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
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

101132

Informations 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

Auteurs

Asa Shnaekel (A)

Southern Joint Replacement Institute, TriStar Centennial Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.

J Craig Morrison (JC)

Southern Joint Replacement Institute, TriStar Centennial Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.

Classifications MeSH