Loading…
Can Tantalum Cones Provide Fixation in Complex Revision Knee Arthroplasty?
Background The best method for managing large bone defects during revision knee arthroplasty is unknown. Metaphyseal fixation using porous tantalum cones has been proposed for severe bone loss. Whether this approach achieves osseointegration with low complication rates is unclear. Questions/purposes...
Saved in:
Published in: | Clinical orthopaedics and related research 2012-01, Vol.470 (1), p.199-204 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3bf46d43e1f546e5e45187aa97d94f0e26b8f331232036434397ed05ae0605c43 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3bf46d43e1f546e5e45187aa97d94f0e26b8f331232036434397ed05ae0605c43 |
container_end_page | 204 |
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 199 |
container_title | Clinical orthopaedics and related research |
container_volume | 470 |
creator | Lachiewicz, Paul F. Bolognesi, Michael P. Henderson, Robert A. Soileau, Elizabeth S. Vail, Thomas Parker |
description | Background
The best method for managing large bone defects during revision knee arthroplasty is unknown. Metaphyseal fixation using porous tantalum cones has been proposed for severe bone loss. Whether this approach achieves osseointegration with low complication rates is unclear.
Questions/purposes
We therefore asked: (1) What is the risk of infection in revision knee arthroplasty with large bone defects reconstructed with porous tantalum cones? (2) What is the rate of osseointegration with these cones? (3) What is the rate of loosening and reoperation? (4) Is knee function restored?
Methods
We retrospectively reviewed 27 patients who had 33 tantalum cones (nine femoral, 24 tibial) implanted during 27 revision knee arthroplasties. There were 14 women and 13 men with a mean age of 64.6 years. Preoperative diagnosis was reimplantation for infection in 13 knees, aseptic loosening in 10, and wear-osteolysis in four. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically using the score systems of the Knee Society and followed for a minimum of 2 years (mean, 3.3 years; range, 2–5.7 years).
Results
One knee with two cones was removed for infection. All but one cone showed osseointegration. One knee was revised for femoral cone and component loosening. There was one reoperation for femoral shaft fracture and one for superficial dehiscence. The mean Knee Society pain score improved from 40 points preoperatively to 79 points postoperatively. The mean function score improved from 19 points to 47 points.
Conclusions
Our observations suggest metaphyseal fixation with tantalum cones can be achieved. Longer-term followup is required to determine whether the fixation is durable.
Level of Evidence
Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11999-011-1888-9 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3237984</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>911945971</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3bf46d43e1f546e5e45187aa97d94f0e26b8f331232036434397ed05ae0605c43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU1P3DAQhi3UChbaH8AFRb1wSvH4I4kvILSCthSpVQVSb5Y3mYBRYi92slr-PV7t8ilxssbvM6898xKyD_Q7UFoeRQClVE4BcqiqKldbZAKSVTkAZ5_IhFKqcsXg_w7ZjfEulVxItk12GIhCcqYm5GJqXHZl3GC6sc-m3mHM_ga_sA1m53ZpButdZl1S-nmHy-wfLmxc3f12iNlpGG6Dn3cmDg8nX8jn1nQRv27OPXJ9fnY1_Zlf_vnxa3p6mdeiqIacz1pRNIIjtFIUKFFIqEpjVNko0VJkxaxqOQfGGeWF4IKrEhsqDdKCylrwPXK89p2Psx6bGt0QTKfnwfYmPGhvrH6rOHurb_xCc8ZLVa0MDjcGwd-PGAfd21hj1xmHfoxapbUKqUpI5Ld35J0fg0vTJUhSCbxkCYI1VAcfY8D2-StA9Sonvc5Jp5z0KietUs_B6xmeO56CSQBbAzFJ7gbDy8sfuz4CnzKdOQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>915051372</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Can Tantalum Cones Provide Fixation in Complex Revision Knee Arthroplasty?</title><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Lachiewicz, Paul F. ; Bolognesi, Michael P. ; Henderson, Robert A. ; Soileau, Elizabeth S. ; Vail, Thomas Parker</creator><creatorcontrib>Lachiewicz, Paul F. ; Bolognesi, Michael P. ; Henderson, Robert A. ; Soileau, Elizabeth S. ; Vail, Thomas Parker</creatorcontrib><description>Background
The best method for managing large bone defects during revision knee arthroplasty is unknown. Metaphyseal fixation using porous tantalum cones has been proposed for severe bone loss. Whether this approach achieves osseointegration with low complication rates is unclear.
Questions/purposes
We therefore asked: (1) What is the risk of infection in revision knee arthroplasty with large bone defects reconstructed with porous tantalum cones? (2) What is the rate of osseointegration with these cones? (3) What is the rate of loosening and reoperation? (4) Is knee function restored?
Methods
We retrospectively reviewed 27 patients who had 33 tantalum cones (nine femoral, 24 tibial) implanted during 27 revision knee arthroplasties. There were 14 women and 13 men with a mean age of 64.6 years. Preoperative diagnosis was reimplantation for infection in 13 knees, aseptic loosening in 10, and wear-osteolysis in four. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically using the score systems of the Knee Society and followed for a minimum of 2 years (mean, 3.3 years; range, 2–5.7 years).
Results
One knee with two cones was removed for infection. All but one cone showed osseointegration. One knee was revised for femoral cone and component loosening. There was one reoperation for femoral shaft fracture and one for superficial dehiscence. The mean Knee Society pain score improved from 40 points preoperatively to 79 points postoperatively. The mean function score improved from 19 points to 47 points.
Conclusions
Our observations suggest metaphyseal fixation with tantalum cones can be achieved. Longer-term followup is required to determine whether the fixation is durable.
Level of Evidence
Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0009-921X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1528-1132</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11999-011-1888-9</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21465329</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods ; Cohort Studies ; Conservative Orthopedics ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Joint Instability - prevention & control ; Knee ; Knee Prosthesis ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Middle Aged ; Orthopedics ; Osseointegration - drug effects ; Pain Measurement ; Preoperative Care - methods ; Prosthesis Failure ; Range of Motion, Articular - physiology ; Recovery of Function ; Reoperation - methods ; Retrospective Studies ; Sports Medicine ; Surgery ; Surgical Orthopedics ; Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society ; Tantalum - therapeutic use ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2012-01, Vol.470 (1), p.199-204</ispartof><rights>The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2011</rights><rights>The Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons® 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3bf46d43e1f546e5e45187aa97d94f0e26b8f331232036434397ed05ae0605c43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3bf46d43e1f546e5e45187aa97d94f0e26b8f331232036434397ed05ae0605c43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3237984/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3237984/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27903,27904,53769,53771</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21465329$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lachiewicz, Paul F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bolognesi, Michael P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henderson, Robert A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soileau, Elizabeth S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vail, Thomas Parker</creatorcontrib><title>Can Tantalum Cones Provide Fixation in Complex Revision Knee Arthroplasty?</title><title>Clinical orthopaedics and related research</title><addtitle>Clin Orthop Relat Res</addtitle><addtitle>Clin Orthop Relat Res</addtitle><description>Background
The best method for managing large bone defects during revision knee arthroplasty is unknown. Metaphyseal fixation using porous tantalum cones has been proposed for severe bone loss. Whether this approach achieves osseointegration with low complication rates is unclear.
Questions/purposes
We therefore asked: (1) What is the risk of infection in revision knee arthroplasty with large bone defects reconstructed with porous tantalum cones? (2) What is the rate of osseointegration with these cones? (3) What is the rate of loosening and reoperation? (4) Is knee function restored?
Methods
We retrospectively reviewed 27 patients who had 33 tantalum cones (nine femoral, 24 tibial) implanted during 27 revision knee arthroplasties. There were 14 women and 13 men with a mean age of 64.6 years. Preoperative diagnosis was reimplantation for infection in 13 knees, aseptic loosening in 10, and wear-osteolysis in four. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically using the score systems of the Knee Society and followed for a minimum of 2 years (mean, 3.3 years; range, 2–5.7 years).
Results
One knee with two cones was removed for infection. All but one cone showed osseointegration. One knee was revised for femoral cone and component loosening. There was one reoperation for femoral shaft fracture and one for superficial dehiscence. The mean Knee Society pain score improved from 40 points preoperatively to 79 points postoperatively. The mean function score improved from 19 points to 47 points.
Conclusions
Our observations suggest metaphyseal fixation with tantalum cones can be achieved. Longer-term followup is required to determine whether the fixation is durable.
Level of Evidence
Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods</subject><subject>Cohort Studies</subject><subject>Conservative Orthopedics</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Joint Instability - prevention & control</subject><subject>Knee</subject><subject>Knee Prosthesis</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Osseointegration - drug effects</subject><subject>Pain Measurement</subject><subject>Preoperative Care - methods</subject><subject>Prosthesis Failure</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</subject><subject>Recovery of Function</subject><subject>Reoperation - methods</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Sports Medicine</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Surgical Orthopedics</subject><subject>Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society</subject><subject>Tantalum - therapeutic use</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0009-921X</issn><issn>1528-1132</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kU1P3DAQhi3UChbaH8AFRb1wSvH4I4kvILSCthSpVQVSb5Y3mYBRYi92slr-PV7t8ilxssbvM6898xKyD_Q7UFoeRQClVE4BcqiqKldbZAKSVTkAZ5_IhFKqcsXg_w7ZjfEulVxItk12GIhCcqYm5GJqXHZl3GC6sc-m3mHM_ga_sA1m53ZpButdZl1S-nmHy-wfLmxc3f12iNlpGG6Dn3cmDg8nX8jn1nQRv27OPXJ9fnY1_Zlf_vnxa3p6mdeiqIacz1pRNIIjtFIUKFFIqEpjVNko0VJkxaxqOQfGGeWF4IKrEhsqDdKCylrwPXK89p2Psx6bGt0QTKfnwfYmPGhvrH6rOHurb_xCc8ZLVa0MDjcGwd-PGAfd21hj1xmHfoxapbUKqUpI5Ld35J0fg0vTJUhSCbxkCYI1VAcfY8D2-StA9Sonvc5Jp5z0KietUs_B6xmeO56CSQBbAzFJ7gbDy8sfuz4CnzKdOQ</recordid><startdate>20120101</startdate><enddate>20120101</enddate><creator>Lachiewicz, Paul F.</creator><creator>Bolognesi, Michael P.</creator><creator>Henderson, Robert A.</creator><creator>Soileau, Elizabeth S.</creator><creator>Vail, Thomas Parker</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Ovid Technologies</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120101</creationdate><title>Can Tantalum Cones Provide Fixation in Complex Revision Knee Arthroplasty?</title><author>Lachiewicz, Paul F. ; Bolognesi, Michael P. ; Henderson, Robert A. ; Soileau, Elizabeth S. ; Vail, Thomas Parker</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3bf46d43e1f546e5e45187aa97d94f0e26b8f331232036434397ed05ae0605c43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods</topic><topic>Cohort Studies</topic><topic>Conservative Orthopedics</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Joint Instability - prevention & control</topic><topic>Knee</topic><topic>Knee Prosthesis</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Osseointegration - drug effects</topic><topic>Pain Measurement</topic><topic>Preoperative Care - methods</topic><topic>Prosthesis Failure</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular - physiology</topic><topic>Recovery of Function</topic><topic>Reoperation - methods</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Sports Medicine</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Surgical Orthopedics</topic><topic>Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society</topic><topic>Tantalum - therapeutic use</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lachiewicz, Paul F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bolognesi, Michael P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Henderson, Robert A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soileau, Elizabeth S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vail, Thomas Parker</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Clinical orthopaedics and related research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lachiewicz, Paul F.</au><au>Bolognesi, Michael P.</au><au>Henderson, Robert A.</au><au>Soileau, Elizabeth S.</au><au>Vail, Thomas Parker</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Can Tantalum Cones Provide Fixation in Complex Revision Knee Arthroplasty?</atitle><jtitle>Clinical orthopaedics and related research</jtitle><stitle>Clin Orthop Relat Res</stitle><addtitle>Clin Orthop Relat Res</addtitle><date>2012-01-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>470</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>199</spage><epage>204</epage><pages>199-204</pages><issn>0009-921X</issn><eissn>1528-1132</eissn><abstract>Background
The best method for managing large bone defects during revision knee arthroplasty is unknown. Metaphyseal fixation using porous tantalum cones has been proposed for severe bone loss. Whether this approach achieves osseointegration with low complication rates is unclear.
Questions/purposes
We therefore asked: (1) What is the risk of infection in revision knee arthroplasty with large bone defects reconstructed with porous tantalum cones? (2) What is the rate of osseointegration with these cones? (3) What is the rate of loosening and reoperation? (4) Is knee function restored?
Methods
We retrospectively reviewed 27 patients who had 33 tantalum cones (nine femoral, 24 tibial) implanted during 27 revision knee arthroplasties. There were 14 women and 13 men with a mean age of 64.6 years. Preoperative diagnosis was reimplantation for infection in 13 knees, aseptic loosening in 10, and wear-osteolysis in four. Patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically using the score systems of the Knee Society and followed for a minimum of 2 years (mean, 3.3 years; range, 2–5.7 years).
Results
One knee with two cones was removed for infection. All but one cone showed osseointegration. One knee was revised for femoral cone and component loosening. There was one reoperation for femoral shaft fracture and one for superficial dehiscence. The mean Knee Society pain score improved from 40 points preoperatively to 79 points postoperatively. The mean function score improved from 19 points to 47 points.
Conclusions
Our observations suggest metaphyseal fixation with tantalum cones can be achieved. Longer-term followup is required to determine whether the fixation is durable.
Level of Evidence
Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><pmid>21465329</pmid><doi>10.1007/s11999-011-1888-9</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0009-921X |
ispartof | Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2012-01, Vol.470 (1), p.199-204 |
issn | 0009-921X 1528-1132 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3237984 |
source | PubMed Central |
subjects | Aged Aged, 80 and over Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - adverse effects Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee - methods Cohort Studies Conservative Orthopedics Female Follow-Up Studies Humans Joint Instability - prevention & control Knee Knee Prosthesis Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Middle Aged Orthopedics Osseointegration - drug effects Pain Measurement Preoperative Care - methods Prosthesis Failure Range of Motion, Articular - physiology Recovery of Function Reoperation - methods Retrospective Studies Sports Medicine Surgery Surgical Orthopedics Symposium: Papers Presented at the Annual Meetings of The Knee Society Tantalum - therapeutic use Treatment Outcome |
title | Can Tantalum Cones Provide Fixation in Complex Revision Knee Arthroplasty? |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-23T17%3A05%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Can%20Tantalum%20Cones%20Provide%20Fixation%20in%20Complex%20Revision%20Knee%20Arthroplasty?&rft.jtitle=Clinical%20orthopaedics%20and%20related%20research&rft.au=Lachiewicz,%20Paul%20F.&rft.date=2012-01-01&rft.volume=470&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=199&rft.epage=204&rft.pages=199-204&rft.issn=0009-921X&rft.eissn=1528-1132&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11999-011-1888-9&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E911945971%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c468t-3bf46d43e1f546e5e45187aa97d94f0e26b8f331232036434397ed05ae0605c43%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=915051372&rft_id=info:pmid/21465329&rfr_iscdi=true |