: 31210080
Orthop Surg. 2019 Feb;11(1):15-24
pubmed: 30809942
J Arthroplasty. 1998 Sep;13(6):681-6
pubmed: 9741446