Unstable Total Knee Arthroplasty Research Articles

The use of pedobarographic analysis to evaluate movement patterns in unstable total knee arthroplasty: A proof of concept study

BackgroundDefinition and clinical diagnosis of instability in TKA is challenging. Sensitive and objective biomechanical tools to aid diagnosis are currently lacking. This proof-of-concept study evaluates the use of pressure mat analyses to identify abnormal biomechanical loading patterns associated with TKA instability within an outpatient clinical setting. MethodsTwenty participants were examined: 10 patients with suspected unilateral TKA instability and 10 healthy controls. Participants underwent bilateral stance and gait tests measuring time and limb loading pressure parameters. Gait was divided into three phases: heel strike, mid-foot and toe off. Pressure recordings are expressed relative to bodyweight. Between-limb loading discrepancies were calculated in TKA patients and controls, and these differences were then compared between groups. Statistical significance was accepted at p < 0.05. ResultsTKA patients consistentlyoffloadedpressure away from the operated limb, whereas healthy controls exhibited more even limb loading throughout bilateral stance (p < 0.05). TKA patients exhibited greater discrepancy in overall step contact time between limbs (−0.09 s ± 0.16 s; p = 0.016) compared to controls (0.06 s ± 0.08 s; p = 0.04). Post-hoc tests showed significant between-group differences during midfoot (−0.04 s ± 0.07 s; p = 0.03) and toe-off (0.05 s ± 0.14 s; p = 0.013). Between-group differences in limb loading discrepancy were evident at heel strike (−9.24% ± 2.11%; p = 0.0166) and toe-off (−10.34% ± 5.51%; p = 0.0496). DiscussionPedobarographic measurements demonstrated differences in mechanical loading patterns in patients with TKA instability compared to healthy controls during functional tasks and warrants further investigation. This may prove to be a useful clinical diagnostic tool in identifying patients that would benefit from revision surgery or physical therapy.

Threshold values for stress radiographs in unstable knees after total knee arthroplasty.

The primary aim of this study was to investigate the potential benefit of stress radiographs for diagnosis of unstable total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and to identify clinically relevant cut-off values to differentiate between unstable and stable TKAs. Data of 40 patients with 49 cruciate retaining (CR) TKA who underwent stress radiographs as part of the diagnostic algorithm in a painful knee clinic were prospectively collected. Anterior and posterior stress radiographs were done in 90° and 15° flexion, varus-valgus stress radiographs in 0° and 30° knee flexion. Knee laxity was measured in mm and degrees by two independent observers using standardized landmarks. Intra- and inter-observer single measure intraclass correlations were between 0.92 to 1 and 0.89 to 1, respectively. For evaluation and investigation of the potential cut-off values, two groups of patients with and without revision surgery due to instability were compared. Radiographic measures of standardized z values according to the group without revision due to instability were used to calculate average and maximum laxity z-scores. Knees undergoing revision TKA due to instability showed significantly (p < 0.001) lower (KSS) pain/function scores (94±6.3, range 80-100; control group: 112±19.2, range 80-148) and total KSS scores when compared to the control group. The laxity values of patients with instability were significantly higher in terms of mean values (p < 0.01) when compared to the control group. The maximum laxity z-score showed the strongest difference between the groups (R2 = 0.26, p < 0.001). The following cut-off values indicating need of revision due to instability were established: in 90° (15°) flexion-anterior translation 5.2mm (22.4mm), posterior translation 16.6mm (13.2mm); varus stress in 0° (20°-30°) flexion-inlay gap 5.2mm (6.1mm) or joint angle 6.1° (6.8°); valgus stress in 0° (20°-30°) flexion-inlay gap 4.6mm (5.7mm) or joint angle 5.2° (7.1°). Standardized stress radiographs are helpful tools for diagnosis of instability after TKA. The established cut-off values help to guide decision making in this challenging group of patients. However, laxity values should not be considered as the only criteria for diagnosis of unstable TKA. IV.

Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Instability—Outcome for Different Types of Instability and Implants

BackgroundGiven the mixed outcome after revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) for instability in the literature and the relative high recurrence of instability, we were interested in the outcome of a cohort of patients operated for various types of clinical instability and with different types of implants. MethodsA total of 77 patients with unstable TKA were completely revised (19 hinged and 58 condylar implants). We classified the patients in 3 instability groups based on the literature: (1) anterior-posterior flexion instability (N = 29); (2) medial-lateral flexion instability (N = 16); and (3) multiplane instability (N = 32). Patients were evaluated up to 24 months postoperatively, concerning Knee Society clinical rating system, range of motion, visual analog scale (VAS) pain, and VAS satisfaction. ResultsFor the total group, all outcome scores improved, but substantial residual pain (VAS = 41) was reported. For type of instability, the clinical outcome was similar for all the groups. For type of implant, the hinged group had lower postoperative outcome scores but similar satisfaction scores compared with those in the condylar group. There was a considerable number of insert changes and secondary patellar resurfacing in the condylar group compared with no reoperations in the hinged group. Recurrent instability was not seen in the anterior-posterior flexion instability group and in patients who received a condylar constraint-type implant. ConclusionsWe recommend 3 options in revision TKA for instability: (1) hinged implants in cases with severe ligament instability in multiple planes or bone loss, (2) condylar implants with a posterior-stabilized insert in cases with isolated posterior cruciate ligament insufficiency, and (3) condylar implants with condylar constraints in all other cases.

Instability in total knee arthroplasty : assessment and solutions.

Instability is a common indication for early revision after both primary and revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA), accounting for up to 20% in the literature. The number of TKAs performed annually continues to climb exponentially, thus having an effective algorithm for treatment is essential. This relies on a thorough pre- and intra-operative assessment of the patient. The underlying cause of the instability must be identified initially and subsequently, the surgeon must be able to balance the flexion and extension gaps and be comfortable using a variety of constrained implants. This review describes the assessment of the unstable TKA, and the authors' preferred form of treatment for these difficult cases where the source of instability is often multifactorial.

Level of constraint in revision knee arthroplasty

Revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the setting of major bone deficiency and/or soft tissue laxity might require increasing levels of constraint to restore knee stability. However, increasing the level of constraint not always correlates with mid-to-long-term satisfactory results. Recently, modular components as tantalum cones and titanium sleeves have been introduced to the market with the goal of obtaining better fixation where bone deficiency is an issue; theoretically, satisfactory meta-diaphyseal fixation can reduce the mechanical stress at the level of the joint line, reducing the need for high levels of constraint. This article reviews the recent literature on the surgical management of the unstable TKA with the goal to propose a modern surgical algorithm for adult reconstruction surgeons.

Posterolateral Corner Reconstruction Alone Using a Fibular-Based Technique in a Patient with Persistent Unstable Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty.

Posterolateral rotatory instability is a relatively uncommon cause of unstable total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In most cases, surgical treatment requires revision TKA into a more constrained design or thicker polyethylene liner. We present a case of a patient with unstable TKA who remained unstable after increasing thickness of the polyethylene liner and undergoing more constrained TKA. After several revision surgeries, the patient was still unstable. Posterolateral corner reconstruction with a fibular-based technique using a tibialis anterior allograft was performed. At 1-year follow-up, the patient was stable and asymptomatic and with excellent function. A soft-tissue procedure only (fibular-based posterolateral corner reconstruction) can be effective at restoring posterolateral rotatory stability in a patient with persistent instability after revision TKA.

Results of Revision Surgery and Causes of Unstable Total Knee Arthroplasty

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to evaluate causes of unstable total knee arthroplasty and results of revision surgery.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 24 knees that underwent a revision arthroplasty for unstable total knee arthroplasty. The average follow-up period was 33.8 months. We classified the instability and analyzed the treatment results according to its cause. Stress radiographs, postoperative component position, and joint level were measured. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Hospital for Special Surgery (HSS) score and range of motion.ResultsCauses of instability included coronal instability with posteromedial polyethylene wear and lateral laxity in 13 knees, coronal instability with posteromedial polyethylene wear in 6 knees and coronal and sagittal instability in 3 knees including post breakage in 1 knee, global instability in 1 knee and flexion instability in 1 knee. Mean preoperative/postoperative varus and valgus angles were 5.8°/3.2° (p = 0.713) and 22.5°/5.6° (p = 0.032). Mean postoperative α, β, γ, δ angle were 5.34°, 89.65°, 2.74°, 6.77°. Mean changes of joint levels were from 14.1 mm to 13.6 mm from fibular head (p = 0.82). The mean HSS score improved from 53.4 to 89.2 (p = 0.04). The average range of motion was changed from 123° to 122° (p = 0.82).ConclusionsRevision total knee arthroplasty with or without a more constrained prosthesis will be a definite solution for an unstable total knee arthroplasty. The solution according to cause is very important and seems to be helpful to avoid unnecessary over-constrained implant selection in revision surgery for total knee instability.

Causes of Instability After Total Knee Arthroplasty

The purpose of the present study was to characterize the underlying causes that lead to instability after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We reviewed 83 revision TKAs (79 patients) performed for instability. After detailed analysis of patient's history, physical examination, operative report and radiographs, we identified six categories: flexion/extension gap mismatch, component malposition, isolated ligament insufficiency, extensor mechanism insufficiency, component loosening, and global instability. Twenty-five knees presented with multi-factorial instability. When these knees were classified according to the most fundamental category, each category above included 24, 12, 11, 10, 10 and 16 knees respectively. The unstable TKA may result from a variety of distinct etiologies which must be identified and treated at the time of revision. The revision TKA could be tailored to the specific causes.

The Unstable Total Knee Arthroplasty: Just Change the Poly?

The Unstable Total Knee Arthroplasty: Just Change the Poly?

Revision of the Unstable Total Knee Arthroplasty: Outcome Predictors

Revision arthroplasty is often required for confirmed cases of symptomatic tibiofemoral instability after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We evaluated the results of revision for TKA instability in a consecutive series of 67 patients (68 knees) between 2000 and 2006. Outcome measures were surgeon-based assessment of knee stability, Knee Society Score, and Short Form Health Survey 36. At an average of 39 months of follow-up, the mean Knee Society Score and Short Form Health Survey 36 physical and mental scores were 76, 53, and 67 points, respectively. Knee instability persisted in 14 patients (22%). Data at the 95% confidence level revealed that revising both the femoral and tibial components, the use of femoral augments, and smaller joint line elevation as measured on radiographs correlated significantly with achieving a stable knee. In revision surgery for TKA instability, revision of both components and the use of femoral augments seem to offer the most predictable outcome.

Revision of the unstable total knee replacement; outcome predictors

Instability is a well-recognized cause of poor results after total knee replacement. Lack of adequate soft tissue balancing, loss of integrity of ligamentous structures, and/or component malpositioning are thought to be the main causes of instability after TKA. Revision arthroplasty for confirmed cases of symptomatic instability is often required. We evaluated the results of revision of an unstable total knee arthroplasty. In particular, this study sought to identify predictive factors for success of revision arthroplasty.

From tibiofemoral instability to dislocation in total knee arthroplasty

Tibiofemoral instability is increasingly recognized as a mode of failure in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Severe instability may lead to dislocation. Wrong surgical technique and wrong choice of constraint of the prostheses are the main causes for instability. Malalignment, malrotation and intraoperatively uncorrected instability especially in flexion may lead to an unstable total knee arthroplasty. Cruciate-retaining designs and mobile platforms can be considered only in the presence of well-balanced ligaments. Cruciate-substituting designs give more stability and many people find them more forgiving. However, correction of varus-valgus instability and severe flexion laxity cannot be provided. Varus-valgus contrained designs cannot compensate for the absence of medial and lateral collateral ligaments. Such cases are most reliably treated with a linked implant (rotating hinge). The exact analysis of the cause of an unstable or dislocated total knee arthroplasty represents the most essential basis of a successful treatment. Exchange of the prostheses represents the most successful procedure. Correction of implantation failures should be performed. A more constrained design should be used if insufficient ligaments are found. Post-traumatic instability or dislocation represents an exception.

The Unstable Total Knee Arthroplasty: Causes and Cures

Surgery for the unstable total knee arthroplasty requires a deep understanding of the causes and a plan that specifically addresses them. Isolated ligament reconstructions and polyethylene insert exchanges generally do not work. Patients may experience “buckling” from pain, flexion contracture, recurvatum, or patellar problems. True mechanical instability may result from loosening, bone loss, prosthetic breakage, component size or position, fracture, wear, or collateral ligament failure. Only the last one typically requires a constrained implant. The possible modes (directions) of instability are the following: varus-valgus, recurvatum, flexion, and global. Revision surgery must eliminate deforming forces, most frequently frontal plane alignment. Prosthetic implants, no matter how well engineered, are not a substitute for diagnosis and surgical technique.

Constraint in total knee arthroplasty: When and what?

Tibiofemoral instability is increasingly recognized as a common mode of failure in total knee arthroplasty. Despite this, there are few published guidelines concerning treatment options, component selection, and expected results. In the treatment of the unstable total knee arthroplasty, cruciate-retaining designs can be considered only in the presence of well-balanced ligaments, including the posterior cruciate ligament. More predictable results are obtained with the use of cruciate-substituting components, but they provide no varus-valgus stability and cannot compensate for severe flexion laxity. Varus-valgus constrained designs cannot provide long-term stability in cases of varus-valgus instability or severe flexion laxity. Such cases are most reliably treated with a linked implant. © 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Case challenges in knee surgery: What would you do?

In an interactive case presentation session, the faculty discussed management of complex primary and revision knee arthroplasty issues. Principles discussed included: preoperative evaluation of the failed knee arthroplasty, intra-articular versus extra-articular deformity correction, ligamentous balancing, managing the unstable total knee arthroplasty, bone deficiency management, rotational positioning of prosthetic components, selection of articular constraint in the revision knee, and extensor mechanism balancing. Copyright 2002, Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.