Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients with Retention of Prior Hardware Material: What is the Outcome? | ||
| The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery | ||
| مقاله 5، دوره 6، شماره 1، فروردین 2018، صفحه 23-26 اصل مقاله (382.02 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: RESEARCH PAPER | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/abjs.2017.19759.1513 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Jorge Manrique1؛ Mohammad Rasouli2؛ Camilo Restrepo1؛ Mitchell G. Maltenfort1؛ Jonathan Beri1؛ Jeffrey Oliver1؛ Raj Patel1؛ Javad Parvizi* 1 | ||
| 1Rothman Institute of Orthopaedics, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA | ||
| 2Rothman Institute of Orthopaedics, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA Sina Trauma and Surgery Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Background: There is an information gap in literature regarding postoperative outcome of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with hardware in-situ from the previous knee surgery. The present study aims to evaluate impact of retained hardware on short-term outcome of TKA patients. Methods: Perioperative radiographs of patients who had undergone TKA between 2007 and 2012 were reviewed and patients in whom partial or complete retention of hardware was evident after TKA were included. These patients were matched in 1 to 2 ratio based on age (+/- 2 years), gender, surgeon and year of surgery to a group of patients that underwent primary TKA without hardware in the affected knee. The average follow up of these patients was 43.45 (range 12-155.2) months. Complication rates were compared between the two groups using statistical tests that took into account the matched data structure. Results: We included a total of 55 cases and 110 controls. The incidence of complications was higher, although not all statistically significant, in the case group. Only mechanical complications were significantly different in the cases group (5.5% versus 0%, P=0.01). Time to event analysis using the mixed-effects Cox model didn’t show a statistically significant difference between two groups for various outcomes. Conclusion: Presence of retained hardware around the knee may predispose the patient to a higher rate of complications particularly mechanical complications of the implant after TKA. Further studies are required to investigate impact of retained hardware around the knee in patients undergoing TKA. | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Arthroplasty؛ Implant-related infection؛ Internal fixation of fracture؛ knee؛ Perioperative complication؛ Replacement | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1. Brown TD, Johnston RC, Saltzman CL, Marsh JL, Buckwalter JA. Posttraumatic osteoarthritis: a first estimate of incidence, prevalence, and burden of disease. J Orthop Trauma. 2006; 20(10):739-44. 2. Weiss NG, Parvizi J, Hanssen AD, Trousdale RT, Lewallen DG. Total knee arthroplasty in posttraumatic arthrosis of the knee. J Arthroplasty. 2003; 18 (3 Suppl 1):23–6. 3. Kim J, Nelson CL, Lotke PA. Stiffness after total knee arthroplasty. Prevalence of the complication and outcomes of revision. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004; 86- A(7):1479–84. 4. Iorio R, Della Valle CJ, Healy WL, Berend KR, Cushner FD, Dalury DF, et al. Stratification of standardized TKA complications and adverse events: a brief communication. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014; 472(1):194–205. 5. Horan TC, Gaynes RP, Martone WJ, Jarvis WR, Emori TG. CDC definitions of nosocomial surgical site infections, 1992: a modification of CDC definitions of surgical wound infections. Am J Infect Control. 1992; 20(5):271–4. 6. Lonner JH, Pedlow FX, Siliski JM. Total knee arthroplasty for post-traumatic arthrosis. J Arthroplasty. 1999; 14(8):969–75. 7. Roffi RP, Merritt PO. Total knee replacement after fractures about the knee. Orthop Rev 1990; 19(7):614–20. 8. Saleh KJ, Sherman P, Katkin P, Windsor R, Haas S, Laskin R, et al. Total knee arthroplasty after open reduction and internal fixation of fractures of the tibial plateau: a minimum five-year follow-up study. J References Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83-A(8):1144–8. 9. Parratte S, Bonnevialle P, Pietu G, Saragaglia D, Cherrier B, Lafosse JM. Primary total knee arthroplasty in the management of epiphyseal fracture around the knee. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2011; 97(6 Suppl):S87-94. 10. Papadopoulos EC, Parvizi J, Lai CH, Lewallen DG. Total knee arthroplasty following prior distal femoral fracture. Knee. 2002; 9(4):267–74. 11. Pulido L, Ghanem E, Joshi A, Purtill JJ, Parvizi J. Periprosthetic joint infection: the incidence, timing, and predisposing factors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008; 466(7):1710–5. 12. Klatte TO, Schneider MM, Citak M, Oloughlin P, Gebauer M, Rueger M, et al. Infection rates in patients undergoing primary knee arthroplasty with preexisting orthopaedic fixation-devices. Knee 2013; 20(3):177–80. 13. Suzuki G, Saito S, Ishii T, Motojima S, Tokuhashi Y, Ryu J. Previous fracture surgery is a major risk factor of infection after total knee arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2011; 19(12):2040–4. 14. Board TN, Karva A, Board RE, Gambhir AK, Porter ML. The prophylaxis and treatment of heterotopic ossification following lower limb arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007; 89(4):434–40. 15. Freeman TA, Parvizi J, Della Valle CJ, Steinbeck MJ. Reactive oxygen and nitrogen species induce protein and DNA modifications driving arthrofibrosis following total knee arthroplasty. Fibrogenesis Tissue Repair. 2009; 2(1):5-16. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 909 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 735 |
||