Dataset Information

Proximal tibial replacement in revision knee arthroplasty for non-oncologic indications.

ABSTRACT: Proximal tibial metaphyseal bone loss compromises the alignment and fixation of components during revision total knee arthroplasty. In massive, segmental defects with loss of collateral ligamentous support and lack of bone to support the use of prosthetic augments or metaphyseal cones or sleeves, a hinged proximal tibial replacement or a so-called "megaprosthesis" should be available. While proximal tibial replacement is the reconstructive method of choice in the setting of bone tumor resection, applications in non-oncologic joint arthroplasty are rare and may offer an opportunity for limb salvage in dire clinical scenarios with massive proximal tibial bone loss. This report reviews 6 cases of proximal tibial replacement.

SUBMITTER: Fram B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7083738 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Proximal tibial replacement in revision knee arthroplasty for non-oncologic indications.

Fram Brianna B Smith Eric B EB Deirmengian Gregory K GK Abraham John A JA Strony John J Cross Michael B MB Ponzio Danielle Y DY

Arthroplasty today 20200128 1

Proximal tibial metaphyseal bone loss compromises the alignment and fixation of components during revision total knee arthroplasty. In massive, segmental defects with loss of collateral ligamentous support and lack of bone to support the use of prosthetic augments or metaphyseal cones or sleeves, a hinged proximal tibial replacement or a so-called "megaprosthesis" should be available. While proximal tibial replacement is the reconstructive method of choice in the setting of bone tumor resection, ...[more]

PMID: 32211471

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:During total knee arthroplasty, few rotating reference axes can be reliably used after tibial resection. We speculated that a line that passes through the lateral edge of the posterior cruciate ligament (PCL) at its tibial attachment after resection and the most prominent point of the tibial tubercle [after-tibial resection (ATR) line] will provide a good reference axis. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the association between ATR and Akagi's lines. MATERIALS AND METHODS:In this case-control simulation study, we retrospectively evaluated 38 patients with varus knee and 28 patients with valgus knee. We defined the reference cutting plane as 10 mm distal from the lateral articular surface of the tibia in varus group and as 7 mm distal from the medial articular surface in the valgus group. We measured angles between Akagi's line and the ATR line (ATR line angle) as well as between Akagi's line and 1/3 Akagi's line (1/3 Akagi's line angle), which passes through the midpoint of PCL and the medial third of the patellar tendon. We used paired t-tests to determine the significance of differences between these angles, with p < 0.05 indicating statistical significance. Intra- and interclass correlation coefficients for the reproducibility of 1/3 Akagi's line angle and ATR line angle were analyzed by two surgeons. RESULTS:We found that 1/3 Akagi's line angle was 10.2° ± 1.3° in the varus group and 10.9° ± 1.3° in the valgus group (p = 0.017). The ATR line was positioned externally compared with Akagi's line in all patients. Mean ATR line angles at 0°, 3° and 7° posterior slopes were 6.1° ± 1.9°, 5.8° ± 2.0° and 6.0° ± 1.7° in the varus group and 6.3° ± 2.3°, 6.2° ± 2.3° and 5.4° ± 2.1° in the valgus group, respectively. There were no significant differences in the ATR line angle between the varus and valgus groups. (p = 0.34-0.67) Intra- and interclass correlation coefficients for the reproducibility of 1/3 Akagi's line angle were 0.936 and 0.986 and those for the reproducibility of ATR line angle were 0.811 and 0.839. CONCLUSIONS:The ATR line was positioned between Akagi's line and 1/3 Akagi's line in all patients and was a valid option for evaluating rotational tibial alignment after tibial resection.

Project description:IntroductionRevision total knee arthoplasty often requires modular implants to treat bone defects of varying severity. In some cases, it may not be clear which module size and implant combination (e.g. sleeve and stem) should be chosen for a specific defect. When balancing implant stability and osseointegration against stress-shielding, it is important to choose an appropriate implant combination in order to match the given level of bone loss. Therefore, the necessity of stems in less extensive tibial defects and the advantage of different stems (lengths and stiffnesses) in combination with large metaphyseal sleeves on implant fixation and bone flexibility using a modular tibial revision knee system, were analyzed.Materials and methodsFour different stem combinations for a tibial revision implant (Sigma TC3, DePuy) were compared to an intact bone. Standardized implantation with n = 4 synthetic tibial bones was performed after generating an Anderson Orthopaedic Research Institute (AORI) Type T1 bone defect. Axial torques around the longitudinal stem axis and varus-valgus torques were separately applied to the implant. Micromotions of bone and implant were tracked using a digital image correlation system to calculate relative micromotions at the implant-bone-interface and bone deformation.ResultsOverall, using stems reduced the proximal micromotions of tray and sleeve compared to no stem, while reducing bone deformation proximally at the same time, indicating some potential for proximal stress-shielding compared to no stem. The potential for increased proximal stress-shield due to reduced proximal deformation appeared to be greater when using the longer stems. The location of lowest relative micromotions was also more distal when using long stems as opposed to short stems. A short stem (especially a smaller diameter short stem which still achieves diaphyseal fixation) displayed less potential for stress-shielding, but greater bone deformation distal to the tip of the stem than in the natural model.DiscussionIn the case of tibial revision implants with metaphyseal sleeves in a simple fully contained Type I defect, the absence of a stem provides for more natural bone deformation. However, adding a stem reduces overall relative micromotions, while introducing some risk of proximal stress-shielding due to increased diaphyseal fixation. Increasing stem length intensifies this effect. Short stems offered a balance between reduced micromotions and more proximal bone deformation that reduced the potential for stress-shielding when compared to long stems. A short stem with slightly smaller diameter (simulating a less stiff stem which still has diaphyseal fixation) increased the proximal bone deformation, but also tended to increase the bone deformation even further at the distal stem's tip.ConclusionIn conclusion, further investigation should be conducted on fully contained Type I defects and the addition of a stem to offer better initial stability, taking into account stem length (i.e. shorter or more flexible stems) to support metaphyseal fixation and allowing bending found in intact bone. In addition, further study into more extensive tibial defects is required to determine if the stability/micromotion trends observed in this study with stems and sleeves in Type I defects still apply in cases of extensive proximal bone loss.

Dataset Information

Proximal tibial replacement in revision knee arthroplasty for non-oncologic indications.

Publications

Proximal tibial replacement in revision knee arthroplasty for non-oncologic indications.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets