High Rates of Aseptic Loosening in Modern Posterior-stabilized Femoral Components From a Single Manufacturer.
Exactech
Femoral aseptic loosening
Optetrak logic
Revision total knee arthroplasty
Truliant
Journal
Arthroplasty today
ISSN: 2352-3441
Titre abrégé: Arthroplast Today
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101681808
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2023
Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
02
09
2022
revised:
05
02
2023
accepted:
08
03
2023
medline:
4
9
2023
pubmed:
4
9
2023
entrez:
4
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in the United States. There are concerns and reports of early aseptic loosening due to debonding at the cement-implant interface in a specific posterior-stabilized femoral design. This study describes failure at the cement-implant interface with 2 femoral implant designs produced by a single manufacturer. This is a review of failed primary total knee arthroplasties performed with Optetrak Logic and Truliant posterior-stabilized femoral components between 2010 and 2020. Cases with revision surgery performed for femoral component loosening were reviewed. Seventeen of 896 knees were revised for femoral component loosening. The mean time from index arthroplasty to revision was 73 months. Patients presented with knee pain and recurrent aseptic effusions. More than half of patients had no evidence of component loosening on plain radiographs. Bone scans were positive in 77% of patients with loosening. Femoral components were easily disimpacted from the cement mantle at the time of revision surgery. Patients were treated with femoral only revision or femoral and tibial revision. Two complications occurred in this series. Providers should maintain vigilance in the surveillance of patients with these implants. Clinicians should have a low threshold for additional diagnostic testing if these patients develop pain and/or recurrent effusions. Isolated femoral or complete revision both seem to be acceptable treatment strategies for this failure mechanism.
Sections du résumé
Background
UNASSIGNED
Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most commonly performed surgical procedures in the United States. There are concerns and reports of early aseptic loosening due to debonding at the cement-implant interface in a specific posterior-stabilized femoral design. This study describes failure at the cement-implant interface with 2 femoral implant designs produced by a single manufacturer.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
This is a review of failed primary total knee arthroplasties performed with Optetrak Logic and Truliant posterior-stabilized femoral components between 2010 and 2020. Cases with revision surgery performed for femoral component loosening were reviewed.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Seventeen of 896 knees were revised for femoral component loosening. The mean time from index arthroplasty to revision was 73 months. Patients presented with knee pain and recurrent aseptic effusions. More than half of patients had no evidence of component loosening on plain radiographs. Bone scans were positive in 77% of patients with loosening. Femoral components were easily disimpacted from the cement mantle at the time of revision surgery. Patients were treated with femoral only revision or femoral and tibial revision. Two complications occurred in this series.
Conclusions
UNASSIGNED
Providers should maintain vigilance in the surveillance of patients with these implants. Clinicians should have a low threshold for additional diagnostic testing if these patients develop pain and/or recurrent effusions. Isolated femoral or complete revision both seem to be acceptable treatment strategies for this failure mechanism.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37663071
doi: 10.1016/j.artd.2023.101132
pii: S2352-3441(23)00037-7
pmc: PMC10472140
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
101132Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors.
Références
J Arthroplasty. 2017 Sep;32(9):2663-2668
pubmed: 28456561
J Arthroplasty. 2020 Jun;35(6S):S182-S189
pubmed: 31521443
J Arthroplasty. 2021 Jun;36(6):1987-1994
pubmed: 33610408
J Rheumatol. 2019 Sep;46(9):1134-1140
pubmed: 30988126
J Arthroplasty. 2016 Nov;31(11):2579-2582
pubmed: 27155996
J Arthroplasty. 2021 Jun;36(6):2116-2120
pubmed: 33518360
J Knee Surg. 2022 Dec;35(14):1595-1603
pubmed: 33930899
J Arthroplasty. 2022 Oct;37(10):2025-2034
pubmed: 35525417
J Arthroplasty. 2018 Nov;33(11):3460-3464
pubmed: 30057268
Biomed Tech (Berl). 2005 May;50(5):143-7
pubmed: 15966619
J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2019 Oct 15;27(20):743-751
pubmed: 31008874
J Arthroplasty. 2021 Jun;36(6):1995-1999
pubmed: 33707124