Orthopedics, 2013;36(10):e1299–e1306
Cite this articlePublished Online:September 20, 2013https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20130920-24Cited by:15
Abstract
The goal of this study was to analyze the clinical and radiographic results and the survival rate of a series of rotating-hinge implants used for revision total knee arthroplasties in mild and severe instability.
Between December 1991 and June 2004, fifty-three revision total knee arthroplasties were performed using the Endo-Modell (Waldemar LINK GmbH and Co, Hamburg, Germany) rotating-hinge prosthesis; 7 (13.2%) patients underwent partial revision of a previous Endo-Modell. All patients were evaluated preoperatively, 3 and 6 months postoperatively, and annually thereafter using the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) knee score and the Knee Society Roentgenographic Evaluation System (KS-RES). Mean follow-up was 155.2±40.1 months (range, 78–240 months), with 32 patients examined at the final follow-up. All HSS knee scores increased from preoperatively to last follow-up. No statistically significance differences were found in the HSS knee scores between septic and aseptic revisions and between total or partial revisions. Progressive radiolucent lines were detected in 8 (25%) patients. Implant failure occurred in 11 (20.7%) patients; the cumulative survival of the implants was 80.4% at 150 months for the final 32 patients.
The authors recommend use of this implant for revision total knee arthroplasty, especially in patients with severe instability and bone loss.
- 1.Kurtz SM, Ong KL, Schmier J, Zhao K, Mowat F, Lau E. Primary and revision arthroplasty surgery caseloads in the United States from 1990 to 2004. J Arthroplasty. 2009; 24(2):195–203.
10.1016/j.arth.2007.11.015 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 2.Kurtz S, Mowat F, Ong K, Chan N, Lau E, Halpern M. Prevalence of primary and revision total hip and knee arthroplasty in the United States from 1990 through 2002. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005; 87(7):1487–1497.
10.2106/JBJS.D.02441 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 3.Riaz S, Umar M. Revision knee arthroplasty. J Pak Med Assoc. 2006; 56(10):456–460. > MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 4.Pun SY, Ries MD. Effect of gender and preoperative diagnosis on results of revision total knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008; 466(11):2701–2705.
10.1007/s11999-008-0451-9 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 5.Gustke KA. Preoperative planning for revision total knee arthroplasty:avoiding chaos. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(suppl 2):37–40.
10.1016/j.arth.2005.03.026 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 6.Gonzalez MH, Mekhail AO. The failed total knee arthroplasty: evaluation and etiology. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2004; 12(6):436–446. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 7.Haas BD, Dennis DA. Implant selection in revision total knee arthroplasty. In: , eds. The Adult Knee. Vol 2. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincot Williams & Wilkins; 2003:1447–1453. > Google Scholar
- 8.Guenoun B, Latargez L, Freslon M, Defossez G, Salas N, Gayet LE. Complications following rotating hinge Endo-Modell (Link) knee arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2009; 95(7):529–536.
10.1016/j.otsr.2009.07.013 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 9.Springer BD, Hanssen AD, Sim FH, Lewallen DG. The kinematic rotating hinge prosthesis for complex knee arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001; (392):283–291.
10.1097/00003086-200111000-00037 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 10.Pour AE, Parvizi J, Slenker N, Purtill JJ, Sharkey PF. Rotating hinged total knee replacement: use with caution. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007; 89(8):1735–1741.
10.2106/JBJS.F.00893 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 11.Ewald FC. The Knee Society total knee arthroplasty roentgenographic evaluation and scoring system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989; (248):9–12. > MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 12.Vyskocil P, Gerber C, Bamert P. Radiolucent lines and component stability in knee arthroplasty. Standard versus fluoroscopically-assisted radiographs. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1999; 81(1):24–26.
10.1302/0301-620X.81B1.9213 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 13.Aebli N, Krebs J, Schwenke D, Hii T, Wehrli U. Progression of radiolucent lines in cementless twin-bearing low-contact-stress knee prostheses. A retrospective study. J Arthroplasty. 2004; 19(6):783–789.
10.1016/j.arth.2004.02.030 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 14.Gratz S, Behr TM, Reize P, Pfestroff A, Kampen WU, Höffken H. (99m)Tc-Fab’ fragments (sulesomab) for imaging septically loosened total knee arthroplasty. J Int Med Res. 2009; 37(1):54–67.
10.1177/147323000903700107 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 15.Engh GA, Ammeen DJ. Bone loss with revision total knee arthroplasty: defect classification and alternatives for reconstruction. Instr Course Lect. 1999; 48:167–175. > MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 16.Toms AD, Barker RL, McClelland D, Chua L, Spencer-Jones R, Kuiper JH. Repair of defects and containment in revision total knee replacement: a comparative biomechanical analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009; 91(2):271–277. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 17.Stulberg DS. Bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2003; 18(suppl 1):48–50.
10.1054/arth.2003.50106 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 18.Dennis DA. The structural allograft composite in revision total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2002; 17(suppl 1):90–93.
10.1054/arth.2002.32456 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 19.van Loon CJ, de Waal Malefijt MC, Verdonschot N, Buma P, van der Aa AJ, Huiskes R. Morsellized bone grafting compensates for femoral bone loss in revision total knee arthroplasty. An experimental study. Biomaterials. 1999; 20(1):85–89.
10.1016/S0142-9612(98)00155-0 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 20.Haddad FS, Masri BA, Campbell D, McGraw RW, Beauchamp CP, Duncan CP. The PROSTALAC functional spacer in two-stage revision for infected knee replacements. J Boint Joint Surg Br. 2000; 82(6):807–812.
10.1302/0301-620X.82B6.10486 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 22.Cuckler JM. The infected total knee: management options. J Arthroplasty. 2005; 20(4) (suppl 2):33–36.
10.1016/j.arth.2005.03.004 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 23.Marx RG. Knee rating scales. Arthroscopy. 2003; 19(10):1103–1108.
10.1016/j.arthro.2003.10.029 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 24.Insall JN, Dorr LD, Scott RD, Scott WN. Rationale of the Knee Society clinical rating system. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989; (248):13–14. > MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 25.McGrory BJ, Shinar AA, Freiberg AA, Harris WH. Enhancement of the value of hip questionnaires by telephone follow-up evaluation. J Arthroplasty. 1997; 12(3):340–343.
10.1016/S0883-5403(97)90033-4 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 26.Scuderi GR. Revision total knee arthroplasty: how much constraint is enough?Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001; (392):300–305.
10.1097/00003086-200111000-00039 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 27.Pradhan NR, Bale L, Kay P, Porter ML. Salvage revision total knee replacement using the Endo-Model rotating hinge prosthesis. Knee. 2004; 11(6):469–473.
10.1016/j.knee.2004.03.001 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 28.Joshi N, Navarro-Quilis A. Is there a place for rotating-hinge arthroplasty in knee revision surgery for aseptic loosening?J Arthroplasty. 2008; 23:1204–1211.
10.1016/j.arth.2007.10.016 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 29.Petrou G, Petrou H, Tilkeridis C, Medium-term results with a primary cemented rotating-hinge total knee replacement. A 7- to 15-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004; 86(6):813–817.
10.1302/0301-620X.86B6.14708 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 30.Kim YH, Kim JS. Revision total knee arthroplasty with use of a constrained condylar knee prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91(6):1440–1447.
10.2106/JBJS.H.00425 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 31.Inglis AE, Walker PS. Revision of failed knee replacements using fixed-axis hinges. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991; 73(5):757–761. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 32.Bistolfi A, Turell MB, Lee YL, Bellare A. Tensile and tribological properties of high-crystallinity radiation crosslinked UHMWPE. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2009; 90(1):137–144. > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar
- 33.Simis KS, Bistolfi A, Bellare A, Pruitt LA. The combined effects of crosslinking and high crystallinity on the microstructural and mechanical properties of ultra high molecular weight polyethylene. Biomaterials. 2006; 27(9):1688–1694.
10.1016/j.biomaterials.2005.09.033 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 34.Banche G, Bracco P, Bistolfi A, Vitamin e blended UHMWPE may have the potential to reduce bacterial adhesive ability. J Orthop Res. 2011; 29(11):1662–1667.
10.1002/jor.21432 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 35.Hernández-Vaquero D, Sandoval-García MA. Hinged total knee arthroplasty in the presence of ligamentous deficiency. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010; 468(5):1248–1253.
10.1007/s11999-009-1226-7 > Crossref MedlineGoogle Scholar - 36.Bistolfi A, Massazza G, Rosso F, Crova M. Rotating-hinge total knee for revision total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2012; 35(3):325–330. > LinkGoogle Scholar
